Difference between revisions of "OGS: Performance"

From LID SWM Planning and Design Guide
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(10 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{TOClimit|2}}
{{TOClimit|3}}




Line 8: Line 8:
*Woodside SmartCentre (Markham)
*Woodside SmartCentre (Markham)
*North Queen Street & The Queensway (Etobicoke)
*North Queen Street & The Queensway (Etobicoke)


The mean performance value recorded at the inlet for OGS practices' ability to remove Total Suspended Sediments (TSS) was was calculated based on 46 separate recordings between 1997 - 1998 amongst the two sites previously mentioned.
The mean performance value recorded at the inlet for OGS practices' ability to remove Total Suspended Sediments (TSS) was was calculated based on 46 separate recordings between 1997 - 1998 amongst the two sites previously mentioned.
Line 23: Line 22:
*Woodside SmartCentre (Markham)
*Woodside SmartCentre (Markham)
*North Queen Street & The Queensway (Etobicoke)
*North Queen Street & The Queensway (Etobicoke)


The mean performance value recorded at the inlet for OGS practices' ability to remove Total Suspended Sediments (TSS) was was calculated based on 46 separate recordings between 1997 - 1998 amongst the two sites previously mentioned.
The mean performance value recorded at the inlet for OGS practices' ability to remove Total Suspended Sediments (TSS) was was calculated based on 46 separate recordings between 1997 - 1998 amongst the two sites previously mentioned.
Line 32: Line 30:


<br>
<br>
</br>


'''Refer to the [[Oil and Grit Separator]] page for more information related to updated requirements through laboratory testing in accordance with the [https://etvcanada.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/ETV-OGS-Procedure_final_revised-June_2014.pdf Procedure for Laboratory Testing of Oil-Grit Separators PDF (TRCA/CETV Program)] testing protocol and will have current and valid [https://etvcanada.ca/home/verify-your-technology/current-verified-technologies/ ISO14034: Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) program].
'''Refer to the [[Oil and Grit Separator]] page for more information related to updated requirements through laboratory testing in accordance with the [https://etvcanada.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/ETV-OGS-Procedure_final_revised-June_2014.pdf Procedure for Laboratory Testing of Oil-Grit Separators PDF (TRCA/CETV Program)] testing protocol and will have current and valid [https://etvcanada.ca/home/verify-your-technology/current-verified-technologies/ ISO14034: Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) program].


