Construction and Monitoring Performance of Filterra® and...

NC APWA Conference September 2014

Construction and Monitoring Performance of Filterra® and BioPaveTM Units in

Fayetteville, NC

Andrew R. Anderson, M.S., EIT

Extension Associate

@NCSUstormwater

Like us on Facebook facebook.com/NCStateStormwaterExtension

North Carolina State University Department of Biological & Agricultural Engineering


www.bae.ncsu.edu/stormwater

Courtesy Arkansas LID Manual



Stormwater Control Measure Toolbox

• Bioretention • Vegetated swales • Green roofs • Rainwater harvesting • Permeable pavement • Sand filter • Catch basin insert • Stormwater wetlands • Detention/retention ponds

What about in series?

Proprietary devices?



Stormwater Proprietary Devices

• New systems introduced faster than researchers can research them. How well do they compare to “traditional” BMPs?

• Numerous and varying testing protocols across U.S. • Unique opportunity between municipality,

manufacturers, and independent Universities to implement field-scale studies.



Filterra® Bioretention System • High-flow surface

runoff filter (250-350 cm/h)

• Open-throat inlet ideal for curb flow

• Proprietary soil media with tree planter

Courtesy: www.filterra.com




Filterra® BioPaveTM Stormwater System




BioPaveTM Treatment Train

Permeable Pavement (PICP)

Filterra® Surface Inflow

To traditional storm drainage

network

LID Processes • Filtration • Infiltration

LID Processes • Filtration • Bio processes • Sorption • Evapotranspiration

Flow/WQ Flow/WQ Flow/WQ

Performance Evaluation: • PICP (in) PICP (out) • PICP (out) Filterra (out) • PICP (in) Filterra (out)



Map Data source: http://www.secretary.state.nc.us/kidspg/geog.htm Climate Data source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fayetteville,_North_Carolina#Geography

Raleigh

Fayetteville Charlotte

Asheville

Wilmington

Fayetteville Characteristic Value

Annual Precipitation (mm) 1,143

Avg. Precipitation Days 111

Avg. Inter-Event Time (d) 3 to 4

10-yr, 24-h storm (mm) 140

Population (2010 Census) 374,157

Fayetteville, NC



Research Site – Amtrak® Station

Amtrak Train Station

• 0.25-acre drainagearea

• 100% impervious • ~270:1 Loading Ratio

Installed Sept. 2012



Stand-Alone Filterra® • Surface inflow from aging

asphalt parking lot • Media filtration and treatment • Outflow drainage to existing

storm sewer • Throat sized for the 10-yr

storm



Stand-Alone Filterra® Sizing


*Re-surveyed area larger than originally thought



PICP Area = 2,300 sf Runon Area = ~5000 sf (~2:1 ratio)

Filterra® BioPaveTM

Installed Sept. 2012



Design Plan View

Check dam

Underdrain

4’x4’ Tree Filter



Design Cross-Section

Concrete check dam

No. 2 Subbase

2” No. 8 Stone

3 1/8” Concrete

pavers

Subgrade

4” No. 57 Open-graded base

4” perforated underdrain



To SW drainage network

OUTLET (TO STORM DRAIN)

INLET (FROM PICP)



Constraints • Utilities • Traffic loading – 62,400

lifetime ESALs • Rel. High Slope • Soil parameters

– California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of 7-13

– Soil texture = sand/sandy loam

– Ksat = 0.25-0.5 cm/h

Courtesy: Tomorrow Lab L.L.C.



Soil Excavation

• Avoid compaction of soil with heavy machinery as much as possible

• Preserve infiltration rate • Fayetteville install:

wanted less infiltration because of research – Could compact or line if

infiltration too high for research purposes

– BE CONSERVATIVE



Subgrade Preparation • Ensure slope is correct (laser level, total station, etc.) • Install check dams

– Concrete – Filter fabric + No. 57 Stone



Concrete Edging



To Upturn or Not To Upturn?

• Generally: Yes in NC to store the Water Quality Volume

• Fayetteville Project: Goal was to also send water to the tree bioretention filter, so No upturn was used.



Make sure quarry supplies washed stone!



Finished PICP Surface



Tree filter / bioretention install

Single Tree Planting



Tree filter / bioretention install

• Outflow of tree filter connects to existing storm network



Monitoring Goals

1. Evaluate water quality and hydrologic treatment performance of both PICP-Filterra and standard Filterra proprietary devices

– Monitoring Period from winter 2012 to present – To date: Fully analyzed sediment and hydrologic

performance for Stand-alone, nutrients on-going.

