Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | '''STEP are conducting a review of performance for many BMP types throughout 2018. This content will be updated shortly.''' |
|
| |
|
| <table class="table-responsive">
| | {|class="wikitable sortable" |
| <table class="table table-bordered">
| | |+ 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> |
| <caption><strong>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></strong></caption>
| | |- |
| <tr class='success'>
| | !style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|Location |
| <th class="text-center">Location</th>
| | !style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|Filter media composition |
| <th class="text-center">Biomedia composition</th>
| | !style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|Media depth (cm) |
| <th class="text-center">Media depth (cm)</th>
| | !style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|Internal water storage depth (cm) |
| <th class="text-center">Internal water storage depth (cm)</th>
| | !style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|I/P ratio |
| <th class="text-center">I/P*</th>
| | !style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|Runoff volume reduction (%) |
| <th class="text-center">Runoff volume reduction (%)</th>
| | !style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|TSS reduction (%) |
| <th class="text-center">TSS reduction(%)</th>
| | !style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|TN reduction (%) |
| <th class="text-center">TN reduction (%)</th>
| | !style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|TP reduction (%) |
| <th class="text-center">TP reduction (%)</th>
| | |- |
| </tr>
| | !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> |
| <tr><td class="text-center">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></td>
| | |88% sand, 8% fines, 4% OM||180||150||47||97||99||99||99 |
| <td class="text-center">88% sand, 8% fines, 4% OM</td>
| | |- |
| <td class="text-center">180</td>
| | !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> |
| <td class="text-center">150</td>
| | |88% sand, 8% fines, 4% OM||180||150||47||97||99||99||99 |
| <td class="text-center">47</td>
| | |- |
| <td class="text-center">97</td>
| | !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> |
| <td class="text-center">99</td>
| | |rowspan="4"|96% sand, 4% fines||rowspan="2"|110||88||rowspan="2"|12||89||rowspan="4"|58||rowspan="4"|58||rowspan="4"|-10 |
| <td class="text-center">99</td>
| | |- |
| <td class="text-center">99</td></tr>
| | |58||93 |
| <tr><td class="text-center">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></td>
| | |- |
| <td class="text-center">88% sand, 8% fines, 4% OM</td>
| | |rowspan="2"|96||72||rowspan="2"|13||98 |
| <td class="text-center">180</td>
| | |- |
| <td class="text-center">150</td>
| | |42||100 |
| <td class="text-center">47</td>
| | |- |
| <td class="text-center">97</td>
| | !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> |
| <td class="text-center">99</td>
| | |loamy sand, 3% OM||120||60||20||99||-||-||- |
| <td class="text-center">99</td>
| | |- |
| <td class="text-center">99</td></tr>
| | !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> |
| <tr><td rowspan=4 class="text-center">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></td>
| | |rowspan="2"|98% sand, 2% fines||90||30||12||90||-||-||- |
| <td rowspan=4 class="text-center">96% sand, 4% fines</td>
| | |- |
| <td rowspan=2 class="text-center">110</td>
| | |90||60||12||98||-||-||- |
| <td class="text-center">88</td>
| | |- |
| <td rowspan=2 class="text-center">12</td>
| | !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> |
| <td class="text-center">89</td>
| | |rowspan="2"|15% sand, 80% fines, 5% OM||60||45||68||-||-||54||63 |
| <td rowspan=4 class="text-center">58</td>
| | |- |
| <td rowspan=4 class="text-center">58</td>
| | |90||75||68||-||-||54||58 |
| <td rowspan=4 class="text-center">-10</td></tr>
| | |} |
| <tr><td class="text-center">58</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">93</td>
| |
| </tr>
| |
| <tr><td rowspan=2 class="text-center">96</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">72</td>
| |
| <td rowspan=2 class="text-center">13</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">98</td>
| |
| </tr>
| |
| <tr><td class="text-center">42</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">100</td>
| |
| </tr>
| |
| <tr><td class="text-center">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></td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">loamy sand, 3% OM</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">120</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">60</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">20</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">>99</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">-</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">-</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">-</td>
| |
| </tr>
| |
| <tr><td rowspan=2 class="text-center">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></td>
| |
| <td rowspan=2 class="text-center">98% sand, 2% fines</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">90</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">30</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">12</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">90</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">-</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">-</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">-</td>
| |
| </tr>
| |
| <tr><td class="text-center">90</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">60</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">12</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">98</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">-</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">-</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">-</td>
| |
| </tr>
| |
| <tr><td rowspan=2 class="text-center">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></td>
| |
| <td rowspan=2 class="text-center">15% sand, 80% fines, 5% OM</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">60</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">45</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">68</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">-</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">-</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">54</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">63</td>
| |
| </tr>
| |
| <tr><td class="text-center">90</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">75</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">68</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">-</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">-</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">54</td>
| |
| <td class="text-center">58</td>
| |
| </tr>
| |
| </table>
| |
| *Impervious/Pervious ratio, i.e. the area of catchment divided by surface area of the cell
| |
| </table>
| |
| ====References====
| |
| <em><references /></em>
| |
| {{:Feedback}}
| |
|
| |
|
| <strong>For review</strong>
| | ===For review=== |
| http://ascelibrary.org/doi/10.1061/%28ASCE%29EE.1943-7870.0000876 | | *http://ascelibrary.org/doi/10.1061/%28ASCE%29EE.1943-7870.0000876 (pollutants) |
| | *http://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/9780784413883.003 (maturation) |
| | *https://www1.villanova.edu/content/dam/villanova/engineering/vcase/sym-presentations/2011/40_2ayers.pdf (maturation) |
| | *https://www.chijournal.org/C417 (undersized) |
| | *https://www.unh.edu/unhsc/sites/unh.edu.unhsc/files/STONE%20THESIS%20FINAL.pdf (modified biomedia) |
| | *http://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/5/1/13/htm (cold climate) |
| | ---- |
| | [[Category: Performance]] |