SmartDrain TM for Enhanced Biofiltration Controls

Similar documents
Observed infiltration and clogging characteristics for tested media.

Treatability of Organic and Radioactive Emerging Contaminants in Stormwater Runoff

Using WinSLAMM v10 to Predict Stormwater Pollutant Loads and Evaluate LID Management Approaches Overview

Conservation Design Approach for New Development

Modeling Green Infrastructure Compared with Large-Scale Monitoring at Kansas City, MO

BMP ACHIEVABILITY vs. WQS: Are there non-compliance risks for NPDES permittees AFTER BMP implementation?

WinSLAMM: Integrating Stormwater Management and Green Technologies

Stormwater Management Studies in Areas Undergoing Reconstruction Following the Tornado that Hit Tuscaloosa, AL

Evapotranspiration Calculations for Stormwater Quality Models

Evapotranspiration Calculations for Stormwater Quality Models

Wet Detention Ponds, MCTTs, and other Options for Critical Area Stormwater Control. Robert Pitt University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL

Particulate Transport in Grass Swales

Stormwater Effects. The Selection of an Urban Runoff Control Program using Decision Analysis. Birmingham, AL, rains from 1952 through 1989

Permeable Pavement for Stormwater Management Porous Pavement

Chemical and Microbiological Quality of Stormwater Runoff Affected by Dry Wells; A Case Study in Millburn, NJ

INTRODUCTION BMP DATABASE PROJECTS IN PA

Biofiltration and Downspout Filter Media Evaluation for BMP Decision-Making at the Port of Vancouver, WA

Treatability of Stormwater Toxicants Using Biofiltration Media

CENTRALIZED BMPS TYPICALLY PUBLICLY OWNED & MAINTAINED BMPS, TREATING A LARGE (>20 ACRES) URBAN DRAINAGE WITH MULTIPLE LAND

3/10/2011. Our Past. Burnsville Minnesota Paired Study

Contents. R. Pitt July 29, 2011

High-Rate Stormwater Treatment with Up-Flow Filtration

Integrated Watershed Management in Urban Areas

Fremont Tree Well Filters LID Performance on a Redeveloped Urban Roadway

A Summary of the International Stormwater BMP Database

Background to Research Leading to Development of Upflow Filtration

Land Development and Soil Characteristics Affects on Runoff

High-Rate Stormwater Treatment with Up-Flow Filtration

4. Ponds and infiltration BMPs can achieve 60 to 100% removal efficiencies for sediment.

Enhanced Biofilter Treatment of Urban Stormwater by Optimizing the Hydraulic Residence Time in the Media

Ballard Phase I/Retrofit Supplemental Monitoring Plan

The Source Loading and Management Model (SLAMM)

WinSLAMM v 10 Theory and Practice

Water Resources Management Plan

Pollutant Associations with Particulates in Stormwater

Lockwood Folly Watershed Bacteria TMDL & LID

Detention Pond Design Considering Varying Design Storms. Receiving Water Effects of Water Pollutant Discharges

Part 3. Groundwater Contamination Potential with Stormwater Infiltration

FILTRATION FOR METALS REMOVAL FROM STORMWATER

Urban runoff takes many forms and has highly variable characteristics

San Francisco State University Site 1 Vegetated Infiltration Basin Monitoring Report: Rainy Seasons and

Hydrology for Drainage Design. Design Considerations Use appropriate design tools for the job at hand:

How Climate Change Impacts Urban Runoff and Water Quality Design

FIELD PERFORMANCE FOR UP FLOW FILTRATION DEVICE

WinSLAMM v Program Modifications Final, 3/16/19

Need to Verify Model TSS Reduction Estimates

Field Evaluation of a Stormceptor Model STC 1200 Westwood, Massachusetts. Prepared by: Stormceptor Group of Companies

WinSLAMM v Program Modifications Final, 12/12/17

Infiltration Trench Factsheet

Module 10b: Gutter and Inlet Designs and Multiple Design Objectives

Management of Farmstead Area Runoff: Potential of Agricultural Filter Strips

with assistance from New Zealand Water and Wastes Association presents Managing Stormwater and Road Run-off Tools, Techniques and Devices

SUMMARY REPORT. Brik Zivkovich, M.S., EIT Graduate Engineering Intern, Master Planning Program

Filter media for stormwater treatment and recycling: the influence of hydraulic properties of flow on pollutant removal