==Recent Performance Research==
==Recent Performance Research==
</br>
{|class="wikitable sortable"
|+ Performance of bioretention with internal water storage<ref>Liu J, Sample D, Bell C, Guan Y. Review and Research Needs of Bioretention Used for the Treatment of Urban Stormwater. Water. 2014;6(4):1069-1099. doi:10.3390/w6041069.</ref>
|-
!style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|Location
!style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|Filter media composition
!style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|Media depth (cm)
!style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|Internal water storage depth (cm)
!style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|I/P ratio
!style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|Runoff volume reduction (%)
!style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|TSS reduction (%)
!style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|TN reduction (%)
!style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|TP reduction (%)
|-
!Montréal<ref>Géhéniau N, Fuamba M, Mahaut V, Gendron MR, Dugué M. Monitoring of a Rain Garden in Cold Climate: Case Study of a Parking Lot near Montréal. J Irrig Drain Eng. 2015;141(6):4014073. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)IR.1943-4774.0000836.</ref>
|88% sand, 8% fines, 4% OM||180||150||47||97||99||99||99
|-
!Virginia<ref>DeBusk KM, Wynn TM. Storm-Water Bioretention for Runoff Quality and Quantity Mitigation. J Environ Eng. 2011;137(9):800-808. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)EE.1943-7870.0000388.</ref>
|88% sand, 8% fines, 4% OM||180||150||47||97||99||99||99
|-
!rowspan="4"|North Carolina<ref>Brown RA, Asce AM, Hunt WF, Asce M. Underdrain Configuration to Enhance Bioretention Exfiltration to Reduce Pollutant Loads. J Environ Eng. 2011;137(11):1082-1091. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)EE.1943-7870.0000437.</ref>
|rowspan="4"|96% sand, 4% fines||rowspan="2"|110||88||rowspan="2"|12||89||rowspan="4"|58||rowspan="4"|58||rowspan="4"|-10
|-
|58||93
|-
|rowspan="2"|96||72||rowspan="2"|13||98
|-
|42||100
|-
!North Carolina<ref>Li H, Sharkey LJ, Hunt WF, Davis AP. Mitigation of Impervious Surface Hydrology Using Bioretention in North Carolina and Maryland. J Hydrol Eng. 2009;14(4):407-415. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0699(2009)14:4(407).</ref>
|loamy sand, 3% OM||120||60||20||99||-||-||-
|-
!rowspan="2"|North Carolina<ref>Brown RA, Hunt WF. Bioretention Performance in the Upper Coastal Plain of North Carolina. In: Low Impact Development for Urban Ecosystem and Habitat Protection. Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers; 2008:1-10. doi:10.1061/41009(333)95.</ref>
|rowspan="2"|98% sand, 2% fines||90||30||12||90||-||-||-
|-
|90||60||12||98||-||-||-
|-
!rowspan="2"|North Carolina<ref>Passeport E, Hunt WF, Line DE, Smith RA, Brown RA. Field Study of the Ability of Two Grassed Bioretention Cells to Reduce Storm-Water Runoff Pollution. J Irrig Drain Eng. 2009;135(4):505-510. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)IR.1943-4774.0000006.</ref>
|rowspan="2"|15% sand, 80% fines, 5% OM||60||45||68||-||-||54||63
|-
|90||75||68||-||-||54||58
|}


*[https://www3.epa.gov/region1/npdes/stormwater/research/epa-final-report-filter-study.pdf (USEPA, 2013) - Evaluation and Optimization of Bioretention Design for Nitrogen and Phosphorus Removal]
[[File:OGS types Lee, 2014 update.PNG|thumb|400px|Shown here are the two variations of hydrodynamic separators ([[Oil and grit separator]]s) used in the 6-year study conducted by Lee, et al., 2014. All four OGS' used were of different sizes. The first (Type A) was a dip cylindrical plate with a centershaft and the second (Type B) was a hollow cylindrical screen. All four sites where the OGS' were installed were in urban settings in Gyunggi Province, Korea, and discharge into Gyung-An stream, which deposits into the Pal-dang Lake. This lake is the the primary drinking water source for Seoul's Metropolitan area (Lee, et al. 2014<ref>Lee, D.H., Min, K.S. and Kang, J.H., 2014. Performance evaluation and a sizing method for hydrodynamic separators treating urban stormwater runoff. Water science and technology, 69(10), pp.2122-2131)</ref>.]]
**USEPA conducted both field and laboratory testing on the performance of bioretention with augmented designs and filter media composition with aluminum hydroxide/oxide content, found normally within water treatment residuals. These additives added at 10-15% of the total filter media mix ad median removal efficiencies of 90-99% of orthophosphate and a second study found a bioretention design with WTR mixture in the filter media and a [[Bioretention: Internal water storage|IWSZ]] optimized to remove phosphorus and nitrogen had a removal efficiency of 20% and effluent concentrations below 20µg/L (well below the MECP/CCME guideline in Ontario).


