26
12/23/2014 1 DESIGN Post-Construction Stormwater Design Considerations Design Objective December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 2 How do we make this . . . function like this . . .

bmp design considerations

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

1

DESIGNPost-Construction Stormwater Design Considerations

Design Objective

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 2

How do we make this . . .

function like this . . .

Page 2: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

2

Design Criteria

• Water Quality Treatment Volume• ~90% non-exceedance, ~1.0 inch rainfall

• Typically focus on runoff retention

• Channel Protection• Purpose – maintain stable channel hydrology

• Typically designed for 2-year event (3.0 in)

• Commonly volume and peak flow control

• Municipal Sewer Conveyance• Used to size sewer pipes and open channels

• 5 to 10-year events commonly used (3.7 - 4.2 in)

• Commonly sizing pipes for post-development peak flow

• Local Flood Control• Manage local drainage to prevent problem flooding

• 25 to 100-year events commonly assumed (5.1 – 6.6 in)

• Commonly detention storage with peak flow limited to pipe capacity

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 3

Sizing

• How do you size these things for all the different criteria?

• Hand calculations

• Spreadsheets

• Dedicated hydrologic modeling software

• Calculating complete hydrographs is important

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 4

HSPF

WMS

PIHM

CUHP

IWFM

HydroBEAM

CWYET

Page 3: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

3

Drainage Area• Practices are sized for the drainage area

• Know the intended drainage area

• Field changes may necessitate design changes

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 5

Tributary Drainage Area

Bioretention

Curb Extension

Storage Volume of Practice

• Drainage area equates to a volume of runoff

• Build practices to meet design volume

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 6

Category % of Design

Volume

% of Practices

in Category

Severely Undersized <-25% 28%

Moderately Undersized -25% to -10% 22%

Adequate -10% to 10% 17%

Moderately Oversized 10% to 25% 17%

Severely Oversized >25% 17%

Assessing the Accuracy of Bioretention Installation in

North Carolina (2011) B. Wardynski and W. Hunt.

Page 4: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

4

BIORETENTION PROFILELet’s take a quick sidetrack and look at the typical components of a

bioretention system and example cross sections

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 7

Bioretention

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 8

Aggregate storage

In situ soil

Choker Course

Planting Soil/Filter

Mulch

Surface storage

Underdrain

Page 5: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

5

Swale - Small

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 9

Swale - Large

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 10

Page 6: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

6

Parking Lot Swale

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 11

Bioretention Parking Lots

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 12

Page 7: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

7

Bioretention at Building Sites

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 13

Linear Planter - Small

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 14

Page 8: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

8

Linear Planter - Large

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 15

Planter Box Next to Building

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 16

Page 9: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

9

Curb Extension

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 17

BIORETENTION DETAILSNow let’s look a little closer at the component details

December 09, 2014 Low Impact Development Practices 18

Page 10: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

10

Inlet

• Sized to capture design flow

• Location and elevation

• Prevent clogging and

sediment accumulation

• Guard against excessive inlet

velocities

December 09, 2014 Low Impact Development Practices 19

Pretreatment

• Capture large sediment

(sometimes trash and debris)

• Prevent erosion

• Level weir wall

• Options

• Filter strips

• Grass channels

• Sumps

• Hydrodynamic devices

• Screens and baskets

• Design based on dynamic

settling and Stokes Law

December 09, 2014 Low Impact Development Practices 20

Page 11: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

11

Primary Storage Area

• Level soil surface

• Encourage even

infiltration and

reduce erosion

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 21

Vegetation

• Water Uptake

• Stabilization

• Impeding Flow

• Filtration

• Infiltration

• Nutrient Uptake

• Toxin Uptake

• Pollutant Breakdown

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 22

• Plants for Stormwater Design : Species Selection for

the Upper Midwest, by D. Shaw and R.Schmidt, 2003.