2. Collect hydrologic data of PICP SCM for use in calibration of DRAINMOD



Hydrologic Monitoring • Multiple depth piezometers to see

what’s happening to zones • Monitoring drain time performance

throughout study and/or PICP lifespan

• Continuous rainfall at both sites

HOBO U20 Water Level Logger, Onset Computer Corporation



Event Mean Concentrations (EMCs)

• Phosphorus (Total, Dissolved, Ortho-P) • Nitrogen (TKN, NOx, Ammonia, TN, Total & Diss.) • Total Suspended Solids • Suspended Sediment Concentration • Particle Size Distribution • Copper and Zinc (Total & Dissolved) • pH • Infiltration Rate of PICP

Monitoring Metrics

Hydrology

• Flow rate • Total volume • time metrics



Water Quality Sampling: North End

(1) Standalone Filterra Inflow

• ISCO 6712 • Compound weir • Bubbler flow module • Rainfall



Water Quality Sampling: North End

(2) Standalone Filterra Outflow

• ISCO 6712 • ISCO 6712 • Bubbler flow module • Cipoletti weir



Water Quality Sampling: South End

(3) Inflow (sheet flow)

• ISCO 6712 • Slot drain • Rainfall

paced




(4) PICP Outflow/ Filterra Inflow

• ISCO 6712 • 30° V-notch

weir • Bubbler flow

module




(5) Filterra Outflow

• ISCO 6712 • 45° V-notch

weir • Bubbler flow

module



PICP Clogging Monitoring • Can use ASTM C1781 for

permeable paver systems

single 300-mm diameter ring infiltrometer



If Draining Impermeable Lot, Ensure It Is Clean!

• Maintenance is key! (more to come in the next presentation)

• Stabilized catchment • Leaf litter from tree

overhang

Clogging!

Old asphalt lot / PICP interface



PICP Clogging Monitoring • Can use ASTM C1781 for

permeable paver systems • Extremely old and gritty lot

draining to pavers can be a maintenance issue

• Anecdotal evidence from this and other studies on upper-limit of contributing area



PICP Clogging Monitoring • Accounted for reduced volume

infiltration based on a “clogging factor”

Restorative Maintenance (March 2014)



Sediment Monitoring Data Characteristics

SEASON TSS Sample No.

SSC Sample No.

Winter 4 2

Spring 9 6

Summer 6 6

Fall 3 1

Total 22 15

• 22 water quality events captured • 103 hydrologic events captured

Parameter WQ Events Only

Hydrologic events

Average Rainfall (in.)

0.72 0.52

Max rainfall depth (in.)

1.94 4.94

Max intensity (in/h) 0.48 5.28



Filterra® Hydrology

Metric Median Value

Inflow Peak (cfs) 0.33

Outflow peak (cfs) 0.082

Peak Ratio 0.47

Peak Flow Reduction 53%

• Peak flow reduction most noticeable for small storms

• Did not increase peak flow (pre vs. post)



Filterra® Hydrologic Budget

Metric Median Value

Inflow Peak (cfs) 0.33

Outflow peak (cfs) 0.082

Peak Ratio 0.47

Peak Flow Reduction 53%

• Peak flow reduction most noticeable for small storms

• Did not increase peak flow (pre vs. post)

Inflow Outflow Bypass Other Total Volume (cubic feet) 44,691 34,106 8,361 2,190

Percent of Inflow (%) NA 76% 19% 6%



Filterra® Hydrology



Filterra® Sample Runoff Hydrographs



Filterra® Capture Thresholds

• “Outflow” from Filterra® = underdrain + bypass

• Rational equation for pre- and post-construction (forested vs. paved) for various intensities









Preliminary Phosphorus Statistics

Parameter All Storms (n = 21) TAPE (n = 9)

Influent Effluent Influent Effluent

Median EMC (mg/L) 0.07a** 0.038a** 0.20b** 0.048b**

Median Load (mg) 1.14c** 0.14c** 1.14d** 0.32d**

Low Phosphorus Inflow?

Median TP from typical parking lot (Passeport et al, 2009)



Monitoring Results: Filterra® Total Suspended Sediment

Metric Parameter TSS SSC

Concentration Inlet mean (mg/L) 125 95 Outlet mean (mg/L) 4.9 4.3

Conc. Perc. Reduction (all storms) Median 94% 96%

Conc. Perc. Reduction (storms without bypass) Median 96% 96%

Event-based load reductions (all storms) Median 79% 82%

Event-based loadreductions (storms without bypass) Median 96% 96%

Cumulative load efficiency (all storms) 76% 79%

Cumulative load efficiency (no bypass) 96% 96%



Monitoring Results: Filterra® Effluent Concentrations are Important!