Removing Dissolved Pollutants from Stormwater Runoff. Andy Erickson, Research Fellow St. Anthony Falls Laboratory March 8, 2012

Permeable Pavement: A New Chapter

Filtration Fundamentals: The basics and why filtration matters today

Attachment 1. Manufactured Treatment Device (MTD) Registration

Stormwater Volume and Treatment Methods Simplifying the Numbers. IAFSM March 10, Presented by: Tom Powers P.E., CFM, LEED AP, CPESC

the 2001 season. Allison brought high winds and street flooding to Houston, after

WinSLAMM, the Source Loading and Management Model

Traversing Stormwater Treatment Technologies

Stormwater Treatment Practice (STP) Calculator Instructions

Construction Site Erosion Control and Phase II of the Stormwater Permit Program

Figure 1. Inlet particle size distributions observed at the Monroe St. (Madison, WI) wet detention pond (WI DNR and USGS).

Concurrent Session B: LID Design Specifications (Chapter 4 in Draft Manual)

Our Eastern Shore Groundwater Part IV Groundwater Quality on the Eastern Shore: How safe is our groundwater and are there ways we can protect it?

Water Resources Management Plan Appendix B

THE IMPORTANCE OF NATURAL WATERSHED HYDROLOGY AND HOW TO ADVANCE IT IN URBAN AREAS

Full Scale Up Flo Filter Field Performance Verification Tests

LID PLANTER BOX MODELING

This information can be obtained from good aerial photographs for existing areas, or from project. This area is entered into the main land use screen,

Webinar Overview. Presenter: Moderator: Length of Webinar: (1) hour Questions: For More Information or Comments: Amanda Ludlow Principal Scientist

Phosphorus Treatment Advanced Removal Mechanisms and Amended Design for Stormwater BMPs. Imbrium Systems

Results of EPA Research on Permeable Pavement

Appendix A. Compliance Calculator Guidance

WQ-08 ENHANCED DRY SWALE

Sizing Calculations and Design Considerations for LID Treatment Measures

Matt Lundsted Principal Comprehensive Environmental Inc.

Example 1: Pond Design in a residential development (Water Quantity calculations for a Wet Pond and Wet Extended Detention Pond)

Shelbyville, Kentucky Stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) Stormwater Pollution Treatment Practices (Structural) DRAFT

POLLUTANT REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES FOR TYPICAL STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS IN FLORIDA

Construction Site Erosion Control and Phase II of the Stormwater Permit Program

Shirley E. Clark, Ph.D., P.E. October 5, /30/2012

Treatability of Filtered Heavy Metals by (Bio)(In)filtration Media: Water and Soil Chemistry Effects

Stormwater Non-Potable Uses and Impacts on Urban Infrastructure

This is the site setup with the bioreactor located at the west side and the wetlands at the east side. The area draining to the bioreactor via the

Biofiltration for Stormwater Treatment Port of Vancouver, WA. Sheila Sahu, Senior Project Manager, Kennedy/Jenks Consultants Portland, Oregon

Effectiveness of a Bioretention Cell Treating Stormwater Runoff in. Northeastern Kansas

Overcoming Barriers to Implementation of LID Practices

Full Scale Up-Flo Filter Field Verification Tests

Fact Sheet: How does stormwater biofiltration work?

WEFTEC 2006, Dallas, Texas FULL SCALE EVALUATION OF THE UPFLO TM FILTER - A CATCHBASIN INSERT FOR THE TREATMENT OF STORMWATER AT CRITICAL SOURCE AREAS

TABLE B.3 - STORMWATER BMP POLLUTANT REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES

Dual Media Filtration System for Reducing Pollutants in Storm Water Runoff

Runoff Calculations. Time of Concentration (T c or t c ) from one location to another within a watershed. Travel

Total Suspended Solids: The Hows & Whys of Controlling Runoff Pollution

Stormwater Conservation

Erosion Control Inspection Form

Transcription:

SmartDrain TM for Enhanced Biofiltration Controls Redahegn Sileshi and Robert Pitt Department of Civil, Construction, and Environmental Engineering University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL Shirley Clark Penn State Harrisburg, Middletown, PA 2011 Fox-Wolf Stormwater Conference Appleton, Wisconsin

Outline of Presentation Topics Green Infrastructure case study for CSO control relying on biofiltration systems in Kansas City, MO Biofiltration media tests to optimize toxicant control for Southern California industrial site having numeric stormwater limits Residence time issues in biofiltration device designs The use of the SmartDrain TM as a biofilter outlet control having slow drainage rates to enhance residence time and contaminant removal.