[[File:EBC vs. TBC.PNG|500px|thumb| Comparison of an Enhanced dephosphorization bioretention cell (EBC) (above) vs. a traditional bioretention cell (TBC) (below). The EBC includes evenly spaced apart soil mixture layers, which includes 70-80% native soil found on site mixed with 20-30% of charcoal, oregani matter and iron, along with permeable layers of gravel pumice and zeolite, all of which help adsorb phosphates out of stormwater entering the system. This differs from the TBC design which generally includes just a gravel bed to aid in the facility's drainage ability (Ho and Lin, 2022)<ref>Ho, C.C. and Lin, Y.X., 2022. Pollutant Removal Efficiency of a Bioretention Cell with Enhanced Dephosphorization. Water, 14(3), p.396. https://mdpi-res.com/books/book/5900/Urban_Runoff_Control_and_Sponge_City_Construction.pdf?filename=Urban_Runoff_Control_and_Sponge_City_Construction.pdf#page=168</ref>.]]
*[https://www.conteches.com/Portals/0/Documents/Product%20Evaluation%20and%20%20Testing/vx_harding_township.pdf?ver=2018-05-31-143332-863 (Greenway, 2001) - Stormwater Treatment Demonstration Project - Oil water/grit separator followed by a sand filter.]
**This project took place for Harding Township in New Jersey back in 2001. The performance assessment showcased the ability of a Vortechnics Oil/Grit separator followed by a sand filter's removal ability over three years located at a rest stop off a nearby highway. A full storm analysis was conducted over the three-year project and found that the average TSS (mg/L) entering the Oil/Grit separator was 492 mg/L whereas the outlet of the separator had only 35.18 mg/L of TSS remaining (a ~93% reduction rate). Once water passed through the sand filter after the OGS, the removal efficiency increased to 98.12%, with only 9.28 mg/L of TSS remaining (Greenway, 2001<ref>Greenway, R.A. 2001. Stormwater Treatment Demonstration Project—Oil water/grit separator followed by a sand filter: RTP Environmental Associates. Inc., prepared for Harding Township, NJ, Environmental Commission and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Paper WM-668. https://www.conteches.com/Portals/0/Documents/Product%20Evaluation%20and%20%20Testing/vx_harding_township.pdf?ver=2018-05-31-143332-863</ref>).


*[https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/14/3/396 (Ho and Lin, 2022) - Pollutant Removal Efficiency of a Bioretention Cell with Enhanced Dephosphorization]
**Authors Ho and Lin, 2022 note that bioretention practices perform poorly in reducing phosphorus from influent stormwater when compared to their ability to remove ammonia and COD pollutants. The authors tested a new type of enhanced dephosphorization bioretention cell (EBC) which improves phosphorus removal performance. The difference between EBC and a traditional bioretention cell is that the lowest level of an EBC feature is comprised of a mixed fill material layer (permeable layers - PLs and soil mixed layers - SMLs) instead of a traditional gravel bed layer. The SMLs include active charcoal powder, organic matter and iron, evenly spaced apart, while the PLs include aggregates of gravel, pumice and zeolite. Over the two years that the same sized EBC feature was monitored in comparison to a standard bioretention cell they found that the EBC outperformed the traditional bioretention cell by removing 92% of total phosphorus to 52%. The average inflow concentration for both features from May 2019 - April 2021 was 0.76 mg/L, whereas the outflow concentration averages were 0.36 mg/L for the traditional bioretention cell and 0.06 mg/L for the EBC, respectively (Ho and Lin, 2022)<ref>Ho, C.C. and Lin, Y.X., 2022. Pollutant Removal Efficiency of a Bioretention Cell with Enhanced Dephosphorization. Water, 14(3), p.396. https://mdpi-res.com/books/book/5900/Urban_Runoff_Control_and_Sponge_City_Construction.pdf?filename=Urban_Runoff_Control_and_Sponge_City_Construction.pdf#page=168</ref>.


