Stone only drains

vanderbadger

well lads
what the feeling on stone only drains, have a field im thinking of draining and it was suggested to me to put in maybe 2 main drains with stone and pipe and then run minor drains with stone only into these main ones..is this the norm now??

LostCovey

vanderbadger wrote: »

well lads
what the feeling on stone only drains, have a field im thinking of draining and it was suggested to me to put in maybe 2 main drains with stone and pipe and then run minor drains with stone only into these main ones..is this the norm now??

News to me, maybe it depends on your ground. When you see how piped drains silt up, I can only imagine it would happen quicker with stone-only, if you just mean back-filling the trench with broken stone.

I am sure it would drain better than no drain, but would not expect a long useful life. I suppose you would have to blind the stone with gravel and or some sort of membrane or geotextile? Otherwise I would think it would just choke up in no time.

Unless you have the patience to built a traditional stone drain.....

LostCovey

who the fug

LostCovey wrote: »

News to me, maybe it depends on your ground. When you see how piped drains silt up, I can only imagine it would happen quicker with stone-only, if you just mean back-filling the trench with broken stone.

I am sure it would drain better than no drain, but would not expect a long useful life. I suppose you would have to blind the stone with gravel and or some sort of membrane or geotextile? Otherwise I would think it would just choke up in no time.

Unless you have the patience to built a traditional stone drain.....

LostCovey

Don't know about modern drain technology, but we found there was not much of a problem with stone drains, beyond making sure the outflow wasn't clogged, and some of them drains were 40 to 50 years old

reilig

vanderbadger wrote: »

well lads
what the feeling on stone only drains, have a field im thinking of draining and it was suggested to me to put in maybe 2 main drains with stone and pipe and then run minor drains with stone only into these main ones..is this the norm now??

Most if not all drainage over 30 years ago was done by stone drains with no pipe and the majority of them are still flowing today in comparison to a lot of shores put in with pipe in the last 30 years. You have to be careful to use the right type of stone - drains that I have seen have been done with 3 or 4 inch crushed stone which was very clean. You need to make sure that there's no dust through it as it can set and clog it up. Stone drains aren't really suitable for bog as the stone tends to sink down, but are a great job for any upland. Blinding the stone with chips or gravel will only clog it up as will putting any type of membrane over it - you want any silt that goes into it to flow through the stone rather than sit on top of it and prevent water getting into the drain.

Biggest problem is cost. Do careful calculations about the price of the stone in comparison to the new pipe only drainage system from connacht agri. I believe that trials of it are showing great success.

www.connachtagri.ie

Tora Bora

reilig wrote: »

Most if not all drainage over 30 years ago was done by stone drains with no pipe and the majority of them are still flowing today in comparison to a lot of shores put in with pipe in the last 30 years. You have to be careful to use the right type of stone - drains that I have seen have been done with 3 or 4 inch crushed stone which was very clean. You need to make sure that there's no dust through it as it can set and clog it up. Stone drains aren't really suitable for bog as the stone tends to sink down, but are a great job for any upland. Blinding the stone with chips or gravel will only clog it up as will putting any type of membrane over it - you want any silt that goes into it to flow through the stone rather than sit on top of it and prevent water getting into the drain.

Biggest problem is cost. Do careful calculations about the price of the stone in comparison to the new pipe only drainage system from connacht agri. I believe that trials of it are showing great success.

www.connachtagri.ie

Has anyone used these new pipes and if so what has been the results. I'm needing to replace about 600 meters of old stone drains which are failing here and there and flooding the land in high rain fall. I was thinking of opening a new drain parallel to the existing failing drains and just using this type of pipe and no stone.
I'm 25 miles from nearest quarry so stone will cost a fortune in haulage.

T

Username John

vanderbadger wrote: »

well lads
what the feeling on stone only drains, have a field im thinking of draining and it was suggested to me to put in maybe 2 main drains with stone and pipe and then run minor drains with stone only into these main ones..is this the norm now??

I dont know about the conaughtagri pipe as Relig says below, but if I were doing it, and putting in stones, then I would put in a pipe, just to make it a better job, if you get another few years of good ground before it clogs up, then surely the pipe has paid for itself?

who the fug wrote: »

Don't know about modern drain technology, but we found there was not much of a problem with stone drains, beyond making sure the outflow wasn't clogged, and some of them drains were 40 to 50 years old

reilig wrote: »

Most if not all drainage over 30 years ago was done by stone drains with no pipe and the majority of them are still flowing today in comparison to a lot of shores put in with pipe in the last 30 years.