Kansas City s CSO Challenge Combined sewer area: 58 mi 2 Fully developed Rainfall: 37 in./yr 36 sewer overflows/yr by rain > 0.6 in; reduce frequency by 65%. 6.4 billion gal overflow/yr, reduce to 1.4 billion gal/yr Aging wastewater infrastructure Sewer backups Poor receiving-water quality

Kansas City s Original Middle Blue River Plan with CSO Storage Tanks 1/26/2009

Adjacent Test and Control Watersheds

KC s Modeling Connections SUSTAIN-SWMM - Individual LID - Drainage (Transport) - Multi-scale - Subarea Optimization Weight of Evidence KCMO XP-SWMM - Drainage (Transport) - Design Objectives WinSLAMM -Land Surface Characteristics -Drainage (Transport) -Design Options -Stormwater Beneficial Uses - Multi-scale

Examples from 65% plans prepared by URS for project streets. Plans reviewed and modeled by project team, and construction of several hundred biofilter systems will occur in spring and summer of 2011.

Reductions in Annual Flow Quantity from Directly Connected Roofs with the use of Rain Gardens (Kansas City CSO Study Area) Percent reduction in annual roof runoff 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0.1 1 10 100 Percent of roof area as rain garden

Annual Runoff Reductions from Paved Areas for Different Sized Biofilters for Various Soils Reduction in Annual Impervious Area Runoff (%) 100 10 clay (0.02 in/hr) silt loam (0.3 in/hr) sandy loam (1 in/hr) 1 0.1 1 10 100 Biofilter Size (% of drainage area)

Clogging Potential for Different Sized Rain Gardens Receiving Roof Runoff 10000 Years to Clogging 1000 100 10 years to 10 kg/m2 years to 25 kg/m2 1 0.1 1 10 100 Rain Garden Size (% of roof area) Clogging not likely a problem for rain gardens receiving roof runoff

Clogging Potential for Different Sized Biofilters Receiving Paved Parking Area Runoff 1000 Years to Clogging 100 10 1 0.1 1 10 100 Biofilter Size (% of paved parking area) years to 10 kg/m2 years to 25 kg/m2 Biofilters should be at least 10% of the paved drainage area, or receive significant pre-treatment (such as with long grass filters or swales, or media filters) to prevent premature clogging.

Engineered Bioretention Media for Industrial Stormwater Treatment

JJ

Goals: Media Testing To provide information for design (e.g., optimal media components, depths, and contact times) To maximize the likelihood that filtration-based treatment controls will achieve desired level of performance in the most cost effective manner 14 These tests were conducted in conjunction with Dr. Shirley Clark at Penn State Harrisburg and Geosystec, and sponsored by The Boeing Co.

Media Tests (cont d) Long-Term Column tests using actual stormwater: Clogging, breakthrough, and removal Effects of contact time and media depth on removal Batch tests: Media uptake capacity and removal kinetics Aerobic and anaerobic effects on pollutant mass removed 15

layered S-Z-GAC R-SMZ-GAC-PM Granular activated carbon (GAC) 20 15 10 5 Peat moss (PM) Rhyolite sand ( R) Maintenance with scraping of the surface of the media was not very effective; the removal of several inches of media worked better, but still only for a limited time. 0 R-SMZ-GAC Surface modified zeolite (SMZ) R-SMZ Site zeolite (Z) load to initial maintenance (kg/m2) Site sand (S) initial average flow rate (m/day) 1. Site sand clogged first and had the lowest flow rate 2. Site zeolite and peat alone were next to clog 3. Biofiltration mixed media combination performed better than current site layered media combination Pitt and Clark 2010

Long-Term Column Test Results: Pollutant Removal Site Sand Peat moss GAC Peat moss GAC Of individual media types studied, peat and GAC demonstrated best removal for total and dissolved copper (although note the relatively high influent concentrations) Primary copper removal mechanism appears to be physical straining (of particulate-associated phase) and sorption onto GAC along with organic complexation with peat components, rather than cation exchange

Column Test Results: Pollutant Removal (paired sign test of influent vs. effluent) Media Type R-SMZ- GAC S-Z-GAC (layered) Cr, Cu, Sb, Al Pb Zn Cd, Ni, Tl, Fe Hg NO 3 TCDD T, F T T T, F T T T Recommended biofiltration mixed media combination T, F T T, F T T T Layered filter media combination currently in use R = rhyolite; SMZ = surface modified zeolite; GAC = granular activated carbon; PM = peat moss; S = site sand; Z = site zeolite T = removal for total form (unfiltered); F = removal for filtered form (passed through 0.45-µm membrane filter) Other findings (data not shown here): The bioretention media combination met all current site permit limits, except for copper and mercury during peak conditions (not expected to occur), and had significant removals for all constituents measured, except for phosphorus and gross beta radioactivity. The current site layered media combination resulted in all effluent samples meeting the current site permit limits, except for a slightly elevated ph, when maximum site runoff conditions were considered.