*[https://sustainabletechnologies.ca/app/uploads/2019/06/improving-nutrient-retention-in-bioretention-tech-brief.pdf (STEP, 2019) - Improving nutrient retention in bioretention - Technical Brief]
*[https://www.eeer.org/upload/eer-14-4-262-.pdf (Jianghua, et al. 2009) - Performance Analysis of a Hydrodynamic Separator for Treating Particulate Pollutants in Highway Rainfall Runoff.]
**STEP researchers developed a study to examine the effectiveness of reactive media amendments as a means of enhancing phosphorus retention in a bioretention cell draining a 1150 m<sup>2</sup> parking lot in the City of Vaughan. For testing purposes, the bioretention was divided into three hydrologically distinct cells: (1) with a high sand, low phosphorus media mix (control); (2) with a proprietary reactive media (Sorbitve™) mixed into the sandy filter media, and (3) with a 170 cm layer of iron rich sand (aka red sand) below the sandy filter media. Outflow quantity and quality from each cell was measured directly, while inflows and runoff quality were estimated based on monitoring of an adjacent asphalt reference site over the same time period. The results found that the Sorbitve™ and the Iron rich (red) sand cells had lower concentrations of Total Phosphorus (among other contaminants) in its effluent outflow, and the TP measured was below the CCDME guideline of 0.03mg/L in both years monitored for Sorbitve™ (2016 & 2017) and 2017 for the cell with Iron rich (red) sand. Both cells had median concentrations lower than the control media cell used in the study by at least 68% for TP (STEP, 2019<ref>STEP. 2019. Improving nutrient retention in bioretention - Technical Brief. Prepared by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. Published in 2018. https://sustainabletechnologies.ca/app/uploads/2019/06/improving-nutrient-retention-in-bioretention-tech-brief.pdf</ref>.
** This study examined the separation characteristics of particles in runoff from paved roads using a OGS hydro cyclone design. The results indicated the TSS concentration ratio between the overflow and inflow (TSSover/in) decreased as a function of the operational pressure and the particle removal efficiency was mainly affected by the particle size. By using highway runoff results showed that removal efficiency was greater than 60%. The TSSover/in was (0.26 mg/L – 0.41 mg/L) below the Canadian Water Quality Guidelines (CWQGs) (Jianghua, et al. 2009<ref>Jianghua, Y., Qitao, Y. and Kim, Y. 2009. Performance analysis of a hydrodynamic separator for treating particulate pollutants in highway rainfall runoff. Environmental Engineering Research, 14(4), pp.262-269. https://www.eeer.org/upload/eer-14-4-262-.pdf</ref>).


*[https://repository.library.noaa.gov/view/noaa/41705/noaa_41705_DS1.pdf (Ament, et al. 2022) - Phosphorus removal, metals dynamics, and hydraulics in stormwater bioretention systems amended with drinking water treatment residuals]
**Researchers from the University of Minnesota, the University of Vermont and the USEPA, conducted field experiment to test the effectiveness of Drinking water treatment residuals (DWTRs) as a filter media amendment additive for improve Total Phosphorus (TP) removal in roadside bioretention features. Influent phosphorus levels was relatively low when compared to normal influent stormwater P levels (dissolved = 0.002 mg/L, soluble reactive = 0.022, particulate = 0.036 mg/L) but the difference between the bioretention cell in the study with DWTR additives and the control bioretention cells were 95% (Large D.A) - 97% (small D.A) TP removal and 79 (large D.A)and 91% (small D.A) respectively. The outflows were well below the CCME guidelines of 0.3 mg/L coming in at 0.010 mg/L (large D.A) and 0.011mg/L (small D.A) (Ament, et al. 2022)<ref>Ament, M.R., Roy, E.D., Yuan, Y. and Hurley, S.E., 2022. Phosphorus removal, metals dynamics, and hydraulics in stormwater bioretention systems amended with drinking water treatment residuals. Journal of Sustainable Water in the Built Environment, 8(3), p.04022003.</ref>.)