• Plants for Stormwater Design: Species Selection for

the Upper Midwest, Volume II. By D. Shaw, T.

Randazzo, H. Johnson, R. Schmidt, B. Ashman, 2007.

Page 12: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

12

Transpiration Rates of Various Plants

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 23

Plant Name Plant Type Transpiration Rate

Perennial rye Lawn grass 0.27 in/day

Alfalfa Agriculture crop 0.41 in/day

Common reed Wetland species 0.44 in/day

Great bulrush Wetland species 0.86 in/day

Sedge Wetland/prairie species 1.9 in/day

Prairie cordgrass Prairie species 0.48 in/day

Cottonwood Tree (2 year old) 2-3.75 gpd/tree

Hybrid poplar Tree (5 year old) 20-40 gpd/tree

Cottonwood Tree (mature) 50-350 gpd/tree

Weeping Willow Tree (mature) 200-800 gpd/tree

Source: Plants for Stormwater Design Volume II by D. Shaw and R. Schmidt (ITRC 2001)

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 24

Page 13: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

13

Soil• A special or engineered soil

specified by the particular practice

• Chosen for specific porosity –

infiltration of stormwater

• May have special characteristics to

treat or absorb nutrients and other

pollutants

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 25

Soil

• Light fluffy soil for

vegetation

• Avoid excessive

compaction

• Often specialized

• May reuse soil with

amendments

Example Mixes• Prince Georges Co. MD: 50-60% sand; 20-30% compost; 20-30% topsoil• Minnesota added <5% clay stipulation to PG County mix• NCSU: 85% sand; 12% fines; 3-5% organics• Portland OR: 60-70% sand; 30-40% compost (35-65% organic); particle gradation specified

• LID Center: 50% sand; 30% planting soil (50-85% sand, 0-50% silt, 10-20% clay, 1.5 -10% organic); 20% shredded hardwood mulch

Soil Characteristics

• Porosity: void space of soil

(space for water)

• Infiltration: movement of water

through soil

• Field Capacity: proportion of void

space that stays wet due to

surface tension (i.e. after water

drains by gravity)

• Wilting Point: point at which

plants can no longer withdraw

water fast enough to keep up

with transpiration

December 09, 2014 Low Impact Development Practices 26

Source: FISRWG

Page 14: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

14

A Word About Trees

• Consider a tree box sized for a 16” caliper tree (1,000 cf of soil)

• Fine sandy loam soil with 25% unfilled void space (0.45 porosity – 0.2 field capacity)

• Volume = 250 cf (1,000 cf * 0.25)

• Area of impervious surface needed to generate 250 cf of stormwater from a 1-inch of runoff = 3,000 sf

• Assuming drainage from ½ a 66-ft ROW equates to one tree box every 91-ft

• Ignored evaporation, infiltration, water uptake by plants, and depression storage

December 09, 2014 Low Impact Development Practices 27

Outlet and Overflow

• Water needs a way to get out

• In-line versus off-line

• Location and elevation

• Mulch and topsoil should

stay in

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 28

Page 15: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

15

Supported Sides

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 29

Supported Sides

• Compact materials under

sidewalk and roads

• Light fluffy soil in bioretention

Filter or Choker Layer• Challenges

• Often specified wrong

• Common failure point of system due to clogging

• Information Needed• Required drainage rates (permittivity of filter)

• Geotextiles• Filtration

• Separation

• Stabilization

• Permanent Erosion Control

• Silt Fence

• Aggregate Filter*• recommended

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 30

Choker Layer

• AASHTO Standard Specification for Geotextile Specification

for Highway Application. M 288-06. 2011.

• Departments of the Army and the Air Force. Engineering

Use of Geotextiles. TM 5-818-8, AFJMAN 32-130. 1995.

• Franks, C., A. Davis, and A. Aydilek. Geosynthetic Filters for

Water Quality Improvement of Urban Storm Water Runoff.

ASCE Journal of Environmental Engineering. 2012.

