Performance of geosynthetic cementitious composite mat and vetiver on soil erosion control

Abstract

An understanding of how different land covers affect soil erosion caused by rainfall is necessary in mountainous areas. The land cover usually plays an important role in controlling landslide hazards associated with these terrains. This paper presents the results of a field experiment where several types of land covers were placed on a full-scale embankment as erosion control. An 8 m wide, 21 m long, and 3 m high embankment with a 45° side-slope was built with lateric soil. The soil was compacted under a relative compaction of 70% to simulate a natural soil slope. Two sides of the embankment were divided into six land cover areas, with three different areas of bare soil, and one each of a geosynthetic cementitious composite mat (GCCM), vetiver grass, and a combination of GCCM and vegetation. Soil erosion and moisture levels were monitored for each land cover area during six natural rainfall events encountered over the experimental period. Field results were compared with a numerical simulation and empirical soil loss equation. The results revealed that the GCCM gave the best erosion control immediately after installation, but vetiver grass also exhibited good erosion control six months post-construction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Álvarez-Mozos J, Abad E, Giménez R, et al. (2014) Evaluation of erosion control geotextiles on steep slopes. Part 1: Effects on runoff and soil loss. Catena 118: 168–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2013.05.018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. ASTM-D8173-18 (2018) Site Preparation, Layout, Installation, and Hydration of Geosynthetic Cementitious Composite Mats. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA https://doi.org/10.1520/D8173-18

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bahadur KK (2009) Mapping soil erosion susceptibility using remote sensing and GIS: a case of the Upper Nam Wa Watershed, Nan Province, Thailand. Environmental Geology 57: 695–705. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00254-008-1348-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Benik SR Wilson BN, Biesboer DD, et al. (2003) Performance of erosion control products on a highway embankment. Transactions of the ASAE 46(4): 1113–1119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Briaud JL (2013) Ch 23: Erosion of soils and scour problems, Geotechnical Engineering: Unsaturated and Saturated Soils, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey, USA

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cerdà A (2007) Soil water erosion on road embankments in eastern Spain. Science of the Total Environment 378(1-2): 151–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2007.01.041

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Cerdà A, Rodrigo-Comino J, Giménez-Morera A et al. (2018b) Policies can help to apply successful strategies to control soil and water losses. The case of chipped pruned branches (CPB) in Mediterranean citrus plantations. Land Use Policy 75: 734–745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.12.052

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Cerdà A, Rodrigo-Comino J, Novara A et al. (2018a) Long-term impact of rainfed agricultural land abandonment on soil erosion in the Western Mediterranean basin. Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment 42(2): 202–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309133318758521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chin DA (2019) Estimating Peak Runoff Rates Using the Rational Method. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering 145: 04019006. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)IR.1943-4774.0001387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Council NR (1993) Vétiver grass: a thin green line against erosion, National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Dalton P, Smith R & Truong P (1996) Vétiver grass hedges for erosion control on a cropped flood plain: hedge hydraulics. Agricultural Water Management 31: 91–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-3774(95)01230-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Donjadee S & Tingsanchali T (2016) Soil and water conservation on steep slopes by mulching using rice straw and vétiver grass clippings. Agriculture and Natural Resources 50: 75–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anres.2015.03.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Eab KH, Takahashi A & Likitlersuang S (2014) Centrifuge modelling of root-reinforced soil slope subjected to rainfall infiltration. Géotechnique Letters 4: 211–216. https://doi.org/10.1680/geolett.14.00029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Eab KH, Likitlersuang S & Takahashi A (2015) Laboratory and modeling investigation of root-reinforced system for slope stabilisation. Soils and Foundations 55(5): 1270–1281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2015.09.025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Foster G, Lane L, Nowlin J, et al. (1980) A model to estimate sediment yield from field-sized areas: development of model. IIASA Collaborative Paper. IIASA Laxenburg, Austria: CP-80-010

    Google Scholar 

  16. Fryrear DW (1985) Soil cover and wind erosion. Transactions of the ASAE 28: 781–0784. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.32337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Geo-Studio (2012) Seepage modeling with SEEP/W, An Engineering Methodology. Geo-Slope International Ltd, Canada

    Google Scholar 

  18. Giménez - Morera A, Sinoga JR & Cerdà A (2010) The impact of cotton geotextiles on soil and water losses from Mediterranean rainfed agricultural land. Land Degradation & Development 21(2): 210–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.971

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Jirawattanasomkul T, Kongwang N, Jongvivatsakul P, et al. (2018) Finite element modelling of flexural behaviour of Geosynthetic Cementitious Composite Mat (GCCM). Composites Part B: Engineering 154: 33–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.07.052

