This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
URBAN DRAINAGE IN SPECIFIC CLIMATES
Chief Editor Cedo Maksimovic
Urban drainage in arid and semi-arid climates
Editor of Volume III M. Nouh
IHP-V 1 Technical Documents UNESCO, Paris, 2001
1 No. 40, Vol.lll
The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout the publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCO concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The ideas and opinions expressed in this book are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily represent the views of UNESCO.
This volume, dealing with urban drainage in arid and semi-arid climates, is part of a three-volume series on Urban Drainage in Specific Climates within the framework of Theme 7: Integrated urban water management Project 7.3 lntegrated urban drainage modelling in different climates: tropical, arid and semi-arid and co/d of the Fifth Phase of UNESCO’s International Hydrological Programme. The other two volumes of the series address urban drainage aspect in the Humid Tropics and in Cold Climates. The Editor of this volume is Prof. Mamdouh Nouh of Sharjah University, United Arab Emirates, having led a team of 13 leading international experts in the preparation of this volume. The series of the three volumes has been produced under the co-ordinating role of IRTCUD (International Research and Training Centre on Urban Drainage), an organisation established under the auspices of UNESCO. Prof. Cedo Maksimovic of Imperial College, London, and Director of IRTCUD, served as Chief Editor of the series. Chapter 1 is an introductory chapter common to the three volumes, giving a general overview of urban drainage principles and practice. Chapter 2 discusses the specific climate features affecting the hydrologic characteristics of arid and semi-arid areas. It points to the low, highly variable, rainfall, high evaporation rates, and the sparseness of vegetation and to the main features of arid zone landscapes. Chapter 3 emphasizes the effect of such characteristics on urban drainage, showing that many problems originate from the application of traditional methods of design developed in other climatic zones. Chapter 4 describes the various factors affecting runoff prediction and design of urban facilities. Common methods of estimating design rainfall and runoff are also reviewed and discussed. Chapter 5 addresses important issues related to urban stormwater pollution. Due to the dry conditions and reduced vegetation in arid areas, higher pollutant concentrations and loads during stormwater events occur in these areas. The importance of monitoring of stormwater quality where accurate estimates of pollutant loads are required is underlined. Chapter 6 discusses the state-of-the art of the traditional methods of urban drainage in arid and semiarid regions, both for small and large catchments.‘ Chapter 7 proposes sustainable solutions for urban drainage pr-oblems in arid and semiarid regions, using, for instance, techniques of rainwater harvesting in the urbanised areas and adopting the methods of water spreading over the infiltrating surface of catchments. Chapter 8 reviews practices of maintenance appropriate for arid and semiarid regions. and management of urban stormwater drainage
Chapter 9 describes the case studies dealing with: (i) the effects of dust storms on stormwater quality, (ii) stormwater hydrograph prediction in arid catchments using the Storm Water Management Model (SWMM), and (iii) effect of urbanisation on hydrograph components and on runoff water quality. This is the first time, to our knowledge, that the nature and problems of urban drainage in arid and semi-arid climates have been treated systematically, extensively and in depth in a single volume, thus our deep appreciation for this ground breaking effort goes to Prof. Nouh and his team and to the Chief Editor of the series, Prof. Maksimovic. We trust that this work will benefit the numerous countries in all continents that have arid and semi-arid regions. We welcome comments and feedback on this vaiume from users all over the world that may enable us to produce an improved edition later on.
The Secretariat of the International Hydrological Division of Water Sciences, UNESCO 1, rue Miollis 75732 Paris Cedex 15, France http://www.unesco.org/water/
Theoretical Background Cedo Maksimovic, London, UK. General Characteristics L. Mays, Arizona, USA. of Arid and Semiarid Regions
Problems of Urban Drainage in Arid and Semiarid M. Nouh, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates J. Simons, California, USA Storm Hydrology of Urban Drainage Thomas A. McMahon, Francis H.S. Chiew, Duncan, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Urban Stormwater Pollution Francis H.S. Chiew, Hugh P. Duncan, McMahon, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Traditional Methods of Urban Drainage M. F. Hamouda, Safat, Kuwait. N. Al-Awadi, Muscat, Oman
in Arid and Semiarid
Sustainable Solutions for Urban Drainage arid Regions M. Nouh, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates K. Al-Shamsy, Alexandria, Egypt.
in Arid and Semi-
Urban Drainage Maintenance and Management Issues in Arid and Semiarid Regions Tony H. F. Wong, Francis H.S. Chiew, McMahon, T.A., Duncan, H.P., Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Case Studies M. Nouh, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates A. Al-Rumhy, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Chapter 1 General overview of urban drainage principles and practice ..................
Introduction ..................................................... General characteristics of urban drainage and sustainability concept Urban drainage system as a part of an integrated river basin water management - principles of design and operation 1.4 Basic principles of rainfall-runoff and pollution modelling and outlook application in particular climates ..................................... 1.4.1 Water quality aspects ....................................... 1.4.2 Quality aspects. ........................................... 1.5 Common UD models and needs for their improvements and update 1.6 GIS and informatic support. ........................................ 1.7 Concluding remarks and acknowledgement. ........................... Bibliography ........................................................... 1.1 1.2 1.3 ........ ........ for their
1 1 1
4 7 7 10 15 16 16 19 21 21 21 22 23 24 24 24 26 26 27 27 28 29 32 33 33 35 35 35 41 41 43 44 47 50 51 52 55 55 58 58 59 59 60
of arid and semi-arid regions ........................
Physical features ................................................. 2.1.1 What is aridity?. ........................................... 2.1.2 Geomorphology ........................................... Soil characteristics ......................................... 2.1.3 2.1.4 Aeolian systems ........................................... 2.2 Climate ............................................................ 2.2.1 Causes of aridity ........................................... 2.2.2 Climate areas. ............................................ 2.2.3 What are deserts? ........................... Hydrology ....................................................... 2.3 Rainfall .................................................. 2.3.1 Infiltration ................................................. 2.3.2 Runoff and flooding ......................................... 2.3.3 Erosion and sediment transport. .............................. 2.3.4 Conclusions ........................................................... Bibliography ...........................................................
Problems of urban drainage in arid and semi-arid regions ....................
Design particularities .............................................. Rainfall .................................................. 3.1 .l Evaporation. ..................... 3.1.2 : ........................ Infiltration ................................................ 3.1.3 3.1.4 Sedimentation ............................................. Water quality .............................................. 3.15 3.2 Maintenance, operation, and management. ............................ 3.3 Data acquisition and processing ..................................... 3.4 Application of common urban drainage models ......................... 3.5 Interaction with other urban water systems ............................. Conclusions ........................................................... Bibliography ........................................................... 3.1
Storm hydrology of urban drainage.