Media Performance Plots for Copper, Full-Depth Long-Term Column Tests 14 µg/l limit

This image cannot currently be displayed. This image cannot currently be displayed. Probability Plot of Influent 0.45~3 µm, GAC 0.45~3 µm Normal - 95% CI Percent 99 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 Variable Influent 0.45~3 µm GAC 0.45~3 µm Mean StDev N AD P 9.850 7.242 7 0.484 0.150 3.276 2.040 7 0.294 0.503 10 5 1-20 -10 0 10 Data 20 30 40 Probability Plot of Influent 12~30 µm, GAC 12~30 µm Normal - 95% CI Percent 99 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 Variable Influent 12~30 µm GAC 12~30 µm Mean StDev N AD P 54.47 25.49 7 0.156 0.917 0.6159 0.3258 7 0.273 0.544 10 5 1-50 0 50 Data 100 150 All media were very effective for the removal of a wide range of 20 particle sizes

Breakthrough Capacity Compared to Clogging Period Ratios of Media Capacity to Clogging Period R-SMZ R-SMZ- GAC R-SMZ- GAC-PM Site Sand- GAC-Site Zeolite Layered Cadmium, Total >230 >170 >130 >150 Copper, Total >2.2 >3.4 >1.7 >2.2 Gross Alpha radioactivity >0.3 >0.3 >0.2 >0.2 Lead, Total >2.1 >1.6 >0.9 >0.9 Mercury >250 >230 >130 >140 Oil and Grease 0.1 >0.1 >0.1 <0.1 TCDD >3.1 >2.5 >1.3 >1.5 Green: will clog before breakthrough Red: breakthrough before clogging

Cumulative Particulate Loading to Failure and Expected Years of Operation for Largest Sedimentation-Biofiltration Treatment Trains on Project Site R-SMZ R-SMZ- GAC R-SMZ- GAC-PM Site Sand-GAC-Site Zeolite Layered Load to clogging (kg/m 2 ) 7.5-38 11-53 11-55 6.5-33 Years to replacement 12-58 16-81 17-84 10-50 Seven of the site biofilters were evaluated for clogging potential and chemical removal capacity. The biofilters were from about 1 to 10% of the drainage areas in size and had sedimentation pre-treatment. All of the media combinations would likely have an operational life of at least 10 years for the constituents of greatest concern, with the exception of oil and grease for the layered media.

Batch Testing Results: Contact Time Minimal filtered metal removal observed for all media except peat when contact time <10 minutes. Influent test water The optimal contact times for filtered metals removal ranged from 10 to 1,000 minutes (17 hrs), depending on the metal and the media type. However too long of a contact time increased leaching losses from some media. GAC Rhyolite sand Surface modified zeolite Site zeolite Peat moss 23

Varying Depth Column Test Results These tests determined the effect of contact time on pollutant removal. Longer contact times should enhance pollutant removals because the likelihood of making a favorable contact with the media increases. Only the GAC showed good removals of nitrate, with the removal ability being best with the deepest column. GAC therefore has a limited capacity for nitrate and increasing the amount of GAC in contact with the passing influent water increases the length of time that excellent removals occur.