• Separation layer

between soil and

aggregate reservoir

• Material may be

aggregate or geotextile

Page 16: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

16

Sloped Terrain• Within each cell:

• Soil and aggregate are level

• Maximizes storage

• Promotes infiltration

• Between cells:

• Separating wall

• Overflow from one cell

cascades to next one

downstream

• Can be constructed as

continuous swale.

• System used for

conveyance, not just storage

• Reduced storage volume.

• Increased likelihood of

surface flooding

downstream.

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 31

POROUS PAVEMENTS

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 32

Page 17: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

17

Porous Pavements

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 33

Aggregate storage

In situ soil

Filter coarse (as required)

Pervious Pavement

Geotextile

Underdrain

Choker coarse or setting bed (as required)

Porous Pavements

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 34

Source: American Concrete Pavement Association, 2006

Typical system with underdrain Rock trench along pavement edge

Open trench along pavement edge Rock trench extending beyond pavement

Page 18: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

18

Asphalt

• Installed with standard HMA paving

equipment and no special training

• Mix Design is required

• Binder Content 5.0 - 6.5%

• Air Voids ≥ 18%

• Drain down ≤ 0.3%

• Evaluate for Moisture Susceptibility

• Typical cross-section

• 2 to 4-inch asphalt layer

• Choker course, 1 to 2 inches thick

composed of 0.5-inch diameter stone

• Aggregate subbase, thickness varies

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 35

Porous Asphalt Pavements for Stormwater

Management: Design, Construction and Maintenance

Guide. Information Series 131. National Asphalt

Pavement Association (NAPA). 2008.

Concrete

• Pervious designed as regular concrete pavement, but has lower strength• Ranges from 400 psi to 4000 psi

• Strength decreases linearly as void ratio increases

• 15% to 20% void ratio can result in 7-day compressive strengths of 2900 to 3300 psi

• ACPA PerviousPave software for design www.acpa.org/perviouspave/

• Most “car traffic only” pavements are 6 inches of pervious concrete

• Use certified professionals (list available on nrmca.org)

• Water content is critical to success

• Cover during curing

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 36

Illinois Ready Mixed Concrete Association, Pervious Concrete.

http://www.irmca.org/site/page23.aspx

National Ready Mixed Concrete Association. Pervious Concrete.

http://www.perviouspavement.org/

FHWA www.fhwa.dot.gov/pavement/concrete/pubs/hif13006/index.cfm

Page 19: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

19

Other Aggregate Based Paving Systems

• Flexi®-Pave (kbius.com)

• Filterpave® (http://filterpave.com)

• Glass (recycled) or aggregate

• elastomeric binder

• PorousPave

(www.porouspaveinc.com )

• Recycled tires, aggregate and

urethane binder

• Sidewalks, driveways, play areas,

parking lots

• Gravel Driveway

• and many more…

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 37

Open-Jointed Paving Blocks

• Water drains between pavers

• Concrete and clay materials

• Typical cross-section

• Paver stone

• Bedding course 1 to 2 inches thick,

typically ASTM No. 8

• Aggregate subbase, thickness varies,

typically ASTM No. 57

• Edge restraints are required

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 38

Interlocking Concrete Pavement Institute

www.icpi.org

Brick Industry Association

www.gobrick.com

Page 20: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

20

Open-Celled Paving Grids

• Similar design and installation as the open-jointed paving blocks

• Pavers contain large openings

• Voids filled with various materials

• Concrete blocks

Plastic Geocells and Porous Turf

• Various manufacturers

• Vertical load supported by honeycomb structure

• Void space typically filled with granular material

• May be vegetated

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 40

Page 21: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

21

Filter or Choker Layer

• Challenges• Often specified wrong

• Common failure point of system due to clogging

• Information Needed• Grain size analysis of in situ soil

• Required drainage rates (permittivity of filter)

• Geotextiles• Filtration

• Separation

• Stabilization

• Permanent Erosion Control

• Silt Fence

• Aggregate Filter

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 41

• AASHTO Standard Specification for Geotextile Specification for

Highway Application. M 288-06. 2011.