Effect of urbanisation on runoff. ..................................... Estimation of design rainfall ......................................... 4.2.1 Design event .............................................. Rainfall intensity-frequency-duration relationships 4.2.2
4.2.3 Temporal distribution of rainfall intensity ......................... Estimation of design runoff. ........................................ 4.3.1 Rational method for estimating design peak discharge ............. 4.3.2 Methods for estimating complete runoff hydrograph ................ 126.96.36.199 Determination of rainfall excess hyetograph ............... 188.8.131.52 Time-area method for estimating runoff hydrograph ......... 184.108.40.206 Routing of stormwater runoff. .......................... 4.3.3 Event and short time-step stormwater runoff models ............... Estimation of daily and longer time-step runoff. ......................... 4.4 4.4.1 Annualrunoff .............................................. 4.4.2 Daily and monthly runoff. .................................... 220.127.116.11 Simple conceptual model to characterise daily runoff. ....... 18.104.22.168 Conceptual rainfall-runoff model for estimating daily runoff .... 22.214.171.124 Data and model calibration and verification ................ Conclusions ........................................................... Bibliography ...........................................................
61 62 62 63 63 64 66 66 67 68 69 70 70 72 73 73 75 75 76 78 81 81 81 82 84 84 85 86 87 87 88 88 89 90 90 91 92 92 92 93 93 94 94 96 96 97 97 97 97 99 99 99 100 100 101 102 103
Urban stormwater pollution.
5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4
Stormwater pollution .............................................. Urban stormwater quality process .................................... Event mean concentrations of water quality parameters ................... Estimation of stormwater pollution load ................................ 5.4.1 Water quality monitoring ..................................... 5.4.2 Estimation of daily and long-term pollution load ................... 5.4.3 Modelling of event and sub-daily time step pollution load ............ Other issues in the estimation of stormwater pollution loads ................ 5.5 5.5.1 GIS and pollutant mass loading ............................... 5.5.2 Link-mode modelling of pollution generation and transport in large catchments 5.5.3 Contaminants associated with different sediment sizes ............. Conclusions ........................................................... Bibliography ...........................................................
methods of urban drainage in arid and semi-arid regions
Small catchments ................................................ 6.1.1 Amount of storm runoff ...................................... 6.1.2 Design of storm sewers ..................................... 126.96.36.199 Determination of storm water flow rates ................... 188.8.131.52 Hydraulic grade calculations ........................... 6.1.3 French drains ............................................. 6.1.4 Drainage system changes ................................... 6.1.5 Infiltration systems ......................................... Largecatchments ................................................ 6.2.1 Estimation of flow .......................................... 6.2.2 Urban drainage models ...................................... 6.2.3 Computer programs ....................................... 6.2.4 Urban storm drainage system ................................. 184.108.40.206 Gutters ............................................ 220.127.116.11 Inlets. ............................................. 18.104.22.168 Catch basins ....................................... 22.214.171.124 Grated inlets. ....................................... 126.96.36.199 Manholes .......................................... 6.2.5 System design. ........................................... 188.8.131.52 Storm sewer design. ................................. 184.108.40.206 Gutter design ....................................... 220.127.116.11 Street inlet design ................................... 18.104.22.168 Detention and retention storage facilities .................. 22.214.171.124 Stormwater culverts. ................................. 126.96.36.199 Infiltration ponds. .................................... Evaluation of urban drainage methods. ...............................
Traditional vs modern methods. ................................. 6.4.1 Collection of stormwater ................................. 6.4.2 Storage and reuse of stormwater. ............................. Conclusions ........................................................... Bibliography ...........................................................
103 103 104 104 104 106 106 107 107 108 109 112 114 116 118 118 119 119 120 121 121 122 122 124 128 128 130 131 131 132 135 135 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 147 149
Sustainable solutions for urban drainage problems in arid and semiarid regions
Water harvesting ................................................. 7.1 .l Design of rainwater harvesting system .......................... 7.1.2 Maintenance of rainwater harvesting systems .................... 7.1.3 Costs of rainwater harvesting systems .......................... 7.1.4 Rainwater harvesting systems in arid and semi-arid areas .......... 7.1.5 Types of rainwater harvesting collecting systems .................. 7.1.6 Efficiency of rainwater harvesting systems ....................... 7.1.7 Modelling of rainwater collection systems ........................ 7.2 Infiltration potential and natural drainage .............................. 7.2.1 Comparison between different direct techniques .................. 7.2.2 Managerial aspects ......................................... Conclusions ........................................................... -Bibliography ........................................................... 7.1
Urban drainage maintenance and management issues in arid and semiarid regions
General ........................................................ Stormwater detention and retention systems ........................... 8.2.1 Flood retarding basins ...................................... 8.2.2 Stormwater quality improvement facilities ........................ 188.8.131.52 On-site detention basins .............................. 184.108.40.206 On-site retention systems ............................. Channelmanagement...........................................~ 8.3 Conclusions ........................................................... Bibliography ........................................................... 8.1 8.2
Effect of duststorms on stormwater quality ............................. 9.1 .l Average TSP level ......................................... 9.1.2 Spatial variation of duststorm ................................. 9.1.3 Temporal variation of duststorm ............................... .-. ...................... 9.1.4 Catchment size .................... Application of SWMM model ........................................ 9.2 9.2.1 Effect of catchment size ..................................... 9.2.2 Effect of infiltration rates ..................................... 9.2.3 Effect of rainfall characteristics ................................ 220.127.116.11 Spatial variation of rainfall ............................. 18.104.22.168 Temporal variation of rainfall ........................... 22.214.171.124 Dry period between two successive rainstorms. ............ 126.96.36.199 Total depth of rainfall ................................. 188.8.131.52 Duration of rainfall ................................... 9.2.4 Effect of duststorms. ....................................... 9.3 Effect of urbanization .............................................. Conclusions ........................................................... Bibliography ...........................................................
of urban drainage
1 .I Introduction
This- chapter is meant to serve as a common introduction to UNESCO’s three volumes publication dealing with urban drainage in three particular climate zones:
l l l
ASA - Atid and Semi Arid HT - Humid tropical and subtropical and CC - Cold climate zones
It’s structure reflects the need to underline the similarities of urban drainage problems in particular climate zones and to address the need for breakthroughs in both research and application of the adequate tool in these region. The chapter provides an introduction to the contemporary state of the art in analysis, modelling, design and management of urban drainage systems indicating that the particular aspects are covered in separate volumes for each zone . The principles of “fitting” the urban drainage solutions into integrated wtchment management plans is introduced. Two principal components of the integrated flood mitigation solution such as: structural and non-structural measures applied in two parts of a river basin (catchment) i.e.: urban and suburban zone and the rest of the catchment - rural and natural areas are presented. The differences of the situations in developing and developed countries have been highlighted. The concept of natural drainage within the broader framework of sustainable solutions is re-iterated and its major components will be presented by distinguishing between the rehabilitation of aged systems and the construction of new ones. The scope dependent nature of storm system modelling is presented in the form “an appropriate tool for each task”. The major types of modelling concept (quality, quantity, interactions, integrated) are briefly analysed, by placing an emphasis on data needs and data reliability as well as on the need for development of a new generation of modules that will be able to cope with particular aspects of specific climates.