Monitoring Results: Filterra® Particle Size Distribution

Storm event Date

PSD Collected at Inlet?

PSD Collected at Outlet?

Feb. 26, 2013 X

Mar. 04, 2013 X

Mar. 19, 2013 X

Mar. 29, 2013 X

Jun. 10, 2013 X

Jun. 26, 2013 X X

July 02, 2013 X X

Aug. 13, 2013 X

Sep. 2, 2013 X X

Sep. 21, 2013 X

Nov. 1, 2013 X

Feb. 19, 2014 X

Apr 15, 2014 X X

Apr. 19, 2014 X

June 12, 2014 X



BioPaveTM Water Quality:

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

Parking Lot Underdrain Outflow

TSS

Load

ing

(Mg/

ha-

yr)

TSS

Permeable Pavement (PICP) Filterra®

Surface Inflow





Surface Inflow

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

PICP Filterra BioPave

TN L

oad

Redu

ctio

n (k

g/ha

-yr)

TN





Surface Inflow

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

PICP Filterra BioPave

TP L

oad

Redu

ctio

n (k

g/ha

-yr)

TP



• 0.69 mg/L – “Excellent” WQ marker in the Piedmont for TN (McNett et al, 2010)

BioPaveTM Water Quality EMC: Total Nitrogen (Data 2012 – May 2014)

Site Median TN EMC (mg/L)

Runoff 0.83

PICP UD

0.81

Outflow 0.72



BioPaveTM Water Quality EMC: Total Phosphorus (data from 2012-May 2014)

• 0.06 mg/L “Excellent” ambient water quality (McNett et al, 2010)

Site Median TP EMC (mg/L)

Runoff 0.069

PICP UD

0.043

Outflow 0.035



Median Concentrations of Other Pollutants (as of May 2014)

Pollutant Inflow

(mg/L) Outflow (mg/L)

Ammoniacal Nitrogen-N 0.10 0.06

Nitrate/nitrite-N 0.11 0.15

TKN 0.90 0.42

Total Nitrogen 1.07 0.52

Total Phosphorus 0.07 0.04

Orthophosphate-P 0.03 0.03



Low Nutrient Influent Loadings for Stand-Alone Filterra®….Why?



Conclusions • Filterra device statistically treated 1” storms, and

showed similar outflow to pre-development conditions

• Filterra® sediment EMC efficiencies of 95%+ and load reductions of 75%+

• Clogging is an issue with dirty, large contributing areas



Lessons Learned

• Maintenance is key to permeable pavement component

• City cooperation is key in field projects

• Not all urban watersheds are created equally



References • ASTM Standard D448. (2008). “Standard Classification for Sizes of Aggregate for Road and Bridge

Construction,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2008, DOI: 10.1520/D0448-08. • Brown, R.A., Skaggs, R.W, Hunt, W.F. (2013). “Calibration and Validation of DRAINMOD to Model

Bioretention Hydrology.” Journal of Hydrology, 486, 430-442. • Gee, G.W. and J.W. Bauder. (1995). Particle-size analysis in A. Klute (ed.) Methods of Soil Analysis,

Part 1. Physical and Mineralogical Methods. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI. p. 383-411. • NC DENR (2007). Chapter 18: Permeable Pavement (rev. 2012) in Stormwater Best Management

Practices Manual. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality.

• Smith, D. R. (2011). Permeable Interlocking Concrete Pavements. 4th ed. Interlocking Concrete Pavement Institute, Montreal, Canada.

• Barrett, M.E., Lantin, A. and Austrheim-Smith, S. (2004). Stormwater pollutant removal in roadside vegetated buffer strips. Transport Res. Rec. 1890: 129-140.

• McNett, J. K., Hunt, W.F., and Osborne, J.A. (2010). Establishing storm-water BMP evaluation metrics based upon ambient water quality associated with benthic macroinvertebrate populations. J. of. Env. Eng. 136: 535-541.



Acknowledgements • NCSU Stormwater Engineering Group • Filterra® Bioretention Systems • City of Fayetteville • Linda McKenzie & Jenny James, NCSU Center for Applied

Aquatic Ecology • AmtrakTM staff



Thanks! Any Questions?

@NCSUstormwater

Like us on Facebook facebook.com/NCStateStormwaterExtension

Andrew Anderson, E.I.T. [email protected] 919-515-8595

mailto:[email protected]

Date post:	07-Feb-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	8 times
Download:	0 times

Construction and Monitoring Performance of Filterra® and...

Documents