4
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 143:
Line 143: − + Line 150:
Line 150: − + − + − + − + − + − + − + − Research on the volumetric runoff reduction performance of permeable pavements have been conducted on pavements with and without an underdrain in the base. Volumetric performance improves when: + − * Native soils have high infiltration capacity. − * Impervious surface draining onto the permeable pavement is limited or absent. − * Underdrain is elevated above the native soil and/or a flow restrictor is installed on the underdrain. − All permeable pavements have very high surface infiltration rates when appropriately maintained. Therefore, the surface course type (i.e. PICP, pervious concrete) is not a key factor in determining volumetric runoff reduction performance. + + + + + − + − + − + − + − + − + − March/April.</ref> − + − + − + − + − + − |-+ − |style="text-align: center;" |Washington − |style="text-align: center;" |97 to 100% − |style="text-align: center;" |Brattebo and Booth (2003)<ref name="example2">Brattebo, B. and D. Booth. 2003. Long term stormwater quantity and quality − performance of permeable pavement systems. Water Research 37(18): 4369-4376 </ref> − |- − |style="text-align: center;" |Connecticut − |style="text-align: center;" |'''<u><span title="Note: Runoff reduction estimates are based on differences in runoff volume between the practice and a conventional impervious surface over the period of monitoring." >72%*</span></u>''' − |style="text-align: center;" |Gilbert and Clausen (2006)<ref>Gilbert, J. and J. Clausen. 2006. Stormwater runoff quality and quantity from asphalt, − paver and crushed stone driveways in Connecticut. Water Research 40: 826-832.</ref> − |- − |style="text-align: center;" |King City, Ontario − |style="text-align: center;" |'''<u><span title="Note: In this study, there was no underdrain in the pavement base, but an underdrain was located 1 m below the native soils to allow for sampling of infiltrated water. Temporary water storage fluctuations in the base were similar to those expected in a no underdrain design." >99%*</span></u>''' − |style="text-align: center;" |<span class="plainlinks">[https://sustainabletechnologies.ca/app/uploads/2013/03/PP_FactsheetSept2011-compressed.pdf TRCA (2008)]</span> − + Line 254:
Line 241: −
→Performance
==Performance==
==Performance==
{|class="wikitable"
{|class="wikitable"
|+Ability of Permeable Pavements to Meet Stormwater Management Objectives
|+Ability of Bioretention to Meet Stormwater Management Objectives
|-
|-
!BMP
!BMP
!Erosion Control
!Erosion Control
|-
|-
|'''Permeable pavement with no underdrain'''
|'''Bioretention with no underdrain'''
|Yes
|Yes
|Yes-size for water quality storage requirement
|Yes-size for water quality storage requirement
|Partial-based on available storage volume and native soil infiltration rate
|Partial-based on available storage volume and native soil infiltration rate
|-
|-
|'''Permeable pavement with underdrain'''
|'''Bioretention with underdrain'''
|Partial-based on available storage, native soil infiltration rate and if a flow restrictor is used
|Partial-based on available storage volume beneath the underdrain and soil infiltration rate
|Yes-size for water quality storage requirement
|Yes-size for water quality storage requirement
|Partial-based on available storage, native soil infiltration rate and if a flow restrictor is used
|Partial-based on available storage volume beneath the underdrain and soil infiltration rate
|-
|-
|'''Permeable Interlocking Pavements'''
|'''Bioretention with underdrain and impermeable liner'''
|No-some volume reduction occurs through evaporation
|Partial-some volume reduction through evapotranspiration
|Yes-size for water quality storage requirement
|Yes-size for water quality storage requirement
|Partial-based on available storage volume and if a flow restrictor is used
|Partial-some volume reduction through evapotranspiration
|}
|}
===Water Balance===
===Water Balance===
Bioretention has been shown to reduce runoff volume through evapotranspiration and infiltration of runoff. The research can be classified into bioretention applications that include underdrains and those that do not (and therefore rely on full infiltration into underlying soils). Aside from the underdrain, many other factors can impact the water balance
Aside from the underdrain, many other factors can impact the water balance performance of a bioretention installation:
* Native soil infiltration rate;
* Rainfall patterns; and,
* Various sizing criteria on a per-installation basis.
{|class="wikitable"
{|class="wikitable"
|+Volumetric runoff reduction from permeable pavements
|+Volumetric runoff reduction from Bioretention
|-
|-
!'''LID Practice'''
!'''LID Practice'''
!'''Location'''
!'''Location'''
!'''<u><span title="Note: Runoff reduction estimates are based on differences between runoff volume from the practice and total precipitation over the period of monitoring unless otherwise stated." >Runoff Reduction*</span></u>'''
!'''<u><span title="Note: Runoff reduction estimates are based on differences in runoff volume between the practice and a conventional impervious surface over the period of monitoring." >% Runoff Reduction*</span></u>'''
!'''Reference'''
!'''Reference'''
|-
|-
|rowspan="6" style="text-align: center;" | Permeable pavement without underdrain
|rowspan="3" style="text-align: center;" | Bioretention without underdrain
|style="text-align: center;" |Guelph, Ontario
|style="text-align: center;" |Connecticut
|style="text-align: center;" |90%
|style="text-align: center;" |99%
|style="text-align: center;" |James (2002)<ref>James, W. 2002. Green Roads: Research into Permeable Pavers. Stormwater.
|style="text-align: center;" |Dietz and Clausen(2005)<ref>Dietz, M.E. and Clausen, J.C. 2005. A field evaluation of rain garden flow and pollutant treatment. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 167(1), pp.123-138. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.365.9417&rep=rep1&type=pdf.</ref>
|-
|-
|style="text-align: center;" |Pennsylvania
|style="text-align: center;" |Pennsylvania
|style="text-align: center;" |90%
|style="text-align: center;" |80%
|style="text-align: center;" |Kwiatkowski et al. (2007)<ref name="example1">Kwiatkowski, M., Welker, A.L., Traver, R.G., Vanacore, M., Ladd. T. 2007. Evaluation of an infiltration best management practice utilizing pervious concrete. Journal of the American Water Resources Association. Vol. 43. No. 5. pp. 1208-1222.</ref>
|style="text-align: center;" |Ermilio (2005)<ref>Ermilio, J. 2005. Characterization study of a bio-infiltration stormwater BMP. M.S. Thesis. Villanova University. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering. Philadelphia, PA. https://www1.villanova.edu/content/dam/villanova/engineering/vcase/vusp/Ermilio-Thesis06.pdf.</ref>
|-
|-
|style="text-align: center;" |France
|style="text-align: center;" |Pennsylvania
|style="text-align: center;" |97%
|style="text-align: center;" |70%
|style="text-align: center;" |Legret and Colandini (1999)<ref>Legret, M and V. Colandani. 1999. Effects of a porous pavement structure with a reservoir structure on runoff water: water quality and fate of metals. Water Science and Technology. 39(2): 111-117</ref>
|style="text-align: center;" |Emerson and Traver (2004)<ref>Emerson, C. and Traver, R. 2004. The Villanova Bio-infiltration Traffic Island: Project Overview. Proceedings of 2004 World Water and Environmental Resources Congress
(EWRI/ASCE). Salt Lake City, Utah, June 22 – July 1, 2004. https://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/40737(2004)38.</ref>
|-
|-
|rowspan="10" style="text-align: center;" | Permeable pavement with underdrain
|rowspan="10" style="text-align: center;" | Bioretention with underdrain
|-
|-
|style="text-align: center;" |Vaughan, Ontario
|style="text-align: center;" |Vaughan, Ontario
|-
|-
|}
|}
==See also==
==See also==