Example Relationship between Media Depth and Contact Time Typical Contact Time (minutes) 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Rhyolite Sand, Surface Modified Zeolite, and Granular Activated Carbon Mix 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Media Depth (inches)

Contaminant Losses during Anaerobic vs. Aerobic Conditions between Events Stripping of COD was more severe during anaerobic conditions (also nutrient losses under anaerobic conditions; metals relatively stable)

Preparing Recommended Media for Large Biofilters 1. Filling individual media bags prior to mixing 2. Loading Rhyolite sand media bags into mixer 3. Loading surface modified zeolite media bags into mixer 5. Finished mixed media loaded into final bags 4. Loading granular activated carbon media bags into mixer 6. Mixed media ready for placement into biofilters

Many Areas Require Biofilter Drainage within 72 hours to Prevent Mosquito Infestation

Underdrain Effects on Water Balance 0.75 inch rain with complex inflow hydrograph from 1 acre of pavement. 2.2% of paved area is biofilter surface, with natural loam soil (0.5 in/hr infilt. rate) and 2 ft. of modified fill soil for water treatment and to protect groundwater. No Underdrain 78% runoff volume reduction 77% part. solids reduction 31% peak flow rate reduction 76% runoff volume reduction for complete 1999 LAX rain year 74% part. solids reduction for complete 1999 LAX rain year Conventional (perforated pipe) Underdrain 33% runoff volume reduction 85% part. solids reduction 7% peak flow rate reduction Restricted Underdrain 49% runoff volume reduction 91% part solids reduction 80% peak flow rate reduction

Outlet control can be more consistent in providing desired resident time for pollutant control. However, most outlet controls (underdrains) are difficult to size to obtain long residence times. Perforated pipe underdrains short-circuit natural infiltration, resulting in decreased performance. Orifice outlet controls that allow long residence times usually are very small and clog easily. We are studying a foundation drain material (SmartDrain TM ) that can be applied to biofiltration devices and provide another option for outlet control.

SmartDrain TM (http://www.smartdrain.com/) SmartDrain TM operates under laminar flow conditions (Reynolds number of 100 to 600); low sediment carrying capacity and reduced clogging potential. SmartDrain TM has132 micro channels in an 8 inch wide strip; results in very small discharge rates. Close-up photograph of SmartDrain TM material showing the microchannels on the underside of the 8 inch wide strip.

Variables affecting the drainage characteristics of the underdrain material A pilot-scale biofilter was used to test the variables affecting the drainage characteristics of the underdrain material: Length Slope Hydraulic head Type of sand media A fiberglass trough 10 ft long and 2 x 2ft in cross section used as the pilot-scale biofilter

Experimental procedure The SmartDrain TM was installed on top of a 4 layer of the drainage sand, and another 4 layer of the sand was placed on top of the SmartDrain TM. Flow rate measurements were manually taken from the effluent of the biofilter at 25 to 30 minute intervals until the water was completely drained from the trough. SmartDrain TM installation In the drainage sand (it was unrolled before placement of the cover sand).

Experimental procedure Cont. During the tests, the trough was initially filled with water to a maximum head of 22 inches above the center of the pipe and then allowed to drain, resulting in head vs. discharge data. A hydraulic jack and blocks were used to change the slope of the tank. test for effect of length and slope on the drainage characteristics of SmartDrain TM material

Experimental procedure Cont. The flows were measured by timing how long it took to fill a 0.5 L graduated cylinder. Five replicates for each of five different lengths of the SmartDrain TM (9.4ft, 7.1ft, 5.1ft, 3.1ft, and 1.1ft) and three to five slopes were examined to study the variables affecting the drainage characteristics of the material. Flow rate measurement from effluent of the biofilter

Slope tests on the SmartDrain TM material. Flow rate (L/s) = 0.13 (head, m) 0.0049

Flow rate (L/s) = 0.12 (head, m) 0.0036 Slope of the SmartDrain TM material had no significant effect on the stage-discharge relationship, whereas only a small effect of length of the SmartDrain TM material on the discharge was observed (operates similar to a series of very small orifices). 0.51054 0.51054 0.51054 0.51054 0.51054 0.51054 0.4826 0.46736 0.4826 0.46736 0.4826 0.46736 0.43942 0.4191 0.43942 0.4191 0.43942 0.4191 0.39878 0.37338 0.39878 0.37338 0.39878 0.37338 0.3556 0.33782 0.3556 0.33782 0.3556 0.33782 0.15748 0.2667 0.15748 0.2667 0.15748 0.2667 0.0762 0.1143 0.0762 0.1143 0.0762 0.1143 0.04445 0.0762 0.04445 0.0762 0.04445 0.0762 0.0254 0.05715 0.0254 0.05715 0.0254 0.05715 0.01778 0.04826 0.01778 0.04826 0.01778 0.04826 0.04445 0.04445 0.04445

Examining the clogging potential of the SmartDrain TM. A Formica-lined plywood box was used to verify the head vs. discharge relationships for deeper water and used for the clogging tests. The SmartDrain TM was installed on top of a 4 layer of the drainage sand, and another 4 layer of the sand was placed on top of the SmartDrain TM. The box was filled with tap water to produce a maximum head of 4ft above the filter. Sil-Co-Sil 250 was mixed with the test water to provide a concentration of 1g/L (1,000 mg/l). Formica-lined plywood box 3ft by 2.8ft. in cross sectional area and 4ft tall.

