4.5 Article

Hydraulic and treatment performance of pervious pavements under variable drying and wetting regimes

Journal

WATER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Volume 64, Issue 8, Pages 1692-1699

Publisher

IWA PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.2166/wst.2011.150

Keywords

clogging; drying and wetting; pervious pavements; pollutant removal variable flow rates; water sensitive urban design

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Pervious pavements are an effective stormwater treatment technology. However, their performance under variable drying and wetting conditions have yet to be tested, particularly under a continuous time scale. This paper reports on the clogging behaviour and pollutant removal efficiency of three pervious pavement types over 26 accelerated years. These pavements were monolithic porous asphalt (PA), Permapave (PP) and modular Hydrapave (HP). Over a cycle of 13 days, the period of which was equivalent to the average annual Brisbane, Australia rainfall (1,200 mm), the pavements were randomly dosed with four different flows. Drying events of 3 h duration were simulated during each flow. Inflow and outflow samples were collected and analysed for Total Suspended Solids (TSS), Total Phosphorus (TP) and Total Nitrogen (TN). To evaluate the rate of clogging, a 1 in 5 year Brisbane storm event was simulated in the 6th, 8th, 12th, 16th, 20th and 24th week. Under normal dosing conditions, none of the pavements showed signs of clogging even after 15 years. However, under storm conditions, both PA and HP started to clog after 12 years, while PP showed no signs of clogging after 26 years. The drying and various flow events showed no effects in TSS removal, with all systems achieving a removal of approximately 100%. The average TP removal was 20% for all flows except for low flow, which had a significant amount of leaching over time. Leaching from TN was also observed during all flows except high flow. The TSS, TP and TN results observed during storm events were similar to that of high flow.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available