*[https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332063360_Enhanced_Nutrients_Removal_in_Bioretention_Systems_Modified_with_Water_Treatment_Residual_and_Internal_Water_Storage_Zone/download (Qiu, et al. 2019) - Enhanced Nutrients Removal in Bioretention Systems Modified with Water Treatment Residual and Internal Water Storage Zone]
*[https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24845330/ (Lee, et al. 2014) - Performance evaluation and a sizing method for hydrodynamic separators treating urban stormwater runoff.]
**Researchers from Beijing University and Auburn University, conducted lab experiments with two bioretention columns (1) with Water treatment residuals (WTRs - i.e. polyaluminium chloride & dewatered sludge from a surface water treatment plant) (15% dried weight, the remaining 85% sandy loam) and the second (2) filled with traditional sandy loam for its filter bed material. Their pollutant rmeova lefficiency for TSS was virtually the same, treating between 100 - 400 mg/L over 10 separate test cycles in a 50-day period. The effluent TSS levels were bot hless than 20 mg/L (10 mg/L less than the CCME requirement in Ontario) with removal percentages above 90% on average to a maximum of 97%. Meanwhile, for Total Phosphorus removal (TP) the column with 15% WTRs added boated a mean TP removal of 99.6% with a maximum effluent of 0.08 mg/L after remoting an average influent concentration load of 4.0 – 7.0 mg/L) (Qiu, et al. 2019)<ref>Qiu, F., Zhao, S., Zhao, D., Wang, J. and Fu, K., 2019. Enhanced nutrient removal in bioretention systems modified with water treatment residuals and internal water storage zone. Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology, 5(5), pp.993-1003.</ref>.
**This study conducted performance monitoring over a 6-year period (137 separate storm events) of four different hydrodynamic separators in Korean urban catchments between 2006 - 2012. Removal rates were relatively low at all four sites (1. Roadway site: Avg. Inflow = 239.32 mg/L vs Avg. Outflow = 122.2- mg/L /  2. Residential site:  Avg. Inflow = 59.74 mg/L vs Avg. Outflow = 50.35 mg/L / 3. Roadway Site: Avg. Inflow = 62.50 mg/L vs. Avg. Outflow = 33.76 mg/L / 4. Residential(63.5%) & Roadway (36.5%) CDA site: Avg. Inflow = 236.24 mg/L vs. Avg. Outflow = 160.54 mg/L). The low removal rates were due to high rates of extreme overflow events occurring with most suspended sediment being quite small/fine in nature (<75μm)(Lee, et al. 2014<ref>Lee, D.H., Min, K.S. and Kang, J.H., 2014. Performance evaluation and a sizing method for hydrodynamic separators treating urban stormwater runoff. Water science and technology, 69(10), pp.2122-2131)</ref>.


==References==
==References==

Latest revision as of 21:26, 3 March 2023


TSS Reduction[edit]

TSS Inlet.jpg

Inlet[edit]

The performance results for OGS practices, located within TRCA's watershed originate from three primary sites:

  • Woodside SmartCentre (Markham)
  • North Queen Street & The Queensway (Etobicoke)

The mean performance value recorded at the inlet for OGS practices' ability to remove Total Suspended Sediments (TSS) was was calculated based on 46 separate recordings between 1997 - 1998 amongst the two sites previously mentioned.

As can be seen in the corresponding boxplot the mean performance removal efficiency of the OGS practices monitored are well below the suggested guideline of 30 mg/L (Canadian Water Quality Guideline (CWQG), or (background (assumed at <5 mg/L)+ 25 mg/L for short term (<24 hour) exposure) (CCME, 2002[1]; (TRCA, 2021[2]).

The median value of the 46 samples taken was 109.50 mg/L whereas the mean was 145.07 mg/L, with a 96% guideline exceedance.

TSS - OGS out.JPG

Outlet[edit]

The performance results for OGS practices, located within TRCA's watershed originate from three primary sites:

  • Woodside SmartCentre (Markham)
  • North Queen Street & The Queensway (Etobicoke)

The mean performance value recorded at the inlet for OGS practices' ability to remove Total Suspended Sediments (TSS) was was calculated based on 46 separate recordings between 1997 - 1998 amongst the two sites previously mentioned.