Particle size distributions of the sand filter media, and the US Silica Sil-Co-Sil 250 ground silica material used in the clogging tests. Sil-Co-Sil 250 test material (median size 45 µm) Filter Sand (median size 700 µm)

Turbidity measurements taken from the effluent of the device during the clogging tests. The initial turbidity values in the tank were about 1,000 NTU, similar to the initial turbidity values in the treated water. However, these effluent values decreased significantly and rapidly during the drainage period, with most of the sediment remaining trapped in the tank on top of the filter sand.

Plot showing Sil-Co-Sil250 load(kg/m 2 ) vs. slope coefficients for the clogging tests. Very little reduction in flow rates observed with time, even after 40 kg/m 2 load on the biofilter (2 to 4 times the typical clogging load)

Smart Drain Flow Rates Compared to Very Small Orifices 0.14 0.12 Orifice 0.25 inches 0.1 Orifice 0.20 inches Flow rate (L/s) 0.08 0.06 0.04 Smart Drain 1.1 to 9.4 ft clean water Smart Drain 1.25 ft clean water Smart Drain 1.25 ft dirty water 0.02 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 Head (m) Orifice 0.1 inches

Typical biofilter as modeled in WinSLAMM for an area having poor soils.

Biofilter Underdrain Options and Water Balance The sandy-silt loam soil results in extended surface ponding, requiring an underdrain (736 hours of rain per year; 44,500 ft 3 /acre discharged to biofilters per year). Conventional underdrain (3 inch perforated pipe) reduces ponding, but also decreases infiltration opportunities and decreases contact time with media. SmartDrain TM also reduces ponding time, while providing additional infiltration and increased media contact time. Annual runoff (ft 3 /acre/year) and percentage fate: Surface ponding (hrs/year) No underdrain 1,480 Typical 3 inch underdrain 530 SmartDrain TM 1,080 Infiltration volume 31,700 (72%) 17,200 (39%) 26,300 (59%) Surface discharge 12,800 (28%) 4,400 (10%) 10,500 (23%) Subsurface (filtered) discharge 0 Surface discharge reduction (%) (0%) 72% 22,900 (51%) 38% 7,800 (18%) 58%

Biofouling Testing of SmartDrain TM Material The Formica-lined plywood box was also used to verify the head vs. discharge relationships for the biofouling tests. The SmartDrain TM was installed on top of a 4 layer of the drainage sand, and another 4 layer of the sand was placed on top of the SmartDrain TM. The box was filled with tap water and left open to the sun for several weeks to promote the growth of algae. Two different species of algal and liquid fertilizer were added to the test water. growth of algae in the biofilter device

Biofouling Tests of SmartDrain TM Material Turbidity values in the tank after several weeks ranged from 6 to 39 NTU, whereas effluent values were reduced to 4 to 7 NTU during the drainage tests.

Turbidity (NTU) vs. Flowrate for the biofouling tests

Stage-discharge relationships for the biofouling tests were very similar to the Sil-Co-Sil clogging test results. 0.16 SmartDrain TM Biofouling Test Results (length = 2.75 ft) (combined results for 4 tests) Flowrate (L/sec) 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 y = 0.12x R 2 = 0.97 0.02 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 Head (m)

Conclusions The slope of the SmartDrain TM material had no significant effect on the stage-discharge relationship, while the length had only a small effect on the discharge rate. Effluent turbidity (NTU) measurements decreased rapidly with time, indicating significant retention of silt in the test biofilter. Clogging and biofouling of the SmartDrain TM material was minimal during extended tests. Our tests indicate that the SmartDrain TM material provides an additional option for biofilters, having minimal clogging potential while also providing very low discharge rates which encourage infiltration and allow extended media contact periods, compared to typical underdrains.

Acknowledgements The US EPA is supporting the Kansas City green infrastructure demonstration project (the University of Alabama is a subcontractor to TetraTech). The Boeing Co. supported the recent biofilter media tests (Geosyntec and Penn State Harrisburg provided much project assistance and support). Many University of Alabama and Penn State Harrisburg graduate students assisted in conducting these tests.