E-Tube VS. Silt Fence

E-tube vs. Silt Fence

 

  • Silt Fence has to be trenched in while e-tube filter tube lays on the surface.    Filter Tube therefore is a ideal solution for rocky or frozen conditions when silt fence can’t be trenched.    Many environentally sensitive sites (gas & oil) will not allow silt fence because they view trenching as a erosion causing practice.
  • E-tube can be vegatated by filling with compost and seed.    Silt Fence cannot.
  • Silt fence is designed to pond sediment laden water.    E-tube filter tube is designed to hold back then slowly release (filtering) water.    This prevents over topping .
  • Silt fence often collapes or tears.    Filter tube cannot collape.
  • Filter tube is filled with organic wood chips or compost.  Silt Fence is a synthetic product.     Filter tube can be filled with wood products native to their geographic areas.
  • Wood chip filled Filter Tubes have the proven capability to remove hydrocardons, oil, and heavy metals in addition to sediment.     Silt Fence does not remove these elements.
  • Silt fence should be removed after use.     Filter tube can left in place where it decomposes into a berm.
  • While Silt Fence only has the capability to accumulate and store sediment behind the filter fabric, e-tube filter tube have the ability to accumulate and store sediment behind the fabric and within the matrix of the filter.
  • E-tube filter tubes have filters that are three demensional  construction (opposed to a planar construction for silt fence) and are designed to allow runoff to flow through at higher rates.  The larger three dimensional  construction of these sediment filters may allow the filter itself to trap suspended solids from runoff reducing the need to pond water to allow settling to occur.

    Less ponding and lower head pressure may reduce the propensity for failure from blowout and overtopping in the field.    Additionally, if sediment removal  effeciency is a result of the performance of the filter, instead of it’s ability to pond water, then the design capacity, spacing, and height of the e-tube should be based on flow through rate and not ponding rate.