Design and Performance Characterization of Roadside Bioretention Systems

Singh, Rajendra Prasad; Zhao, Fei; Jiang, Qian; J, Saravanan; Fu, Dafang

doi:10.3390/su11072040

Cited by 15 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Current findings for NH 4 + -N and TP are showing the similar trend with the results of Singh et al [34] who demonstrated that NH 4 + -N and TP have good removal effects. Davis et al [35] used sand as a filler to remove nitrogen and phosphorus pollutants from runoff by bioretention systems, which was a stated better removal rate of TP.…”

Section: Water Quality Effect Of Each Structural Layersupporting

confidence: 88%

Hydrologic and Pollutant Removal Performance of Media Layers in Bioretention

Yang

Liu

et al. 2020

Water

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study was aimed to investigate the filler layer structure in modified bioretention systems. Three different structural layers in bioretention were proposed to evaluate their hydrologic performance and pollutant removal efficiency under different rainfall intensities. These layers were as follows: all three layers (filter, transition, and drainage layers), without transition layer, and without drainage layer. Synthetic stormwater was used for experimental purpose in current work. Results revealed that compared with “all three layers”, runoff control rate of “without transition layer” and “without drainage layer” was reduced by 0 to 7.4%, 0 to 10.1%, and outflow start time was advanced by 6 to 8 min and 1.5 to 4.5 min, respectively. Moreover, CODcr (chemical oxygen demand), NH4+-N (ammonium nitrogen), TN (total nitrogen) and TP (total phosphorus) removal rates were 86.0%, 85.4%, 71.8%, and 68.0%, respectively. Particle size distribution of the fillers revealed that during operation, particle moved downward were mainly within 0.16–0.63 mm size. Findings showed that transition and drainage layer played an important role in runoff control, and total height of the filler layer should not be less than 800 mm. Filter layer effectively reduce runoff pollution but the thickness of the filter layer should not be less than 500 mm. Whereas, transition layer has the function of preventing the filler loss of the filter layer; therefore, proper measures must be taken into consideration during structural optimization.

show abstract

Section: Water Quality Effect Of Each Structural Layersupporting

confidence: 88%

Hydrologic and Pollutant Removal Performance of Media Layers in Bioretention

Yang

Liu

et al. 2020

Water

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recently, different enhancement methods have been applied to achieve good nitrogen removal (Ali et al 2021;Takaijudin et al 2016;Luo et al 2020;Poor et al 2018;Singh 2019;You 2019;. Lopez 2016;Jiang et al 2016).…”

Section: Fig 2 Traditional Bioretention Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nitrate Removal from Urban Storm Runoffs by Multi-Filter Process

Sirouspour

Parvinnia

Shokrollahi

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ultimate goal of the present study is to design and investigate the bio-geo-filters for nitrate removal from the runoffs. This research uses alternate layers of non-woven geotextile and granular soil to reduce and remove pollution. These layers are of paramount importance in permeability and adsorption capability. Some points have been considered for selecting the materials, including the material capability for pollution removal, their accessibility, and maximal cost-effectiveness. After conducting the permeability tests, the weight mixing ratio of the materials used in permeable reactive barriers (PRB) was considered to be 25% sand, 20% zeolite, 20% iron filings, and 10% poplar wood sawdust. For pH 7, zeolite's maximal nitrate adsorption efficiency is about 69%, sawdust 29%, and iron filings 12%. The investigation of nitrate adsorption through the final prepared PRB for different nitrate concentrations under the optimal pH conditions showed maximal adsorption of about 83% for a nitrate concentration of 150 mg/L. The more the initial nitrate concentration, the more the absorption amount. Moreover, nitrate was removed with equal amounts of absorbent at optimal pH at different times to determine the equilibrium time. The maximal removal of 100% was obtained at an equilibrium time of 96 hours. In the pollution removal test with biomass grown in the filter environment, the filter decreased the nitrate content up to 99% after nine days, i.e., the final nitrate content was reduced from 100 to 1 mg/L.

show abstract

“…A lacking denitrification process results in nitrogen removal being unstable and widely variable in the bioretention system, particularly for nitrate (NO 3 ). Nitrogen removal is considered the main challenge encountered by bioretention designers [39][40][41]. Davis et al [30] conducted a laboratory study on the performance of traditional bioretention systems on nutrient removal.…”

Section: Overview Of Bioretention Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Common Approaches of Nitrogen Removal in Bioretention System

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bioretention is considered one of the best management practices (BMPS) for managing stormwater quality and quantity. The bioretention system has proven good performance in removing total suspended solids, oil, and heavy metals. The nitrogen (N) removal efficiency of the bioretention system is insufficient, however, due to the complex forms of nitrogen. Therefore, this paper aims to review recent enhancement approaches to nitrogen (N) removal and to discuss the factors influencing bioretention efficiency. To improve bioretention efficiency, several factors should be considered when designing bioretention systems, including nitrogen concentration, climate factors, and hydrological factors. Further, soil and plant selection should be appropriate for environmental conditions. Three design improvement approaches have been reviewed. The first is the inclusion of a saturated zone (SZ), which has been used widely. The SZ is shown to have the best performance in nitrogen removal. The second approach (which is less popular) is the usage of additives in the form of a mixture with soil media or as a separated layer. This concept is intended to be applied in tropical regions with wet soil conditions and a short dry period. The third approach combines the previous two approaches (enhanced filter media and applying a SZ). This approach is more efficient and has recently attracted more attention. This study suggests that further studies on the third approach should be carried out. Applying amendment material through filter media and integrating it with SZ provides appropriate conditions to complete the nitrogen cycle. This approach is considered a promising method to enhance nitrogen removal. In general, the bioretention system offers a promising tool for improving stormwater quality.

show abstract

Design and Performance Characterization of Roadside Bioretention Systems

Cited by 15 publications

References 35 publications

Hydrologic and Pollutant Removal Performance of Media Layers in Bioretention

Hydrologic and Pollutant Removal Performance of Media Layers in Bioretention

Nitrate Removal from Urban Storm Runoffs by Multi-Filter Process

The Common Approaches of Nitrogen Removal in Bioretention System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About