2013
DOI: 10.1007/s11270-013-1803-y
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessment of the Hydraulic and Toxic Metal Removal Capacities of Bioretention Cells After 2 to 8 Years of Service

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
32
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 55 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
2
32
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The clogging process, which will have a negative impact on the actual infiltration capacity in a field application, was not considered in the calculations. However, K sat values, which were used to dimension these systems, may counterbalance the clogging risk because these values represent a conservative estimate of the potential infiltration rate [29]. Table 6.…”
Section: Desorption Of Metals Due To Saltsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The clogging process, which will have a negative impact on the actual infiltration capacity in a field application, was not considered in the calculations. However, K sat values, which were used to dimension these systems, may counterbalance the clogging risk because these values represent a conservative estimate of the potential infiltration rate [29]. Table 6.…”
Section: Desorption Of Metals Due To Saltsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Studies of a field-scale bioretention cells have been conducted to provide design factors that are important to meet hydrologic and water quality goals [35,42,48,66,88,89]. To evaluate the hydrologic impacts of bioretention within an urban environment, Davis [34] monitored the performance of two bioretention cells receiving runoff from adjacent parking lots for approximately two years, covering 49 rainfall events.…”
Section: Field-scale Bioretention Monitoringmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The initial soil moisture content was approximately 12% in all of the tests. The Green and Ampt (1911) parameters, saturated hydraulic conductivity (K sat ) and wetting-front suction (ψ) in the upper 25 cm were estimated at the end of all the tests using the MPD infiltrometer method (Asleson et al, 2009;Olson et al, 2013;Paus et al, 2013;Ahmed et al, 2014). Nineteen measurements of falling head were taken in areas without eroded channels and utilized in the MPD spreadsheet to compute the saturated hydraulic conductivity and the wetting-front suction of the soil.…”
Section: Soil Characteristicsmentioning
confidence: 99%