2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2013.09.016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Impact of the hydraulic loading rate on pollutants removal in tropical horizontal subsurface flow constructed wetlands

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
27
0
15

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 62 publications
(45 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
3
27
0
15
Order By: Relevance
“…These results indicate that a 20 cm/day HLR would be the appropriate upper limit for the applied HLR for pollutant removal, with the HSSF configuration being more suitable for BOD 5 , TSS, FC, and NO 3 − -N removal. These results were consistent with laboratory-scale studies reported earlier by Weerakoon et al [7] and Weerakoon et al [21]. Table 3 presents the range of applied mass loading rates (MLRs) and mass removal rates (MRRs) obtained for the VSSF and HSSF wetland units for polishing stream water, and Table 4 …”
Section: Pollutant Removalsupporting
confidence: 81%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These results indicate that a 20 cm/day HLR would be the appropriate upper limit for the applied HLR for pollutant removal, with the HSSF configuration being more suitable for BOD 5 , TSS, FC, and NO 3 − -N removal. These results were consistent with laboratory-scale studies reported earlier by Weerakoon et al [7] and Weerakoon et al [21]. Table 3 presents the range of applied mass loading rates (MLRs) and mass removal rates (MRRs) obtained for the VSSF and HSSF wetland units for polishing stream water, and Table 4 …”
Section: Pollutant Removalsupporting
confidence: 81%
“…However, wastewater treatment is far from satisfactory in developing countries [5,6], especially in semiurban and rural areas, due to constrained economic conditions and the lack of information. Therefore, some contamination of waterbodies can be expected, and hence development of appropriate and affordable water and wastewater treatment technologies is necessary in these contexts [7].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…HSSF-CWs often exhibit inconsistent and highly variable nitrogen removal efficiency and has been reported in long term studies ranging from 20% to 70% [9,13]. Regarding P removal, values ranging from 30% to 60% have been reported, depending on factors such as the wastewater P loading rate, the type of media used and the hydraulic loading rate [11,14]. In fact, HSSF-CWs phosphorus removal must be limited because the materials used in substrate (usually gravel) are poor in iron and aluminum hydrous oxides minerals as well as in calcium and magnesium concentrations, elements essentials for adsorption and precipitation of insoluble forms in wetlands, the most important mechanisms for removal P in those systems [10].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previous studies demonstrated that CWs are capable of removing a majority of environmental pollutants including nitrogen, phosphorous, chemical oxygen demand (COD) (Lin et al, 2002a;Hu et al, 2012;Li et al, 2013;Wang et al, 2013), and emerging contaminants such as antibiotics (Hijosa-Valsero et al, 2011;Berglund et al, 2014;Chen et al, 2015) and ARGs Chen et al, 2015). Their performance depends on the design parameters such as plant species, flow types, substrates, hydraulic loading rates, hydraulic retention time and applied pollutants loadings (Hijosa-Valsero et al, 2010;Hijosa-Valsero et al, 2011;Saeed and Sun, 2012;Weerakoon et al, 2013;Wu et al, 2014;Wu et al, 2015). The removal of pollutants may involve substrate adsorption, plant uptake, photolysis, volatilization and biodegradation Arroyo et al, 2013;Chen et al, 2014;Li et al, 2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%