Hmmm, but surely the drains built 'long ago' and digging a trench and backfilling with stone are two different things? Any old stone drains I have seen in our place are made with small 'flagstones', placed against each other, to almost form a trianglular structure, with the water flowing underneath, and then earth just put over em... But maybe we were just blessed with big flat stones to allow this

reilig wrote: »

You have to be careful to use the right type of stone - drains that I have seen have been done with 3 or 4 inch crushed stone which was very clean.

Yes - altho when I was doing some draining, even though I was using land drainage pipe, I was told do not use crushed stone, only use washed round stone (so 2 inch pebbles, as opposed to a piece of rock, broken into 2inch bits) Apparently the round stone will let the silt / dirt though better... No trial of it yet, this is just what I was told...

reilig

Username John wrote: »

Hmmm, but surely the drains built 'long ago' and digging a trench and backfilling with stone are two different things? Any old stone drains I have seen in our place are made with small 'flagstones', placed against each other, to almost form a trianglular structure, with the water flowing underneath, and then earth just put over em... But maybe we were just blessed with big flat stones to allow this



Yes - altho when I was doing some draining, even though I was using land drainage pipe, I was told do not use crushed stone, only use washed round stone (so 2 inch pebbles, as opposed to a piece of rock, broken into 2inch bits) Apparently the round stone will let the silt / dirt though better... No trial of it yet, this is just what I was told...

We have no flagstones around us, so any drains that were made were done by digging the trench and filling it with stone - they are still to be seen flowing into drains that have been cleaned up.

There are huge variances in crushed stone - some of it is crushed and has a lot of smaller dust and chips through it. I was referring above to clean crushed stone - with no dust through it which will allow the water to flow through it and not hold silt. 4 inch crushed stone is relatively cheap in comparison to chips and almost half the price of pea gravel that you described that you used above. Silt will wash through this bigger stone and allow the water to flow whereas it will cause smaller stone to stick together and prevent watwer from flowing through it.

As you said, its different when you are using drainage pipe.

I saw land that was drained with the connacht agri pipe, and it appeared to be very effective - dry ground and a good water flow from the outlet, even in times of low rain levels. I was unable to speak to the guy who put it in, so I don't have any idea on price.

Tora Bora

Username John wrote: »

I dont know about the conaughtagri pipe as Relig says below, but if I were doing it, and putting in stones, then I would put in a pipe, just to make it a better job, if you get another few years of good ground before it clogs up, then surely the pipe has paid for itself?





Hmmm, but surely the drains built 'long ago' and digging a trench and backfilling with stone are two different things? Any old stone drains I have seen in our place are made with small 'flagstones', placed against each other, to almost form a trianglular structure, with the water flowing underneath, and then earth just put over em... But maybe we were just blessed with big flat stones to allow this



Yes - altho when I was doing some draining, even though I was using land drainage pipe, I was told do not use crushed stone, only use washed round stone (so 2 inch pebbles, as opposed to a piece of rock, broken into 2inch bits) Apparently the round stone will let the silt / dirt though better... No trial of it yet, this is just what I was told...

I did about a hundred meters of a drain about 10 years ago. I used the yellow pipe and crushed but clean stone from a limestone quarry.
Looking at the end of the drain a few weeks ago after a good night rain, there was a flood rushing out of the stones at the mouth of the drain, and only a trickle out of the pipe.
I would never again use pipe based on what I am seeing. It will be either stone alone or the connaught agri pipe. I must do my sums and decide.
Have to double check with quarry, but 20 ton load of stone will cost me north of €280 delivered, so I won't be surprised if the new pipe works out cheaper.

CJhaughey

How much is that New line pipe or whatever it is called from connacht agri?
Per 5-6m length and 150mm diameter.
Anyone know?

Shauny2010

I agree, If you use clean stone there's no point putting in a pipe. Anywhere Ive seen stone and pipes used the water is usually flowing through the stone and under the pipe.
A point to note is that its clean limestone that was used, I wouldn't use shale stone on its own without a pipe.

pakalasa

Anyone just use a mole plough or subsoiler. It seems a cheap way if you have your own plough and redo it every few years.

I've seen the Connacht Agri pipes in the local Coop. Seem a great idea if they work longterm. I would be concerned that the membrane would deteriorate over time. It seems very light.

It's 4" clean limestone thats used down our way, for the normal shore drains, with and without the 3" yellow pipes.

massey woman

I was in Rochfortbridge last week looking at a mini mountain of round stone or pea gravel which could be bought very cheap
Too bad it is so far away from my part of the world as the transport costs kill any saving on ex works price
Down there it is a by product of another process and because the land locally is free draining there is no farmer demand
I believe that wet land drains more effectively with 2/3" clean stone and no pipe
Have been doing it for 20 years
Pipes silt up after 4/6 years in my experience
Pull a mole drainer thru shores every 10 years
Great results

vanderbadger

interesting thanks for advise, i would have been leaning toward putting in pipe but after hearing alot of people saying the stone worked well i think i will give it a try

Shauny2010

CJhaughey wrote: »

How much is that New line pipe or whatever it is called from connacht agri?
Per 5-6m length and 150mm diameter.
Anyone know?