of urban drainage
Water in urban areas; and urban storm drainage as a part of the urban infrastructure, are topics which are gaining in importance in recent years. Cities now house 50% of the world population, consume 75% of its resources, yet occupy only 2% of the land surface. By the middle of the next century, it is confidently predicted that 70% of the global population will live in urban areas. The number of megacities (> 10 million inhabitants) will increase to over 20, 80% of which are in developing countries (Niemcynowicz, 1996). Properly designed and operated urban drainage systems with its interactions with other urban water systems are crucial element of healthy and safe urban environment. The concept of sustainable development is provoking a profound rethinking in our approach to urban water management (ASCELJNESCO-IHP, 1998). Sustainable
development is that which “meats the needs and aspirations of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs* (WCED, 1987). So, sustainable solutions have a “now” and a “then” component, and improvements though necessary in the present must not be carried out at the expense of future needs and situations. An alternative definition (IUCN-UNEP-WWF, 1991) asserts that sustainable development is that which “improves the quality of human life while living within the carrying capacity of supporting ecosystems”. Here, the emphasis is placed on mankind’s demand for and impact upon earth resources and the environment. Finally, Agenda 21 behoves us to “think global, but act local”. Public participation becomes important and demands individual responsibility. Sustainable services must be environmentally friendly, socially acceptable and financially viable into the next millennium (Butler 8 Maksimovic 1999). The sustainability concept calls for overall rethinking and this implies paying attention to particular situations in the local area. Learning about natural and man made processes that affect the runoff quality and quantity is of prime importance. This publication is thus expected to point out the most important issues that affect the way that we analyse, design, build and operate our storm drainage systems in a nature friendly fashion. Our current knowledge about the physical processes involved is far from satisfactory, even in temperate climates where the most of research has been carried out in the past. Knowledge about processes affecting urban storm drainage systems in particular climates covered in this publication (arid and semi-arid, humid tropical and subtropical and cold) is far from satisfactory. However the publication is aimed at providing an up to date look at solutions to flooding and water quality problems. The concept of sustainability calls for amenity and resources recycling to be taken into account as well. The authors are aware of the fact that many issues raised here require further studies, research and development and that the issues raised will provoke further refinements. In densely populated developed countries (UK, Germany, some parts of the USA, Japan, etc.), urban drainage consumes a high proportion of the investments into urban infrastructure. The reasons for this are the obvious need for an integrated approach to urban water management, and raised public awareness of the pollution caused by urban effluents, which affect both the urban areas themselves and the receiving water bodies. The situation in developing counties is also changing rapidly in the sense that all parties involved in planning, design, management and maintenance as well as funding ( World Bank, aid agencies etc.) are becoming aware that storm drainage can not be ignored. On the contrary, it has to be incorporated into integrated urban infrastructure projects with their mutual interactions encompassing not only the conventional problem of flood mitigation but also health hazard reduction (water quality concerns) and problems of urban amenities and resources management (Figure I. 1). Although cities are in contact with water from various origins (ground water, streams flowing through or near the city etc.), the major concern of urban drainage systems is water originating in the city area itself, i.e. water from local rainfall (urban storm runoff) and its interaction with the water originating from the rest of the river basin. The change of the role of urban storm drainage (USD) and developments of information processing technology have imposed a need for new tools and products to be used in the problem solving procedure. Methods for flood protection by local storms and for assessment of the effects of pollution transported by storms on receiving waters have been significantly improved during the past two decades with the introduction of computer based simulation, design, optimisation, real time control and management. The achievements of modem infonatics (i.e., a higher level of information processing) have made a significant impact on all aspects of problem solving. However, despite significant development achieved, there is still a big gap to be bridged since a compact and reliable package that adequately predicts dynamics and spatial distribution of urban floods and that incorporates source control measures does not seem to exist in the world.
Figure 1.I Stormwater quality, quantity and amenity and resources management of equal importance In modem societies, the status of urban drainage as a part of the integrated infrastructure system varies from one country to another, depending primarily on the level of development and the society awareness of the importance of this problem. In general, the importance of the system increases with the level of development, but there are also exceptions. The awareness of the wet-weather pollution potential has rapidly increased in recent years. The systems, which used to have a simple function of collecting storm water and conveying it to the nearest point of disposal as soon as possible, have gradually evolved and are being replaced by the integrated systems which are gaining in importance. Their role has changed and now in addition to covering urban flood protection, pollution control and management they are starting to cater for improvement of the quality of life by bringing water features - creating urban amenity in the city. Additionally, storm water is considered to be a precious resource, which can be retained near the source to be reused, recharged to the underground for aquifer replenishment or to create habitat for the return of wildlife to designated urban areas etc. Conventional urban drainage systems are separate such as shown in Figure 1.2 or combined in which case both waste and stormwater share the same pipe. During dry weather, water is directed to treatment plant (if existing) and during wet weather, part of the mixed water in combined sewers diverts to receiving stream via Combined Sewer Overflows (CSO). If the city is served by a wastewater treatment plant, CSOs may be one of the major point sources of receiving water pollution. In practice, separate systems rarely remain fully separate; there is always some storm water in foul system and waste water in storm systems. In most cases they behave like two combined systems with various degrees of waste water dilution. Treatment plant suffers from intermittent overload during storm periods. Increased environmental concern has lead to development of the concept in which, at least in developed countries, conventional storm drainage systems are gradually being replaced by the systems based on runoff quantity and quantity control. The system consists of several techniques that aim at controlling the problem as near to the source as possible - thus the term “source control”. They all attempt to mimic the natural processes involved. The techniques include storage, treatment and infiltration, by a “water management treatment train” (Figure 1.3) that results in significant reduction of peak and volume of runoff, improved water quality and a possibility of using storm water as a resource and as an element of urban amenity. However, the means of implementing the element and principles of this technology in urban drainage in particular climates is an art still to be mastered despite significant achievement in some countries - for example Sweden, Stahre (1999) in cold climate, city of Curitiba, Brazil, in tropical, several cases in Israel etc in arid climate conditions as resented by Simon (1996). However, in order to reach greater sustainability in both conventional and innovative urban drainage systems, better understanding of the physical processes, interactions between the systems and environment in particulate climatic conditions is needed. This publication is supposed to wver part of missing information and to address the problems that need further investigations.
Figure j .2 A conventional separate foul and surface water drainage
Site qmtrol control i
Figure 1.3. Surface drainage management train - likely sustainable solution (ClRIA555)
1.3 Urban drainage system as a part of an integrated management - principles of design and operation
river basin water
It is well known that the river basin has been considered an entity that determines both the range and reach of human activities with respect to water in both ancient and modem societies. The catchment is used as a unit for planning and management of not only water, but also of other resources, as well as human and economic activities. In the case of urban drainage of a particular city, the relevance of a catchment is greater for smaller catchments and decreases as the size of the catchment increases, in the sense that the relative effect of the quantity and quality of runof? water generated by that particular drainage system diminishes with the size of the catchment and with the distance from the point of storm water disposal. However, the integrated effect of all stomt drainage systems contributing to the balance of surface water and to the flux of suspended sediment and other pollutants has to be taken into account at the level of river basin or sub-basin upstream of the point under consideration, especially in densely populated areas. The interaction of storm drainage
systems with downstream municipalities and water users is strong in those cases when the drainage peak flow uses up the capacity of the river channel, so that no capacity is left for downstream runoff. In these cases, the downstream-upstream relationships and links have to be analysed in order to either share the existing capacity or to share the costs of its enlargement. Small river basins in densely populated areas are therefore more sensitive to this problem and shall be analysed in the following discussion. On the other hand, the rivers carrying water from large catchments serve as receiving waters for both solid and dissolved pollutants, and the effect of urban storm water disposal has to be analysed from the point of view of its pollution and contribution to the silting of downstream water, including reservoirs. Alterations to the natural water balance within the catchment area can have both positive and adverse effects on upstream and downstream water users. In that respect, integrated planning and design of urban drainage systems requires that both effects are analysed and an unbiased assessment is made in all phases of the planning and management process. Figure 4. outlines an approach which integrates catchment wide, metropolitan/municipal as well as local area planning and management considerations.
