Difference between revisions of "Bioretention media storage"

From LID SWM Planning and Design Guide
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
m
Line 2: Line 2:
Bioretention filter media may be assumed to have a storage capacity of 0.4.
Bioretention filter media may be assumed to have a storage capacity of 0.4.


This has been calculated as the difference between the media porosity and field capacity.  
This has been calculated as the difference between the media porosity and field capacity from a number of studies.  
# Marine sand: 0.51 - 0.06 = 0.45 <ref name=Liu>Liu, Ruifen, and Elizabeth Fassman-Beck. “Pore Structure and Unsaturated Hydraulic Conductivity of Engineered Media for Living Roofs and Bioretention Based on Water Retention Data.” Journal of Hydrologic Engineering 23, no. 3 (March 2018): 04017065. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0001621</ref>
# Marine sand: 0.51 - 0.06 = 0.45 <ref name=Liu>Liu, Ruifen, and Elizabeth Fassman-Beck. “Pore Structure and Unsaturated Hydraulic Conductivity of Engineered Media for Living Roofs and Bioretention Based on Water Retention Data.” Journal of Hydrologic Engineering 23, no. 3 (March 2018): 04017065. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0001621</ref>
# Marine sand with 10 % compost: 0.51 - 0.11 = 0.40 <ref name=Liu/>
# Marine sand with 10 % compost: 0.51 - 0.11 = 0.40 <ref name=Liu/>
# Marine sand with 20 % compost: 0.53 - 0.12 = 0.41 <rev name=Liu/>
# Marine sand with 20 % compost: 0.53 - 0.12 = 0.41 <ref name=Liu/>
# Marine sand with 20 % compost & 20 % topsoil: 0.52 - 0.16 = 0.36 <ref name=Liu/>
# Marine sand with 20 % compost & 20 % topsoil: 0.52 - 0.16 = 0.36 <ref name=Liu/>
# Sand: 0.46 - 0.1 = 0.36 <ref>Saxton, K E, and W J Rawls. “Soil Water Characteristic Estimates by Texture and Organic Matter for Hydrologic Solutions.” Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2006. doi:10.2136/sssaj2005.0117. </ref>
# Sand: 0.46 - 0.1 = 0.36 <ref>Saxton, K E, and W J Rawls. “Soil Water Characteristic Estimates by Texture and Organic Matter for Hydrologic Solutions.” Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2006. doi:10.2136/sssaj2005.0117. </ref>

Revision as of 23:36, 11 November 2018

box plot of nine documented bioretention media

Bioretention filter media may be assumed to have a storage capacity of 0.4.

This has been calculated as the difference between the media porosity and field capacity from a number of studies.

  1. Marine sand: 0.51 - 0.06 = 0.45 [1]
  2. Marine sand with 10 % compost: 0.51 - 0.11 = 0.40 [1]
  3. Marine sand with 20 % compost: 0.53 - 0.12 = 0.41 [1]
  4. Marine sand with 20 % compost & 20 % topsoil: 0.52 - 0.16 = 0.36 [1]
  5. Sand: 0.46 - 0.1 = 0.36 [2]
  6. NC sandy bioretention mix: 47.7 - 7.0 = 40.7 [3]
  7. Bioretention soil I: 0.71 - 0.1 = 0.61 [4]
  8. Bioretention soil II: 0.52 - 0.1 = 0.42 [4]
  9. M minus mean θini: 0.76 - 0.32 = 0.44 [5]

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Liu, Ruifen, and Elizabeth Fassman-Beck. “Pore Structure and Unsaturated Hydraulic Conductivity of Engineered Media for Living Roofs and Bioretention Based on Water Retention Data.” Journal of Hydrologic Engineering 23, no. 3 (March 2018): 04017065. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0001621
  2. Saxton, K E, and W J Rawls. “Soil Water Characteristic Estimates by Texture and Organic Matter for Hydrologic Solutions.” Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2006. doi:10.2136/sssaj2005.0117.
  3. Davis, Allen P., Robert G. Traver, William F. Hunt, Ryan Lee, Robert A. Brown, and Jennifer M. Olszewski. “Hydrologic Performance of Bioretention Storm-Water Control Measures.” Journal of Hydrologic Engineering 17, no. 5 (May 2012): 604–14. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000467.
  4. 4.0 4.1 Li, Houng, and Allen P. Davis. “Urban Particle Capture in Bioretention Media. I: Laboratory and Field Studies.” Journal of Environmental Engineering 134, no. 6 (June 2008): 409–18. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372(2008)134:6(409).
  5. Roy-Poirier, A., Y. Filion, and P. Champagne. “An Event-Based Hydrologic Simulation Model for Bioretention Systems.” Water Science and Technology 72, no. 9 (November 11, 2015): 1524–33. doi:10.2166/wst.2015.368.