Performance of bioretention experimental devices: contrasting laboratory and field scales through controlled experiments

Abstract

Studying the performance of LID devices on a laboratory scale has the advantage of flexible layouts, so that more factors can be tested. However, they do not always correspond to what happens on a real scale of application. This paper focuses on a comparative analysis between two bioretention experimental devices considering field and laboratory scales. Based on this comparison, our understanding can be enhanced to extrapolate the results. Flow rate and duration were used as the main equivalence parameters. However, these parameters were insufficient to ensure similarity in the results. We proposed to include control volume, an application rate and an equivalent net depth as new parameters. Further research should test the variation of these parameters.Keywords: SUDS; Stormwater control; Water retention; Pollutant removal. RESUMOEstudos da performance em laboratório possuem a vantagem de layouts flexíveis, podendo testar mais fatores. No entanto, nem sempre correspondem ao que acontece na escala real de aplicação. Este estudo foca em uma análise comparativa entre dispositivos experimentais de bioretenção em escala de campo e em escala de laboratório. A partir dessa comparação, é possível avançar na compreensão para extrapolação dos resultados. Como principais parâmetros de equivalência, foram utilizados a taxa de fluxo e a duração. No entanto, observou-se que estes parâmetros foram insuficientes para garantia de similaridade nos resultados. Indicamos como novos parâmetros a serem incorporados o volume de controle, taxa de aplicação e altura equivalente útil. Novos estudos com a variação destes parâmetros devem ser feitos.

Managed aquifer recharge: study of undisturbed soil column tests on the infiltration and treatment capacity using effluent of wastewater stabilization pond

“…By the other side, these types of investigations are not widespread, and in some cases, they are inconclusive for the following reasons: i) surface sealing soil layers studied, ii) lack of a proper monitoring of the soil, iii) lack of sites where to apply the effluents, or even by iv) the lack of knowledge of the of most aquifers' behavior. Therefore, the need for more research exists in Brazil to better support the treatment capacity through the soil, as well as its maintenance (OKPALA, 2011;LOPES, 2013;CHAVES et al, 2016;COELHO et al, 2018;MACEDO et al, 2018).…”

Decentralized urban runoff recycling facility addressing the security of the water-energy-food nexus

“…In addition, the decrease in total rainfall leads to reduced water availability. Additionally, the increased drought period leads to higher pollutant build up and wash off (Liu et al, 2016;Liu et al, 2017;Lago et al, 2018).…”

“…The daily precipitation that occurs at 90% frequency (P90) for the city is 32.5 mm. The laboratory prototype was built in the form of a bioretention box, according to the one proposed by and Macedo et al (2018). The bioretention box allows keeping physical similarities as close as possible to the real system in the field to ensure that the hydraulic and treatment processes occurring in the field are replicated in the laboratory.…”

“…The evaluation of the system in the laboratory has some advantages in relation to the real system in the field (Macedo et al, 2018): (1) The environmental conditions of the events can be controlled to obtain a more appropriate investigation, both in terms of the total runoff volume and peak flows, as in pollutant concentration;…”

“…This additional volume must be considered in the design of LID structures regarding long-term flood mitigation. The ΔP|climate will also lead to different process of pollutant build up and wash off, affecting the pollutant load in the runoff (ΔL|climate) (Liu et al, 2016;Liu et al, 2017;Lago, Macedo & Mendiondo, 2018). In this case, where both urbanization and climate are considered, the LID practices are called of 2nd generation (LID-2G).…”