As can be seen in the corresponding boxplot the mean performance removal efficiency of the OGS practices monitored are well below the suggested guideline of 30 mg/L (Canadian Water Quality Guideline (CWQG), or (background (assumed at <5 mg/L)+ 25 mg/L for short term (<24 hour) exposure) (CCME, 2002[3]; (TRCA, 2021[4]).

The median value of the 91 samples taken was 44.50 mg/L whereas the mean was 64.60 mg/L, with a 61% guideline exceedance. Given the age of of these practices and the dates monitoring took place, these systems will likely need major maintenance and/or rehabilitation if not full replacement, as they near the end of their working lifecycle, especially given forthcoming Ontario guidelines on removal efficiencies, set to release later in 2023 (Low Impact Development Stormwater Management Guidance Manual). Read more about the performance efficiency of these specific OGS installations located within TRCA's watershed here, in the following document - Performance Assessment of Two Types of Oil & Grit Separator for SWM in Parking Lots (SWAMP, 2004[5]).


Refer to the Oil and Grit Separator page for more information related to updated requirements through laboratory testing in accordance with the Procedure for Laboratory Testing of Oil-Grit Separators PDF (TRCA/CETV Program) testing protocol and will have current and valid ISO14034: Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) program.

Recent Performance Research[edit]

Shown here are the two variations of hydrodynamic separators (Oil and grit separators) used in the 6-year study conducted by Lee, et al., 2014. All four OGS' used were of different sizes. The first (Type A) was a dip cylindrical plate with a centershaft and the second (Type B) was a hollow cylindrical screen. All four sites where the OGS' were installed were in urban settings in Gyunggi Province, Korea, and discharge into Gyung-An stream, which deposits into the Pal-dang Lake. This lake is the the primary drinking water source for Seoul's Metropolitan area (Lee, et al. 2014[6].
  • (Greenway, 2001) - Stormwater Treatment Demonstration Project - Oil water/grit separator followed by a sand filter.
    • This project took place for Harding Township in New Jersey back in 2001. The performance assessment showcased the ability of a Vortechnics Oil/Grit separator followed by a sand filter's removal ability over three years located at a rest stop off a nearby highway. A full storm analysis was conducted over the three-year project and found that the average TSS (mg/L) entering the Oil/Grit separator was 492 mg/L whereas the outlet of the separator had only 35.18 mg/L of TSS remaining (a ~93% reduction rate). Once water passed through the sand filter after the OGS, the removal efficiency increased to 98.12%, with only 9.28 mg/L of TSS remaining (Greenway, 2001[7]).



  • (Lee, et al. 2014) - Performance evaluation and a sizing method for hydrodynamic separators treating urban stormwater runoff.
    • This study conducted performance monitoring over a 6-year period (137 separate storm events) of four different hydrodynamic separators in Korean urban catchments between 2006 - 2012. Removal rates were relatively low at all four sites (1. Roadway site: Avg. Inflow = 239.32 mg/L vs Avg. Outflow = 122.2- mg/L / 2. Residential site: Avg. Inflow = 59.74 mg/L vs Avg. Outflow = 50.35 mg/L / 3. Roadway Site: Avg. Inflow = 62.50 mg/L vs. Avg. Outflow = 33.76 mg/L / 4. Residential(63.5%) & Roadway (36.5%) CDA site: Avg. Inflow = 236.24 mg/L vs. Avg. Outflow = 160.54 mg/L). The low removal rates were due to high rates of extreme overflow events occurring with most suspended sediment being quite small/fine in nature (<75μm)(Lee, et al. 2014[9].

