Please wait a minute...
Journal of Arid Land
Journal of Arid Land  2023, Vol. 15 Issue (2): 180-190    DOI: 10.1007/s40333-023-0005-8     CSTR: 32276.14.s40333-023-0005-8
Research article     
Sediment yield and erosion-deposition distribution characteristics in ephemeral gullies in black soil areas under geocell protection
WANG Xinyu1, SU Yu1, SUN Yiqiu1, ZHANG Yan2, GUAN Yinghui2, WANG Zhirong1, WU Hailong1,*()
1School of Environmental Science and Safety Engineering, Tianjin University of Technology, Tianjin 300384, China
2School of Soil and Water Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100038, China
Download: HTML     PDF(1429KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      

Abstract  

Investigating the effect of geocells on the erosion and deposition distribution of ephemeral gullies in the black soil area of Northeast China can provide a scientific basis for the allocation of soil and water conservation measures in ephemeral gullies. In this study, an artificial simulated confluence test and stereoscopic photogrammetry were used to analyze the distribution characteristics of erosion and deposition in ephemeral gullies protected by geocells and the effect of different confluence flows on the erosion process of ephemeral gullies. Results showed that when the confluence flow was larger, the effect of geocell was more evident, and the protection against ephemeral gully erosion was stronger. When the confluence flow rates were 0.6, 1.8, 2.4, and 3.0 m3/h, ephemeral gully erosion decreased by 37.84%, 26.09%, 21.40%, and 35.45%. When the confluence flow rates were 2.4 and 3.0 m3/h, the average sediment yield rate of the ephemeral gully was close to 2.14 kg/(m2?min), and the protective effect of ephemeral gully erosion was enhanced. When the flow rate was higher, the surface fracture of the ephemeral gully was more serious. With an increase in confluence flow rate, the ratio of erosion to deposition increased gradually, the erosion area of ephemeral gullies was expanded, and erosion depth changed minimally. In conclusion, geocell measures changed erosion patterns by altering the rill erosion/deposition ratio, converting erosion from rill erosion to sheet erosion.

Key words： geocell      erosion and deposition distribution      runoff and sediment production      ephemeral gully      soil conservation     
Received: 23 July 2022      Published: 28 February 2023
Corresponding Authors: *WU Hailong (E-mail: wuhailong@email.tjut.edu.cn)
Service
E-mail this article
Add to my bookshelf
Add to citation manager
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
WANG Xinyu
SU Yu
SUN Yiqiu
ZHANG Yan
GUAN Yinghui
WANG Zhirong
WU Hailong
Cite this article:

WANG Xinyu, SU Yu, SUN Yiqiu, ZHANG Yan, GUAN Yinghui, WANG Zhirong, WU Hailong. Sediment yield and erosion-deposition distribution characteristics in ephemeral gullies in black soil areas under geocell protection. Journal of Arid Land, 2023, 15(2): 180-190.

URL:

http://jal.xjegi.com/10.1007/s40333-023-0005-8     OR     http://jal.xjegi.com/Y2023/V15/I2/180