T MANAGEMENT WATER Nc’PPL.\
Figure 1.4. Urban Storm Water Master Plan as a part of the Catchment Management Plan The general goal of integrated water management is a sustainable utilisation of water resources respecting the social, economic and environmental interests. Considering the close interrelationship between the society and economy, the first two groups are usually aggregated into socioeconomic issues. It also includes institutional issues. It should be recognised that the goals and objectives of integrated water management are formulated at various spatial scales, involving all three components, According to Butler and Maksimovic (1999) the institutional aspects cover the following:
Development of improved informatic support tools for planning, design and operational management based on improved quantii and quality of data. Incorporation of more (relevant) components and stakeholders into the decrsionmaking process (e.g. sustainability, public attitudes). Development of methodologies to evaluate the uncertainty and risk associated with future water management strategies. Decision on how to consult and educate the public concerning the importance of urban water issues. Devising suitable organisational/institutional structures to incorporate the integrated, holistic system management we advocate. Enacting appropriate supporting water legislation and standards.
The fundamental qualities of integrated water management are its holistic nature, which recognises the system complexity and inter-connectivii of its elements, demonstrated by exchange of information, energy and matter, and the style of planning actions. The holistic 5
and regional authorities, engineers and approach also equally involves local/municipal natural scientists, environmentalists and decision makers, politicians of all patties, governing and in opposition, as well as the people affected (Geiger, 1994 and Geiger & Becker, 1997). Sustainable water management ensures that no matter is accumulated or energy is lost, by recovery and reuse techniques. This approach requires novel, environmentally sound technologies. In the urban drainage field it calls for a wider application of source control. In the context of urban and industrial water resources, the most pertinent water uses are water supply (safe, reliable and equitable), drainage and flood protection (affordable), sanitation with maximum reuse, recreation (protecting public health), aesthetic and cultural values, and ecosystem health. Solutions applied at urban catchment level have to be analysed in terms of it upstream and downstream interactions. The conditions may vary in various climate conditions and these will be analysed in the main chapters of this publication . Contributions of urban storm drainage projects to the conflicts and uncertainty in water resources plans at a river basin level, can be analysed by taking into consideration the ways in which the existing urban structures, their features, and the newly planned drainage elements affect both water balance and quality in a particular urban area. In this respect, the major difference between urban and rural (or natural) part of a river basin, is the reduced infiltration potential of urban areas and the fast response in generation of surface runoff. A mutual interaction of urban runoff and flows in adjacent steams is shown in Fig. 5. Water running from the upstream parts of catchments flows either through the city’s regulated stream, or through its system of urban drainage infrastructure. The major difference in approaches to integrated solutions is indicated by the ratio of the urban peak flow to the flow in the receiving stream, at the downstream end of the urban area. The forms of urban flooding caused by other man made and natural disasters such as storm surges that usually coincide with heavy rainfall , dike break (Iwasa, Inoue, 1987) have also to be taken into account. We take the Danube, as a large river flowing through the large cities of Vienna, Bratislava, Budapest, Belgrade, etc., as an example. In the most extreme events of heavy storms over these cities, the local runoff contributes only a very small proportion of the flow in the river, and one can claim that the management of urban storm drainage system in these cities will not significantly affect the flow in tie Danube. This effect is diminishing as one travels form the spring to the river mouth. In that respect, and with reference to water quantity, these systems do not affect the peak flow in the receiving water and can be designed independently. However, small streams near large cities (i.e. small value of the factor Y equation 1) are strongly affected by the urban runoff peak flows, and implementation of source control could be strongly recommended. In some cases it is the only solution. In many cases, the peak flow generated by urban runoff is comparable to the conveyance capacity of the receiving stream. In these cases, the management of urban drainage has a significant effect on the receiving water and its downstream reaches. Consequently, the solution for the particular storm drainage problems has to be developed at the catchment level, and in an integrated way. However, growing wncems over the quality of surface runoff require that the interaction of particular city’s pollution load is addressed in conjunction with other pollution contributions from both upstream and downstream urban areas. The difference in the capacity of the main receiving water calls for classification of the concepts of storm drainage solutions, depending on the ratio of the peak flows, likely to occur at the point of disposal (end of the pipe), to the average discharge in the receiving stream (shown in Figure 1.5.)
where :QR = inflow at the upstream end of the urbanised area; Qh = outlet flow at the downstream end of the urbanised area.
Figure 1.5. Classification of urban sub-catchments and interaction between urban runoff and the adjacent river. In the cases when the receiving urban stream reaches its full capacity under the effect of a given return period flood wave. Source control solutions will be strongly dependent on the value of the factor !Pand of the urban catchment location (part of the city at high elevations and storm water drained by gravity, or part of the city at low elevations which can be flooded by receiving water). A high value of the factor Y, means the high capacity of the receiving water, thus the storm runoff from the local urban area might not affect water level in the river. Thus the implementation of source control may be less beneficial to the for the part of the city located on the left river bank situated in the higher elevations (Figure 1.2.) than to the portion of the city located on the opposite side of the river. In the latter case, the implementation of source control measures could result in significant savings in both construction and operation management costs. Both the cities of Budapest and Belgrade are good examples in which the portions of the city on opposite sides of the receiving waters (Danube in the case of Budapest and both Sava and Danube rivers in the case of Belgrade), have completely different flooding vulnerabilities and different source control suitability. Thus the portions on different river banks would benefit differently if source control measures would have been applied. As a conclusion to this section one can say that there are no universal rules of thumb for implementation of source control techniques. The most appropriate solutions have to be firstly sought through the resolution of conflicts between land and water users at catchment level and than at the level of municipal storm water plan. Both structural and non-structural measures have to be analysed in terms of the suitability to an application of source control and benefits that can be reached. Stormwater quality issues, which were almost ignored in the past, have to be addressed properly in terms of their spatial and temporal distribution and effects on receiving water bodies. A possible approach in the evaluation of suitability by GIS support is given in the paper of Macropoulos et al ( 1998) and will be discussed later in the section 05).