References[edit]

  1. ↑ Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). 2002. Canadian water quality guidelines for the protection of aquatic life: Total particulate matter. In: Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines, Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, Winnipeg
  2. ↑ TRCA. 2021. Spatial Patterns (2016-2020) and Temporal Trends (1966-2020) in Stream Water Quality across TRCA’s Jurisdiction Prepared by Watershed Planning and Ecosystem Science. https://trcaca.s3.ca-central-1.amazonaws.com/app/uploads/2021/10/29113334/2016-2020-SWQ-Report-v11_FINAL_AODA-FA.pdf
  3. ↑ Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). 2002. Canadian water quality guidelines for the protection of aquatic life: Total particulate matter. In: Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines, Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, Winnipeg
  4. ↑ TRCA. 2021. Spatial Patterns (2016-2020) and Temporal Trends (1966-2020) in Stream Water Quality across TRCA’s Jurisdiction Prepared by Watershed Planning and Ecosystem Science. https://trcaca.s3.ca-central-1.amazonaws.com/app/uploads/2021/10/29113334/2016-2020-SWQ-Report-v11_FINAL_AODA-FA.pdf
  5. ↑ Stormwater Assessment Monitoring and Performance (SWAMP) Program. 2004. Performance Assessment of Two Types of Oil and Grit Separator for Stormwater Management in Parking Lot Applications – Markham & Toronto, Ontario. Report prepared for - Ontario Ministry of Environment, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Municipal Engineers Association of Ontario, and The City of Toronto. Published: July, 2004. Retrieved from: https://sustainabletechnologies.ca/app/uploads/2013/03/OGS_entire-report.pdf
  6. ↑ Lee, D.H., Min, K.S. and Kang, J.H., 2014. Performance evaluation and a sizing method for hydrodynamic separators treating urban stormwater runoff. Water science and technology, 69(10), pp.2122-2131)
  7. ↑ Greenway, R.A. 2001. Stormwater Treatment Demonstration Project—Oil water/grit separator followed by a sand filter: RTP Environmental Associates. Inc., prepared for Harding Township, NJ, Environmental Commission and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Paper WM-668. https://www.conteches.com/Portals/0/Documents/Product%20Evaluation%20and%20%20Testing/vx_harding_township.pdf?ver=2018-05-31-143332-863
  8. ↑ Jianghua, Y., Qitao, Y. and Kim, Y. 2009. Performance analysis of a hydrodynamic separator for treating particulate pollutants in highway rainfall runoff. Environmental Engineering Research, 14(4), pp.262-269. https://www.eeer.org/upload/eer-14-4-262-.pdf
  9. ↑ Lee, D.H., Min, K.S. and Kang, J.H., 2014. Performance evaluation and a sizing method for hydrodynamic separators treating urban stormwater runoff. Water science and technology, 69(10), pp.2122-2131)

Total suspended solids

Toronto and Region Conservation Authority

Systems designed to remove trash, debris and some amount of sediment, oil and grease from stormwater runoff based on the principles of sedimentation for the grit and phase separation for the oil.

Soil, sand and minerals washed from land into water, usually after rain. They pile up in reservoirs, rivers and harbors, destroying fish-nesting areas and holes of water animals and cloud the water so that needed sunlight might not reach aquatic plans. Careless farming, mining and building activities will expose sediment materials, allowing them to be washed off the land after rainfalls.

Mineral particles which are smaller than 2 mm, and which are free of appreciable quantities of clay and silt. Coarse sand usually designates sand grains with particle size between 0.2 and 0.02 mm.

The portion of water precipitated onto a catchment area, which then flows as surface discharge from the catchment area past a specified point.

Water from rain, snow melt, or irrigation that flows over the land surface.

Soil, sand and minerals washed from land into water, usually after rain. They pile up in reservoirs, rivers and harbors, destroying fish-nesting areas and holes of water animals and cloud the water so that needed sunlight might not reach aquatic plans. Careless farming, mining and building activities will expose sediment materials, allowing them to be washed off the land after rainfalls.

Refers to the conditions in which an organism lives and survives or the conditions in which an organism resides. These conditions can be described as aspects of a “physical”, “social” or an “economic” environment, depending on the perspective perceived by the observer.

A biological community, including humans and their natural environment.

Retrieved from "https://wikidev.sustainabletechnologies.ca/index.php?title=OGS:_Performance&oldid=15796"