$4.50 including VAT per meter for the 4 inch pipe I `m not sure about the 6 inch but it could be around 6.50

Tora Bora

Shauny2010 wrote: »

$4.50 including VAT per meter for the 4 inch pipe I `m not sure about the 6 inch but it could be around 6.50

Sounds awful expensive. I can get 20 tons 4 inch clean stone for €205 delivered. That would only buy me 46 meters of this pipe. I imagine 20 ton of stone would go a lot further.

roadtripman

There was a bit about drainage in the journal a few weeks ago, (i cant remember the exact figures quoted) the new type pipe was way more expensive than the yellow pipe and washed stone but yet on the same issue an add for the new pipe claims 30% savings??? maybe Teagasc should do a trial

kulchie

How durable is that connacht pipe? Would it crack OR break if a heavy stone fell on it when you're filling in the drain?

Shauny2010

Tora Bora wrote: »

Sounds awful expensive. I can get 20 tons 4 inch clean stone for €205 delivered. That would only buy me 46 meters of this pipe. I imagine 20 ton of stone would go a lot further.

Yep , a 20 tone load of stone should fill nearly 100m of a drain dug with a tile drain bucket, I`d rather the stone drain than that agri pipe any day

st1979

I like the idea of stone only drain i might try it. The new type pipe would only suit a free draining soil like peat or sandy loam. With my type clay you need the stone to let the water down from the surface. Its easy to claim you save 30% it just depends what they costed in and quantity of stone used in assumption. I was trying to work out how much a few drains would cost per meter and the stone was as dear or dearer than the cost of the yellow pipe. But that was on paper i need to do a few drains to see how many meters i can do with a load of stone

leg wax

i dont like the new pipe from connacht agri because of the white cloth or what ever it is ,what is this supposed to do for the pipe inside, i think its to keep dirt out and if this is correct than its a filter and we all know what happens to filters they all get blocked and will not let any thing in. what do you think.

aristo

vanderbadger wrote: »

interesting thanks for advise, i would have been leaning toward putting in pipe but after hearing alot of people saying the stone worked well i think i will give it a try

Have stone shores, old clay pipe drainage, and the yellow land drainage pipe here, clay pipes have been upset from deep subsoiling, the other two work fine but the yellow pipe can be jetted out to remove silt and undo some clogging, all you can do with a stone shore is keep the outlet clean

Figerty

The Idea of the membrane is to create a void. The earth particles are larger than the void in the membrane, thereby only allowing water to pass through.

This is actually old technology. The idea is to create moisture movement from the soil into the void in the pipe.

The same idea applies to putting stone in drains, however, in boggy ground (black earth) rather than clay, the bog will move through the voids in the stones eventully.

I used the yellow pipe and pea gravel lately on semi upland, I did the same ten years ago in boggy ground and the drains are blocked.

The connaught agri pipe is not a ground water collector from the surface, it is intended to be buried for slow soakage over time.

I suppose the answer is everything in its place.

Oh ya, one other thing. Using limestone where there is 'iron water' may will cause a reaction that will block the pipe. Have a look at page 69 of the attached link for
Modern Land Drainage: Planning, Design and Management of Agricultural


Dats my twopence worth!

http://books.google.ie/books?id=g61UIupnjMAC&pg=PA309&lpg=PA309&dq=land+drainagemethods&source=bl&ots=FcQiRyxqip&sig=KKLAsiRQ6wb1N94GsIpN7R9mxk8&hl=en&ei=kpaOSrrfM5KK_AaFtKmBDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2#v=onepage&q&f=false

leg wax wrote: »

i dont like the new pipe from connacht agri

because of the white cloth or what ever it is ,what is this supposed to do for the pipe inside, i think its to keep dirt out and if this is correct than its a filter and we all know what happens to filters they all get blocked and will not let any thing in. what do you think.

reilig

roadtripman wrote: »

There was a bit about drainage in the journal a few weeks ago, (i cant remember the exact figures quoted) the new type pipe was way more expensive than the yellow pipe and washed stone but yet on the same issue an add for the new pipe claims 30% savings??? maybe Teagasc should do a trial

There was a trial done on lands belonging to Flynn Machinery in Mullingar (I think) this time last year. Connacht agri were demonstrating a trencher that they sell also. It was well reported in the Journal at the time. I don't know how it worked out.