Fig. 1 An illustration of the experimental device. (a), soil flume; (b), pre-rainfall test; (c), flow rate test.
Fig. 2 (a), geocells used in the experiment; (b), geocells exposed from the ground during the experiment.
Flow rate (m3/h) Measure Slope (°) Experiment repetition
0.6
1.8
2.4
3.0		 Control group
Geocell		 7 2
Table 1 Details of the experimental design
Fig. 3 Experimental soil profile
Fig. 4 Sediment yield in the ephemeral gully protected by geocell under different flow rates. (a), 0.6 m3/h; (b), 1.8 m3/h; (c), 2.4 m3/h; (d), 3.0 m3/h.
Fig. 5 Erosion pattern of ephemeral gully protected by geocell under different flow rates. (a), 0.6 m3/h; (b), 1.8 m3/h; (c), 2.4 m3/h; (d), 3.0 m3/h. DEM, digital elevation model.
Flow rate
(m3/h)		 Control group Geocell Reduced
erosion
(%)
Erosion proportion
(%)		 Deposition proportion
(%)		 Average sediment yield rate
(kg/(m2•min))		 Erosion proportion
(%)		 Deposition proportion (%) Average sediment yield rate
(kg/(m2•min))
0.6 90.59 9.41 2.22 22.27 77.73 1.38 37.84
1.8 73.58 26.42 2.21 44.15 55.85 1.70 23.08
2.4 85.03 14.97 2.71 62.33 37.67 2.13 21.40
3.0 84.56 15.44 3.30 88.75 11.25 2.14 35.45
Table 2 Soil erosion-deposition proportion of ephemeral gully protected by geocell under different flow rates
Fig. 6 Erosion-deposition classification of ephemeral gully protected by geocell under different flow rates
[1]   An J, Zheng F L, Lu J, et al. 2012. Investigating the role of raindrop impact on hydrodynamic mechanism of soil erosion under simulated rainfall conditions. Soil Science, 177(8): 517-526.
doi: 10.1097/SS.0b013e3182639de1
[2]   Banerjee L, Chawla S, Kumar Dash S. 2020. Application of geocell reinforced coal mine overburden waste as subballast in railway tracks on weak subgrade. Construction and Building Materials, 265: 120774, doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.120774.
doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.120774
[3]   Douglas-Mankin K R, Roy S K, Sheshukov A Y, et al. 2020. A comprehensive review of ephemeral gully erosion models. CATENA, 195: 104901, doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2020.104901.
doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2020.104901
[4]   Guo M H, Shi H J, Zhao J, et al. 2016. Digital close-range photogrammetry for the study of rill development at flume scale. CATENA, 143: 265-274.
doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2016.03.036
[5]   Liu H H, Zhang T Y, Liu B Y, et al. 2013. Effects of gully erosion and gully filling on soil depth and crop production in the black soil region, Northeast China. Environmental Earth Sciences, 68(6): 1723-1732.
doi: 10.1007/s12665-012-1863-0
[6]   Liu X B, Li H, Zhang S M, et al. 2019. Gully erosion control practices in Northeast China: A review. Sustainability, 11(18): 5065.
doi: 10.3390/su11185065
[7]   Liu Y, Deng A, Jaksa M. 2019. Failure mechanisms of geocell walls and junctions. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 47(2): 104-120.
doi: 10.1016/j.geotexmem.2018.11.003
[8]   Ma R T, Hu F R, Xu C Y, et al. 2022. Response of soil aggregate stability and splash erosion to different breakdown mechanisms along natural vegetation restoration. CATENA, 208: 105775, doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2021.105775.
doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2021.105775
[9]   Meng L Q, Li Y. 2009. The mechanism of gully development on sloping farmland in black soil area, Northeast China. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 23(1): 7-11, 44. (in Chinese)
[10]   MWR (Ministry of Water Resources (China)). 2013. Bulletin of First National Water Census for Soil and Water Conservation. Beijing: China Water & Power Press, 119-235. (in Chinese)
[11]   Nouwakpo S K, Huang C H. 2012. A simplified close-range photogrammetric technique for soil erosion assessment. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 76(1): 70-84.
doi: 10.2136/sssaj2011.0148
[12]   Qin C, Wu H Y, Zheng F L, et al. 2016. Temporal and spatial variation characteristics of rill erosion and hydrodynamic parameters on loessial hillslope. Transactions of the Chinese Society for Agricultural Machinery, 47(8): 146-154, 207. (in Chinese)
[13]   Qin C, Zheng F L, Xu X M, et al. 2018. A laboratory study on rill network development and morphological characteristics on loessial hillslope. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 18: 1679-1690.
doi: 10.1007/s11368-017-1878-y
[14]   Qin W, Zuo C Q, Fan J R, et al. 2014. Control measures for gully erosion in black soil areas of Northeast China. China Water Resources, 20(3): 37-41. (in Chinese)
[15]   Sitharam T G, Hegde A. 2013. Design and construction of geocell foundation to support the embankment on settled red mud. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 41: 55-63.