1.4 Basic principles of rainfall-runoff and pollution modelling outlook for their application in particular climates 1.4.1. Water quantity aspects
Modelling in urban drainage serves various purposes such as overall assessment of the catchment response as a part of strategic and master planning to detailed network and ancillary elements design, assessment of pollution, operational management, real time control and analysis of interactions among subsystems. The type of model applied depends on the goal of modelling, spatial coverage, data and technology availability but most often on the knowledge, skills and experience of the modeller. Once familiarised with a certain 7
model, the user tends to apply it even in the cases in which that particular model is not appropriate. In principle the simple lumped models (black box and similar) in which the whole catchment is treated as an entii, can provide reliable results and good fit with measurements obtained on the same point from which the data have been used for calibration. One cannot expect to get realistic results for the points within the catchment ( network) unless the measurement is performed on that point and “new model” obtained by calibration against that data sets. The only reliable approach is to obtain more reliable data on a catchments physical characteristics and then develop and apply physically based model in which uncertainty is reduced by replacing the role of physically meaningless parameters with these characteristics. The general principles of conceptual and physically based models of both water quality and quantity have been known for several decades Maksimovic, Radojkovic (1966) , Yen (1966) O’Laughlin et al (1996). Detailed description of modelling principles in temperate climates in which these models have been developed, and from which the data were wllected for model calibration, is beyond the scope of the present chapter. More details on the attempt to use these models in specific climates will be given in the separate chapters. The conceptual models are based on assumptions such as constant runoff coefficient, SCS curve numbers, rational formula, time-area, unit hydrograph etc. originating years before the computers reached the level of development that allowed their broader application in daily practice. Although they were developed for application in natural and rural catchments, they continued to be used in urban areas, where the conditions are significantly more complex, spatial variability of soil and impervious areas require much finer spatial resolution, and man made object require detailed specification of infrastructure system and their interaction with the flow pattern. When property calibrated against measurements, these models can produce seemingly logical results especially if one is modelling the whole urban area as a single catchment and model calibration performed against data in one point. This could be useful for example in design of centralised storage facilities, inflow to treatment plants and similar cases when the response of the whole catchment is considered. However, for detailed runoff modelling of complex features such as trunk systems with broad subcatchment areas, street drainage systems with detailed property drainage components and sub-catchments, models of this nature generate results of high level of uncertainty. Physically based models in which a more detailed presentation of the catchment characteristics are made and distributed modelling is applied should theoretically be less sensitive to subjective assessment of model parameters. In the simplest terms, the whole catchment is divided (delineated) in smaller sub-catchments which, depending on the purpose of modelling, can vary in shape and size arbitrarily as to accommodate, the most realistic model presentation of flow pattern (Figure 1.6). The temperate climate approach considers the following element of modelling :
l Rainfall as an input: single storm, series, historical rainfall, etc. 0 Interception (surface depression) l lnfilJration (steady, unsteady, unsaturated soil, simple solution or Richard’s equation based solutions) 0 Surface runoff l l Gutter flow
Flow in ancillary structures 0 Pipe flow
When it comes to runoff modelling in specific climate conditions it is evident that this approach needs further upgrades as to accommodate features like: l Different forms of precipitation (snow fall in CC) l Different forms of interception (HT) l Different forms of runoff formation (snow melt in CC) l Effect of different cultural, planning, building and other effect on interception (ASA and other) l Strong interaction of surface runoff with sediment transport (ASA) l Lack of proper infrastructure and interactions with solid waste and waste water ( developing countries, low income habitats) l Interaction with ground water (infiltration, exfiltration - all) 8
Interaction with source control features Interactions with real time and other control structures.
It is evident that these features require separate attention, although not necessarily a completely new model. Most of them can be accommodated into reliable, well conceptualised physically based model. This does require more knowledge, reliable data, proper interpretation. Some of the shortcomings of the models of this nature as presented in the paper of Maksimovic et al (1999) are:
Concepts dating back many decades. The development of contemporary information technology’s computing power has not always been mirrored by improvements in the models, The outdated concepts are often hidden behind powerful graphics and presentation glamour Modelling of urban water interactions are almost nonexistent and integrated modelling is in its infancy Many models lack modularity, transparency and transportability (automatic “scaling up and down”), Data quality and completeness is usually not property addressed by software developers, its users often lack the knowledge of basic assumptions on which models are built, Data acquisition and processing are not compliant with model structure and complexity, or models are not capable of producing proper results from available data base (DRIPS Syndrome - Data Rich Information Poor Systems Complete digital data on the urban infrastructure and on the spatial distribution of basic urban environment features (land use, DEM- digital elevation models etc.) is rarely found at an appropriate horizontal and vertical resolution, Thorough testing against high quality data sets is often exercised neither by developers nor by users, High level of independent, international verification of new products is rarely performed. In-house verification tends not to reveal the weak points of the products, a proper educational component is often missing.
Additionally, O’Loughlin et al (1996) claim: ” Despite this availability of information, tools and guides, and the success of rainfall-runoff models in providing generally acceptable basis for design of infrastructure works, there are limitations to the modelling of rainfall-runoff processes . They identify four major reasons for this:
l l l l
Insufficient data Variability of rainfall inputs Insufficient temporal detail Model incompatibility
Concerning the level of detail they point out that engineers have long been skilled at idealising or conceptualising systems, to produce manageable models involving typically 10 to 100 elements to represent a complex urban drainage network. Now that there is a capacity to work with more detail, it is necessary to look at appropriate levels for various tasks and the relationships between models of various scales. It has already been mentioned that for studies concerning general response (in the terms of both quality and quantity) of the catchment or sub-catchment of a considerable size, it may suffice to apply a lumped approach in which spatial variability of catchement characteristics as well as of precipitation is ignored. Providing that reliable measurements at the end of catchments are available, the results of input-output correlations are used instead. Some models of this nature will be discussed in the particular chapters of separate volumes.
