Premium
Determining the effectiveness of some soil stabilizers in wind erosion prevention using wind tunnel experiments
Author(s) -
Erci Vildan,
Seker Cevdet,
Basaran Mustafa,
Erpul Gunay
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
land degradation and development
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.403
H-Index - 81
eISSN - 1099-145X
pISSN - 1085-3278
DOI - 10.1002/ldr.3937
Subject(s) - loam , wind tunnel , aeolian processes , turbulence , geotechnical engineering , environmental science , wind speed , soil science , soil water , geology , meteorology , engineering , geomorphology , physics , aerospace engineering , oceanography
Laboratory wind tunnel simulations were carried out to determine the effectiveness of some soil stabilizers in reducing soil loss by wind erosion under turbulent flow conditions driven by the reference wind velocities of 9 and 11 m s −1 . Particle fractions of 0.5–1 mm of two different soil types: silty clay loam (SiCL) and sandy loam (SL) were used in the experiments as erodible test surfaces after stabilizer treatments. Molasses (M), cement (C m ), a mixture of cement and molasses (C m + M), and hydrogel (H) were applied at four different application doses, and later those materials were subjected to incubation at room temperature for 24 hr before the trays were placed in the tunnel for wind tests. During simulations under turbulent air‐flow conditions, soil losses [(qs), g m −2 min −1 ] were gauged for 10‐min duration immediately following the first lift‐off movement of the particles. Experimental results on qs were compared to those of two controls [untreated control (C) and water‐treated control (C w )], which indicated that the H applications were highly effective at the doses ≥ 13.33 g m −2 for every soil type and wind velocity combination. In addition, at the application doses ≥ 13.33 g m −2 , C m and C m + M treatments were as effective as H statistically in reducing qs at 9 m s −1 by successfully forming resistant crust layers against stronger turbulent swirls on the research test surfaces. From the point of being more easily accessible and more cost‐effective, using less expensive C m and C m + M treatments could be a good alternative to utilizing hydrogel in reducing wind erosion in wide field applications.