doi: 10.1016/j.geotexmem.2013.08.005
[16]   Sutherland R A. 1998. Rolled erosion control systems for hillslope surface protection: a critical review, synthesis, and analysis of available data. I. Background and formative years. Land Degradation & Development, 9(6): 465-486.
doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-145X(199811/12)9:6<465::AID-LDR311>3.0.CO;2-4
[17]   Tang C J, Liu Y, Li Z W, et al. 2021. Effectiveness of vegetation cover pattern on regulating soil erosion and runoff generation in red soil environment, southern China. Ecological Indicators, 129: 107956, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107956.
doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107956
[18]   Vibhoosha M P, Bhasi A, Nayak S. 2021. A review on the design, applications and numerical modeling of geocell reinforced soil. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 39(6): 4035-4057.
doi: 10.1007/s10706-021-01774-3
[19]   Wang G Y, Liu Y H, Wang X H. 2012. Experimental investigation of hydrodynamic characteristics of overland flow with geocell. Journal of Hydrodynamics, 24(5): 737-743.
doi: 10.1016/S1001-6058(11)60298-9
[20]   Wells R R, Momm H G, Bennett S J, et al. 2016. A measurement method for rill and ephemeral gully erosion assessments. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 80(1): 203-214.
doi: 10.2136/sssaj2015.09.0320
[21]   Wen L L, Zheng F L, Shen H O, et al. 2015. Rainfall intensity and inflow rate effects on hillslope soil erosion in the Mollisol region of Northeast China. Nat Hazards, 79: 381-395.
doi: 10.1007/s11069-015-1847-y
[22]   Xiao L G, Lin G Q, Zhao R Q, et al. 2021. Effects of soil conservation measures on wind erosion control in China: A synthesis. Science of the Total Environment, 778: 146308, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146308.
doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146308
[23]   Xu X M, Zheng F L, Tang Q H, et al. 2022. Upslope sediment-laden flow impacts on ephemeral gully erosion: Evidences from field monitoring and laboratory simulation. CATENA, 209: 105802, doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2021.105802.
doi: 10.1016/j.catena.2021.105802
[24]   Yan C G, Yang X H, Xie Y L, et al. 2005. Experimental research on anti-eroding effect of geocells in loess embankment. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 26(8): 1342-1344, 1348. (in Chinese)
[25]   Yang C, Su Z A, Xiong D H, et al. 2018. Application of close-range photogrammetry technology in the study of soil erosion rate on slope farmland. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 32(1): 121-127, 134. (in Chinese)
[26]   Yang J Y, Qi Y X, Zhao T N, et al. 2010. Measuring soil erosion rate using digital close range photogrammetry and erosion pin techniques. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 32(3): 90-94. (in Chinese)
[27]   Zeng L H, Jiang H, Huang H Q, et al. 2017. Study on erosion resistance of geocell based on artificial rainfall. Yangtze River, 48(10): 9-12. (in Chinese)
[28]   Zhang G H, Wang L L, Tang K M, et al. 2011. Effects of sediment size on transport capacity of overland flow on steep slopes. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 56(7): 1289-1299.
doi: 10.1080/02626667.2011.609172
[29]   Zhang G H, Xie Z F. 2019. Soil surface roughness decay under different topographic conditions. Soil & Tillage Research, 187: 92-101.
[30]   Zhang X K, Xu J H, Lu X Q, et al. 1992. A study on the soil loss equation in Heilongjiang Province. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation, 12(4): 1-9, 18. (in Chinese)
[1] ZHU Haiqiang, WANG Jinlong, TANG Junhu, DING Zhaolong, GONG Lu. Spatiotemporal variations of ecosystem services and driving factors in the Tianchi Bogda Peak Natural Reserve of Xinjiang, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(6): 816-833.
[2] QIN Xijin, SUN Yiqiu, ZHANG Yan, GUAN Yinghui, WU Hailong, WANG Xinyu, WANG Guangyu. Effect of coir geotextile and geocell on ephemeral gully erosion in the Mollisol region of Northeast China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(4): 518-530.
[3] BAI Jizhou, LI Jing, RAN Hui, ZHOU Zixiang, DANG Hui, ZHANG Cheng, YU Yuyang. Influence of varied drought types on soil conservation service within the framework of climate change: insights from the Jinghe River Basin, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(2): 220-245.
[4] ZHANG Chaobo, LIU Yating, LIU Pengchong, JIANG Jing, YANG Qihong. Untangling the influence of soil moisture on root pullout property of alfafa plant[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2020, 12(4): 666-675.