Ckuchmcntwith dminage system
i direct surface runoff 2 impervious surfact:
3 pervious surface retentioa 4 ierception sinfiluation 6 gurtcr flow 7 base flow 8pipeflow I
b) WAIIER BALANCE
a) DELLNUTION PRINCIPLE
~~ AN EXAMPLE OF c) DELINEATED URBAN AREA
Figure 1.6. Summary of physically based approach requiring a reliable catchment delineation
Storm water runoff becomes polluted when it washes off concentrated and diffused pollution sources spread across the catchment. An example of the average concentrations found in storm runoff is presented in Table 1.l . (Source: Xanthopoulos and Hahn 1993 and Cordery 1977). In addiion to soil ero&on caused by raindrop impacts and shear stress action, two major sources contribute to storm water pollution in temperate dimate zones: a. diffused sources (Figure 1.7) originating primarily from atmospheric fallout and vehicle emission, additionally spread by the vehicles and wind and
b. concentrated sources originating mostly from human activities - bad housekeeping (industrial wastes, chemicals spread in urban areas - gardening for example) exposed to and widespread by wash-off by storm runoff. Both of the processes generate soluble and suspended material. Throughout the process of transport, depending on hydraulic conditions, settling and re-suspension takes place on the surface and in pipes, as well as biological and chemical reactions. These processes are often considered to be more intense in the initial phase of the storm (first flush effect), however, due to temporal and spatial variability of rainfall and flowing water, first flush effects are more pronounced in pipes rather than on surfaces Deletic (1998), where high concentrations of pollutants can be expected throughout the runoff process. The success of runoff quality modelling exercise is strongly dependent on the quality of model (its reliability to realistically reproduce processes taking place in nature), and the reliability of data against which the model has been calibrated Table 1 .I. An example of average concentrations of pollutants in storm runoff Mean Concentration ,,_ Quantity Conductivity (uS/cm) 108-470 BOD (mg/l) 7.3- 15 TOC (mg/l) 26-28.3 NH4(mg/l) 1.92-2.75 160-525 Pb Ms/l) 320-2000 iWW 35-57 Wg4 6.47-6.78 PH 47-146 COD (mg/l) 3.1.-5.1 DOC(mg/I) 3.1.-5.1 P(mdl) 1.6-2.95 W-w/U 2.8 - 6.4 Cd(W) 23-184 CN&l~l) 2.2 - 5.6 (10*6) Coliforms (/I OOml Similar to quantity modelling, storm runoff quality modelling can be undertaken at various levels of complexity, starting again with simplest input - output relationships. More advanced models deal with spatial distribution of diffused pollution sources and analysis of bringing them to suspension, unsteady process of incipient of solid particles motion, transport along the paved areas, deposition in grassed areas (Deletic 1999) transport through the pipes and disposal either into receiving water body or into treatment plant. In order to enable the comparison of modelling approaches between the models being used in temperate climates with those in development or in need to represent the conditions in other climate conditions, the basic principles of quality modelling are briefly summarised. Most of the models in current practice model the runoff quality by correlating the concentration of pollutants to the concentration of particles of suspended solids which are modelled in the phase of build-up and wash-off. The most common approach in build-up modelling is based on the assumption of an exponential relationship between the amount of solids available on the surface, M, and the duration of antecedent dry weather period, fdV. This equation was adopted in the model of Deletic at al (1977) - Figure 1. 8: (1.2) where M [g/m*] is the amount of solids available on the surface, T [day] is the time elapsed from the start of the first rainfall in the series, tdV [day3 is the duration of antecedent dry weather period, and t’ [day] is the virtual time, M, [g/m ] is the maximum amount of solids expected at the surface, and k [day-‘] the accumulation constant. The virtual time is calculated by assuming that deposition is zero at t’days before the start of the antecedent rainfall, as indicated in Figure 1.8.
A spatial distribution of solids is modelled, based on records from the literature, a different approach to prior models, which all assume that sediment is distributed evenly over the modelled surface. It should be noticed here that this approach build-up modelling could be successfully used in ASA climates where most of the solids accumulated are either atmospheric deposit or are transported by wind. However, in cold climates where a great deal of pdlution is experienced in the snowmelt period from de-icing activities, which are not uniformly distributed over the entire catchment, alternative methods have to be applied (for example GIS supported spatial distribution of salt used in de-icing). In this respect a critical evaluation of other models used in both quantii and quality modelling in particular climate conditions should be made as for their suitability for application in specific climates.
industri 18 % and landfil.
Figure 1.7. Diffused pollution sources in urban area
The reliable modelling of suspended solids wash-off has to be combined with surface and pipe flows to which the solids entrainment module has to be attached. The approach applied in Deleti} et al (1997) will be used as an illustration. In this approach, the solids washoff one dimensional model contains the following sub-blocks: 1. overland flow; 2. solids entrainment; 3. suspended solids transport by overland flow. Overland f/ow is modelled using the kinematic wave equation, which has been used before for the modelling of surface runoff. So/ids entrainment is assessed by a new method, developed by the first author, which considers independently rainfall and overland flow effects on amount of material lifted from the surface. The rainfall effect is assessed by means of the kinetic energy of rain drops, while the effect of flow is expressed by shear stress. One calibration coefficient is needed for this method. The general principles of modelling will be described in more detail enabling thus the comparison to be made between the commonly applied approach and the one that could be used in presenting the specific aspects wash-off in ASA, CC and HT climates. Physically based modelling deals with mass and momentum conservation principles which are that
simplified or adjusted for the specific features of the particular catchments ‘characteristics, boundary conditions internal and external local climate induced boundary conditions. For a unit width of the road surface (Fig. 1.9.a) the continuity equation, Eq. 1.3, and the full momentum equation, Eq. 1.3, can be written as:
ah+aq , a t 77"
Figure 1.8: The concept used in modelling of solids build-up at the surface -1
Figure 9: a) Road surface flow; b) Gutter flow where, h [m] is the water depth, q [m3/s/m] is the unit ovetiand flow, ie [mk] is the effective rainfall intensity, Ss [-] is the surface slope (the natural slope of the street surface), tb [Pa] is the bed shear stress, ti [Pa] is the additional shear stress due to rainfall drops, x is the spatial coordinate, and t is the time from the start of rain. It should be noted here that the source term on the right hand side of the equation 1 is based only on the contribution from direct rainfall. In CC conditions for example this term has to be modified as to include the effects of snow melt and freezing, which have to incorporate the temporal variations their thermodynamic properties. Similarly in HT and ASA conditions it might be necessary to include the evaporation term which has not been included here. The initial and boundaty conditions are given below, W,O) = O;qW) = O;q(O,t) = qup 0) (1.5)
where qup i’s the unit overland flow at the end of the upstream section. The effective rainfall intensity ie was calculated by Linsley’s equation,
t where i [m/s] is rainfall intensity; P = Iidt
[mm] is the total amount of precipitation up to time
f, and yd [mm] is the retention coefficient and is dependent on surface type.
The bed shear stress, tb was defined as:
The friction coefficient, Ct,, depends on the flow type :
CTb = R;, -Re
3 Re<Re I
> Re,, turbulent
b, laminar flow (‘1.8) flow
where Re=q/v is the Reynolds number and v is the water kinematic viscosity. C,, CA and CJ are constants that depend on surface type, and Ret, is the critical Reynolds number between laminar and turbulent flow. The effect of rain drops was modelled by an additional shear stress, IL‘~which is difficult to define separately. Therefore, the total shear stress, written as,
which incorporates both phenomena was used. The local and convective terms (marked as Term 1 and Term 2 in Eq. 1.4) as well as the pressure gradient term (marked as Term 3) are much smaller then the remaining two and are usually neglected and only gravity and friction terms (Term 4 and Term 5) were kept within the dynamic equation. The resulting equation is well known as the kinematic wave equation, and has been used for the moddling of both overland and gutter flow . Consequently, for modelling of gutter flow the following equations can employed (Fig. 1.9.b).
aA aq ~+-g=qW +qr+i,L,
where Q [m3/s] is the gutter flow; qw [m2/s] is the unit inflow from the sidewalk; qr [m2/s] is the unit inflow from the road surface; ie [mls] is the effective rainfall intensity Lg [m] is the gutter width, A [m2] is the cross section area, H [m] is the water depth by the curb, n [m-1’3s] is the Manning roughness coefficient, Sg [-] is the longitudinal slope of the gutter, p p] is the transverse angle of the gutter. Eq. 1.ll is known as luard’s (1946) formula which differs slightly from Manning’s expression, but gives better results for the shallow flow in a triangular cross section channel . In specific climate conditions the right hand side of the equation 1.10 can be modified as to include additional terms the contribute to water balance. It was assumed that there is no flow at the beginning of a rainfall event (the initial conditions). The inflow from the upstream reach was used as an upstream boundary condition. Furthermore, the solids entrainment, pollution transport by overland flow and gutter flow are modelled by making use of kinetic energy of rainfall drop impact, carrying capacity of surface runoff and principle of turbulent transport and diffusion in open channel flow (Deletic et al. 1997). Although these principles are universal thus applicable in other climate conditions, the appropriate modifications have to be made in transport and diffusion equations in order to incorporate their specific conditions, mainly in the source and sink terms
of mass conservation and transport equations. Some of these principles are discussed in the main body of the text, however it should be noted that they are to be further investigated, tested and checked against reliable data. In this respect this publication is to be seen as a source of information on both current practice and need for further investigations in order to realistically reflect the conditions in particular climates. Additionally, it is noted that the above considerations have only dealt with suspended solids.