The 30% saving is calculated using costings for the ordinary shoring pipe with a bed of chips/gravel on the bottom and the shore 3/4 filled to the top. Costings were done on the Journal that day, but i cannot find the article online.

morning delight

Forgive my ignorance but...
What is a 'shore'? Is it the open trench? A shore drain is then a trench filled with stone/ pipe/ whatever...

reilig

morning delight wrote: »

A shore drain is then a trench filled with stone/ pipe/ whatever...

I guess it depends on where in the country you are. Around here if you go to your local plant hire and tell them that you want to drain a field, then they will clean the drains around it. If you tell them that you want shoring done, then they will dig with a "shoring" bucket, put in chips on the bottom, pipe on top of that ans chips in top of that again. The yellow or black drainage pipe is called shoring pipe. The "old people" around here always called a drain a shore.

morning delight

reilig wrote: »

I guess it depends on where in the country you are. The "old people" around here always called a drain a shore.

Just as I thought, some local lingo.

I live beside the sea and the shore to me means the sea shore!:D

pakalasa

Down around here (Banner County), a large open 'drain', say 4 feet wide by 4 feet deep is called a 'trench'. A boundry between fields with plant and trees growing is referred to as a 'ditch'. I've heard large open drains to be called 'ditches' in other areas too.

A small drain, 1 ft wide by 2 feet deep filled with stone, called a 'stone drain'.

We dont use 'Shore', probably confuse it with 'shur'.........as in 'shur, you know what I mean'

vanderbadger

reilig wrote: »

We have no flagstones around us, so any drains that were made were done by digging the trench and filling it with stone - they are still to be seen flowing into drains that have been cleaned up.

There are huge variances in crushed stone - some of it is crushed and has a lot of smaller dust and chips through it. I was referring above to clean crushed stone - with no dust through it which will allow the water to flow through it and not hold silt. 4 inch crushed stone is relatively cheap in comparison to chips and almost half the price of pea gravel that you described that you used above. Silt will wash through this bigger stone and allow the water to flow whereas it will cause smaller stone to stick together and prevent watwer from flowing through it.

As you said, its different when you are using drainage pipe.

I saw land that was drained with the connacht agri pipe, and it appeared to be very effective - dry ground and a good water flow from the outlet, even in times of low rain levels. I was unable to speak to the guy who put it in, so I don't have any idea on price.

what type of ground had your man that used the connaght pipe Reilig?, I would have heavy soil, its hilly ground though so should be good for water to move downhill, ive not personnally seen anyone using that pipe around me but then again it rare enough that you would see much drainage work anyway

vincenzolorenzo

pakalasa wrote: »

Down around here (Banner County), a large open 'drain', say 4 feet wide by 4 feet deep is called a 'trench'. A boundry between fields with plant and trees growing is referred to as a 'ditch'. I've heard large open drains to be called 'ditches' in other areas too.

Yep different counties means different lingo. Down here in kildare your trench would be called a ditch and your ditch would be called a bank (as in a bank of clay)!

reilig

It was in heavy soil. The fields were flat enough, but used to be pretty wet - he didn't get to bale them last year at all because they were too wet. There wouldn't be more than 4 inches of soil on them, then daub. I wrapped bales in them a week ago and they were pretty solid - and normally other dry years they would be borderline for travelling over.
I know that the drainage that was done in Mullingar (In Flynn's) was on flat enough land that has 4 or 5 foot of soil. I've no idea how its doing though.

vanderbadger wrote: »

what type of ground had your man that used the connaght pipe Reilig?, I would have heavy soil, its hilly ground though so should be good for water to move downhill, ive not personnally seen anyone using that pipe around me but then again it rare enough that you would see much drainage work anyway

morning delight

pakalasa wrote: »

Down around here (Banner County), a large open 'drain', say 4 feet wide by 4 feet deep is called a 'trench'. A boundry between fields with plant and trees growing is referred to as a 'ditch'. I've heard large open drains to be called 'ditches' in other areas too.

A small drain, 1 ft wide by 2 feet deep filled with stone, called a 'stone drain'.

We dont use 'Shore', probably confuse it with 'shur'.........as in 'shur, you know what I mean'

There you go, that's the lingo I'm used to.

reilig wrote: »

There wouldn't be more than 4 inches of soil on them, then daub.

Some more funny lingo! I take it daub is the impermeable subsoil that around here we call clay;)

I was at a teagasc demo recently on drainage. If this land has a slope towards a ditch/ open drain the subsoiler or panbuster run parallel to the slope works well. It's important to prevent poaching and maintain an even top surface to allow run off. The farmer who's land the demo was on used this system last year and felt it made a difference. Improved grass growth as well.