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Jirawattanasomkul T, Kongwang N, Jongvivatsakul P, et al. (2019) Finite element analysis of tensile and puncture behaviours of geosynthetic cementitious composite mat (GCCM). Composites Part B: Engineering 165: 702–711. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.02.037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Jongvivatsakul P, Ramdit T, Ngo TP, et al. (2018) Experimental investigation on mechanical properties of geosynthetic cementitious composite mat (GCCM). Construction and Building Materials, 166: 956–965. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.01.185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Keesstra SD, Bouma J, Wallinga J, et al. (2016) The significance of soils and soil science towards realization of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Soil 2: 111–128. https://doi.org/10.5194/soil-2-111-2016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Keesstra SD, Rodrigo-Comino J, Novara A et al. (2019) Straw mulch as a sustainable solution to decrease runoff and erosion in glyphosate-treated clémentine plantations in Eastern Spain. An assessment using rainfall simulation experiments. Catena 174: 95–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2018.11.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Keesstra S, Mol G, de Leeuw J, (2018) Soil-related sustainable development goals: Four concepts to make land degradation neutrality and restoration work. Land 7(4): 133. https://doi.org/10.3390/land7040133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Koerner RMKAGR (2018) Elimination or Minimization of Soil Erosion Using Geosynthetics. GSI (Geosynthetic Institute)white paper 38: 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kounyou K (2018) A study of test embankment improved by geosynthetic cementious composite mat and vertiver grass on surface erosion. MEng thesis, Chulalongkorn University.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Land Development Department (LDD) (2002) Soil Erosion in Thailand. Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperation, Bangkok, Thailand.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Likitlersuang S, Takahashi A & Eab KH (2017) Modeling of Root-reinforced Soil Slope under Rainfall Condition. Engineering Journal 21(3): 123–132. https://doi.org/10.4186/ej.2017.21.3.123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Liu B, Nearing M, Shi P, et al. (2000) Slope length effects on soil loss for steep slopes. Soil Science Society of America Journal 64: 1759–1763. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2000.6451759x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Mahannopkul K & Jotisankasa A (2019) Influences of root concentration and suction on Chrysopogon zizanioides reinforcement of soil. Soils and Foundations 59(2): 500–516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2018.12.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Mohammad AG & Adam MA (2010) The impact of vegetative cover type on runoff and soil erosion under different land uses. Catena 81: 97–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2010.01.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Ng CW & Pang Y (2000) Influence of stress state on soil-water characteristics and slope stability. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering 126: 157–166. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2000)126:2(157)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Ngo TP, Likitlersuang S & Takahashi A (2019) Performance of a geosynthetic cementitious composite mat for stabilising sandy slopes. Geosynthetic International 26(3): 309–319. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgein.19.00020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Nguyen TS, Likitlersuang S & Jotisankasa A (2018) Stability analysis of vegetated residual soil slope in Thailand under rainfall conditions. Environmental Geotechnics (online) 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1680/jenge.17.00025

    Google Scholar 

  35. Nguyen TS, Likitlersuang S & Jotisankasa A (2019) Influence of the spatial variability of the root cohesion on a slope-scale stability model: a case study of residual soil slope in Thailand. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment 78: 3337–3351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-018-1380-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Rickson R (2006) Controlling sediment at source: an evaluation of erosion control geotextiles. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms: The Journal of the British Geomorphological Research Group 31: 550–560. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.1368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Rose CW, Olley JM, Haddadchi A, et al. (2018) An alternative method for interpreting jet erosion test (JET) data: part 1. Theory. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 43: 735–742. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.4269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Saha S (2003) Water and wind induced soil erosion assessment and monitoring using remote sensing and GIS. Satellite remote sensing and GIS applications in agricultural meteorology: 315–330.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Team CW (2001) Guidance Compendium for Watershed Monitoring and Assessment [Online]. California: State Water Resources Control Board California Environmental Protection Agency. Available: https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/swamp/cwt_guidance.html#10 [Accessed 23 November 2019].

    Google Scholar 

  40. Truong P, Van TT & Pinners E (2008) Part 5: Vétiver System for on-farm erosion control and other uses Vetiver system applications: 61–86. The Vetiver Network International.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Woodward D (1999) Method to predict cropland ephemeral gully erosion. Catena 37: 393–399. https://doi.org/10.1007/sn769-016-0837-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Zhang GR, Qian YJ, Wang ZC, et al. (2014) Analysis of rainfall infiltration law in unsaturated soil slope. The Scientific World Journal, https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/567250

    Google Scholar 

  43. Zhang L, Zhang L & Tang W (2004) Rainfall-induced slope failure considering variability of soil properties. Geotechnique, 55(2): 183–188. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.2005.55.2.183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Ziegler AD, Giambelluca TW & Sutherland RA (2001) Erosion prediction on unpaved mountain roads in northern Thailand: validation of dynamic erodibility modelling using KINEROS2. Hydrological Processes 15: 337–358. https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10595

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the Thailand Research Fund (Grant No. DBG-6180004) and the Ratchadapisek Sompoch Endowment Fund (2020) of Chulalongkorn University (Grant No. 763014 Climate Change and Disaster Management Cluster). The work was carried out under the research and development project on landslide prevention and protection according to Royal Initiatives of the Chaipattana Foundation. The authors thank the Siam Cement Group (SCG) for providing the GCCM used in this research.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Suched Likitlersuang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Likitlersuang, S., Kounyou, K. & Prasetyaningtiyas, G.A. Performance of geosynthetic cementitious composite mat and vetiver on soil erosion control. J. Mt. Sci. 17, 1410–1422 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629-019-5926-5

Download citation

Keywords

  • Soil Erosion
  • Field test
  • Geosynthetic
  • Vetiver
  • Rainfall
  • Numerical analysis