1.5 Common UD models and needs for their improvements and update
Physically based models are based on the analysis of processes on the surface and in networks, and is performed by taking into account detailed features on the surface (topography, soil characteristics, land use, connectivity between elements etc.) and of the networks and ancillary structures. This section will mention just a few (more detailed presentations are given in the other chapters ) of the existing models available either freely or commercially:
SWMM (US EPA’s Storm Water Management Model) - Huber (1995). This is one of the first models developed, with a high degree of physically based principles incorporated. Its initial versions (still in frequent use in its original main frame version) have served as a basis for development of the other models which have taken advantage of later development of personal computer technology. Hydroworks (HR Wallinford -Wallingford Software) The latest versions of the package are user orientated and can be used for matching with data sources and in composition of reports. MOUSE (DHI -Danish Hydraulics Institute-1990) Broadly used internationally. The developers have made an effort to incorporate some of the developments of PC technology (for example data base management in network simplification). A discrepancy is noticed between versatile pipe flow model and surface runoff one which would benefit from upgrading and proper matching with GIS and surface flooding routines. Hystem E&an (ITWH - Fuchs and Scheffer ( 1990) Bemus (IRTCUD, Djordjevic et al 1998)
However the models seem to have reached a level in which most of the model developers seem to have lost enthusiasm for further upgrade and improvement of models’ capability in dealing with complexity of urban environment. Adding powerful graphic and wlourful images does not contribute to the reliability of modelling as long as the upgrade of the physical background is not improved. In addition to the above specific particular features of particular climate regions, the following aspects need to dealt with in either model development or customising for application in particular climate conditions:
Capturing, filtering, compaction and processing of high spatial resolution data (primarily obtained by remote sensing. These data would enable a better representation of terrain and land use) and its matching with GIS tools, the use of which could enhance the analytical power of the models. Analysis of the effect of maintenance and management practices (de-icing, sewer flushing, gullyspot cleaning, street sweeping and of the other storm runoff and quality relevant activities) on water quality Analysisof the effects of source control practices Surface flooding (interactions of surcharged underground network with superficially flooded areas, flood risk analysis)
These new incentives seem to be needed for a significant breakthrough to be made. to provide some material which could serve as a guideline for This publication aims development of new generation of models or improvement of the existing ones.
1.6GIS and informatic
Geographical Information Systems are know to deal with acquisition, processing and implementation of data of a spatial nature (Boroughs 1988). Despite significant progress being made in this technology and its application in various water and environmental engineering fields, their application in urban drainage is still relatively limited. Significant progress has been made in the use of GIS based data in creation of data bases linked urban water infrastructure system simulation models (for example AquaBase - Kuby 1998). For the creation of initial data sets (GIS layers) various sources of data can be used (Figure 1.lO). The systems are extremely powerful in providing input data to models after the elementary manipulations with layers presenting physical features of the catchment (such as elevation model and land use) and superficial and underground network have been performed. Starting in the late eighties, with some of the first papers on GIS application in urban drainage - Elgy et al (1993) the research group of the present author has developed a methodology for handling arbitrary data sources and automatic creation of input files for storm drainage modelling. An example of data preparation for creation of input files for catchment delineation (Maksimovic (1995) is given in Figure 1.l 1. The results of application of catchment delineation is presented in Figure 1.12. Figures 1.13 present the results of application of GIS functionalities in the analysis - assessment of the suitability of a catchment of implementation of source control techniques and Figure 1.I3 depicts the results of the application of this analysis in the survey of the applicability of source control in the same catchment (Macropoulos et al 1998 and Macropoulos et al 1999). The works of Prodanovic (1999) and Djordjevic et al (1998) provide further development towards GIS - assisted physically-based flood modelling in urban areas based on the dual drainage concept. There is a huge unexploited potential of GIS application in particular climates. In the individual chapters, authors present current techniques in data analysis and modelling. Most of the specific features of the urban catchment in particular climates are of a spatial nature which renders them particularly applicable to quantification by GIS (e.g. suitable for application of GIS. It can be used in quantification of both physical features (such as soil propensity characteristics, soil erosion, pollutant potential distribution, snow cover, asphalt temperature, solar radiation exposure). These and other GIS applications are yet to be researched and made a part of the daily routine.
The material presented in the present three volumes is result of the team work of numerous specialists gathered around the UNESCO IHP V programme under the theme 7: Integrated Water Management in Urban Areas within the Theme 7.3. Urban Drainage in specific climates. The series of the three volumes has been produced under the co-ordination role of the regional IRTCUD (International Research and Training Centre on Urban Drainage) units for particular dimate regions : humid tropical in Brazil, cold in Norway and arid and semi arid in Sharjah. The production of the present volumes would be impossible without UNESCO’s endorsement and coordination roles of the key w-editors: Prof. Carlos Eduardo Morelli Tucci (for HT volume), Dr. Sveinnung Saegrov, Mrs. Jadranka Milina (MSc) and Prof. Sveinn T. Thorolfsson (for CC volume) and Prof. Mamdouh Nouh (for ASA volume). Thanks are due to the contributing authors of the chapters in individual volumes. Their names are listed in the relevant vdumes. It is sincerely hoped that that publication of these three volumes will encourage further research and development in those regions in which there is still much to be learned about the governing physical processes and in which the most appropriate sustainable solutions can be found to the problems of urban flooding, storm water quality management, amenity development, provision, enhancement and resources recycling.