• Departments of the Army and the Air Force. Engineering Use of

Geotextiles. TM 5-818-8, AFJMAN 32-130. 1995.

• Franks, C., A. Davis, and A. Aydilek. Geosynthetic Filters for Water

Quality Improvement of Urban Storm Water Runoff. ASCE Journal of

Environmental Engineering. 2012.

Aggregate

storage

In situ soil

Filter coarse

(as required)

Pervious

Pavement

Geotextile

Underdrain

Choker coarse or

setting bed (as

required)

Working on slopes

• Pervious concrete successfully

used on 16% slopes

• Asphalt surfaces <= 5% (NAPA

recommended)

• Check Dams or Soil Berms

• Terrace the bottom

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 42

Page 22: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

22

COMMON ELEMENTSUsed with both bioretention and porous pavements

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 43

Aggregate Storage

• Can be used to increase storage

volume

• Open graded aggregate

• Load bearing

• Crushed concrete

• increases pH for years

• impedes vegetation growth

• Steffes R., Laboratory Study of the

Leachate From Crushed Portland

Cement Concrete Base Material, Iowa

DOT. MLR-96-4. September 1999.

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 44

Aggregate

• Water storage reservoir

• 30 to 40% void space

• Level bottom surface to

promote even infiltration

Page 23: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

23

Aggregate Porosity

Sample Porosity Bulk Density

AASHTO #4 37.4 - 46.1% 70.8 - 103.0 lbs/ft3

AASHTO #57 38.7 – 52% 74.8 – 97.7 lbs/ft3

1 ½ inch 35.3 – 41.9% 93.6 – 101.7 lbs/ft3

¾ inch 38.5 – 38.9 97.9 – 100.3 lbs/ft3

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 45

Source: LandSaver Stormwater Management System. Porosity

of Structural Backfill. Tech Sheet #1, Rev. 1/16/2006

Other Types of Storage

• Manufactured

devices

• Plastic and

CMP arches

• Precast

concrete boxes

• Etc.

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 46

Page 24: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

24

Underdrain

• Optional based on infiltration capacity of in situ soil

• Purpose to ensure drainage

• 4-inch diameter or larger

• Types• Rigid PVC

• Flexible HDPE

• SmartDrain(www.smartdrain.com)

• May be paired for redundancy

• Clean-out fittings

• Outlet is commonly used to control allowable discharge rate• Orifice end plate

• Valve to allow for flow adjustments

• May include upturned elbow to enhance nutrient removal

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 47

Underdrain

• Location and elevation

• May connect to valve

The bottom

• Level bottom preferred

• On slopes terrace the bottom or use

heck dams

• Compact

• Infrastructure subgrades and bases = Yes

• In situ soil below stormwater practices

typically do not (should not) be compacted

before placing aggregate and/or soil overtop

• Aggregate reservoirs = Yes

• Planting soil = No

• Loosen and scarify soils

• Before planting

• Before placing aggregate or soil layer

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 48

Page 25: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

25

COMMON MISTAKES AND

LESSONS LEARNED

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 49

Common Design Mistakes

• Not understanding the tributary area (size and surface coverage)

• Inadequate inlet

• Sloped surface resulting in reduced infiltration and erosive velocities

• Wrong mulch, floats away and clogs the outlet

• Lack of pretreatment

• No soil tests

• Poor plant selection

• Overly complex

• No maintenance plan

• Wrong geotextile specified

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 50

Page 26: bmp design considerations

12/23/2014

26

QUESTIONS AND

DISCUSSIONS

Daniel P. Christian, PE, D.WRESenior Project Manager, Water Resources

[email protected]

December 09, 2014 LID Design Considerations 51