5 Satellii images GPS Data Digital data from total stations
Q Video images
%Dynamic positioning 8 bathimetry data
Figure 1.10. Sources of data for GIS applications
Pre processing of primary data and creation of secondary files for subcatchment delineation
Figure 1.11. Pre processing
of data for catchment delineation
Fig. 1.12. GI.S supported catchment
et al 1994)
Fig. 1.13. Suitability of the Klka catchment for application of infiltration techniques
-30% to -24% -24% to -18% -18% to -12% -12% to -6% -6%tol% l%to7% 7%to13% 13% to19% 19% to25% 25% to31% 31% to37% 37% to 43% 43% to 49% 49% to 55% 55% to61% 61% to67% 67% to 73% 73% to79%
Fig.l- 14. Reduction in maximum water level for 10 years return period rainfall
BOROUGHS, P. A (1986)
Resources Assessment: ‘Principles of Geographical lnforrnation Systems for Land
Oxford Science Publications, Oxford BUTLER, D.; C. MAKSIMOVIC (1999) ‘Urban Water Management; Challenges for the next Millennium’ . Progress in Environmental Sciences, Vol. 1 No. 3 p. 213-235 ‘Sustainable urban drainage systems; Design manual for. Scotland and CIRIA (1999) Northern Ireland’ Report No. C521, Construction Industry Research and Information Association, London DELETIC, A; C. MAKSIMOVIC; M. NETIC (1997) ‘Modelling of Storm wash& of Suspended Solids from Impervious Areas’. Journal of Hydraulic Research , Vol. 35, No. 1, p. 99117. DELETIC, A. (1998) ‘The First Flush Load of Urban Surface Runoff. Water Research, Vol. 32 No. 8, p. 2482-2470. DELETIC, A. (1998) ‘Sediment Behaviour in Grass Filter Strips’. Water Science and Technology, Vol. 39, No. 9, p. 19138. DHI (1999) ‘MOUSE Modelling of Urban Sewer Systems on Microcomputers; Users Guide and Technical Reference’. Edition 3.0. DJORDJEVIC, S.; C. MAKSIMOVIC ; D. PRODANOVIC (1998) ‘An Approach to Simulation of Dual Drainage’. Water Science and Technology, Vol. 39, No. 9, p. 95-194. ELGY. J., C. MAKSIMOVlC; D. PRODANOVlC (1993A) ‘Matching Standard GIS Packages with Urban Storm Drainage Simulations Software’. Sixth International Conference on Niagara Falls, Canada Urban Storm Drainage, ELGY. J., C. MAKSIMOVIC; D. PRODANOVIC (19938) ‘ Using Geographical Information Systems for Urban Drainage Hydrology’. Proc. of the International Conference on Application of Geographical Information Systems in Hydrdogy and Water Resources, HydroGlS 93. K. Kovar and H. P. Nachnebel (ed) Vienna, Austria FUCHS. L.; C. SCHEFFER (1991) ‘HYSTEM-EXTRAN, Version 4.3, Model Description and Documentation, Microcomputer in Urban Drainage’. Inst. fuer Technishe and Wissenschaftlische Hydrologie,Hanover. GEIGER, W. (1998) ‘Principles of Integrated Water Management for the Revival of Old Industrial Areas’. Springer Vet-lag, ASI Series, p. 57- 108 , Editors: A. G. Buekens and V. V. Dragalov. Geiger, W. F. and M. Becker (1999) ‘Revisiting the Past? New Approaches to Urban Drainage in the Emscher Area’, Proc. of Engineering Foundation Conference: Sustainable Urban Water Resources in the 21*. Century, Sept. 7-12, Malmo, Sweden, Publ. ASCE, Editors: Ch. Rawney, P. Stahre, L. A. Roesner, pp 123 -135 Haestad Method (1997): Computer Applications in Hydraulic Engineering. 166 p. HUBER, W. (1995) ‘EPA Storm Water Management Model - SWMM’. In V.P. Singh (ed.) Computer Mode/s in Watersheshead Hydrology, Water Resources Publication, pp. 783 898 IWASA,Y. ; K. INOUE (1987) ‘Comparative Study of Flood-Runoff Analysis in View of Disaster Research’. Proc. US-Asia Conference on Engineering for Mitigation Natural Hazard Damage IZZARD, C. F. (1948) ‘Hydraulics of Runoff form Developed Surfaces’, Proc. of Highway p. 129150. Research Board KUBY, R. (1998) ‘Common Ground for GIS Support to Water Supply, Sewerage and Drainage (AquaBase)‘Training course: GIS in Urban Water, Internal publication of Imperial Cdlege and CUW-UK, MAKSIMOVIC, C. and M. RADOJKOVIC (1986) ‘Urban Drainage Modelling’, Proc. Int. Symp UDM’88 Dubrovnik, Yugoslavia, Pergamon Press 540 p. MAKSIMOVlC, C., D. PRODANOVlC, J. ELGY; L. FUCHS (1994) ‘GIS (or GIM) in Water Projects-Tools or Toys’. Proc. International Conference of Hydroinformatics Deft, Bal kema MACROPOULOS, C., C. MAKSIMOVIC; D. BUTLER (1999) ‘Effectiveness of Storm Drainage in urban Flood Risk Reduction under Source Control Implementation’. Fifth International Mime Symposium: System Operational Effectiveness l-3 December (in Press) (1998) ‘GIS supported evaluation of MACROPOULOS, C.,D. Butler and C. MAKSIMOVIC
source control applicability in urban areas’. Water Science and Technology, Vd,. 39 No. 3, p.243252 MAKSIMOVIC, C., L. FUCHS, D. PRODANOVIC and J. ELGY (1995) ‘Full Scale Application of Standard GIS Packages with Urban Storm Drainage Simulation Software’. Kurier Abwasserung Germany, Book 1, p. 3-13 MAKSIMOVlC, C., D. BUTLEr and N. GRAHAM (1999) ‘Emerging Technologies in the Water Industry’. In Water Industry Systems; Modelling and Optimization Applications, Ed. D. Savic and G. Walters, Research Studies Press, p. 3984. NIEMCZYNOWICZ, J. (1998) ‘Challenges and interactions in water future’. Environmental Research Forum-3 4, l-10, Transtec Publications, Switzerland. O’LOUGHLIN, G., W. HUBER and B. CHOCAt, (1998) ‘Rainfall-Runoff Processes and Modelling’, Journal of Hydraulic Research, Vol. 34., No 8, p. 733-752. OSTROWSKI, M.W. and W. JAMES, (1998) ‘Requirements for group decision support systems for urban stormwater management’. Fourth Int. Conference on Developments in Urban Drainage; UDM’98, London PRODANOVIC D.( 1999) ‘Unapredjenje metoda primene hidroinformatike u analizi oticanja sa urbanih pow&a’ (in Serbian) (Improvements of application methods in analysis of runoff from urban areas), PhD Thesis presented at the University of Belgrade, Yugoslavia, November 1999, p 198. SIMON, A. (1998) ‘Estimation of the Utilisation of Possibilities of Overland Flow in Urban Areas in Israel’s Coastal Plain’. In lntegfated Water Management in Urban Environment Edited by J. Nierrczynowicz, Trensttxh Publications, p. 221- 232. STAHRE, P. (1999) ‘Ten Years of Expe&nces of Sustainable Stormwater Management in the Cii of Malmo Sweden’. Proc of s’” International Conference on Urban Storm Drainage, Sydney, Australia, p. 1087 - 1097. XANTHOPUOLOS, C. and H. HAHN (1993) ‘Anthropogenic Pollutants Wash-off from Street Surface’. Proc. Of the Sixth Int. Conference on Urban Storm Drainage, Niagara Falls, Canada YEN B. C., (1986) ‘Rainfall-Runoff Process on Urban Catchment and its Modelling’. Invited lecture at Int. Symp. UDM’86 Dubrovnik, Yugoslavia , Pergamon Press (Ed. Maksimovic & Radojkovic)
Chapter 2 General characteristics of arid and semi-arid regions
2.1.1 What is aridity?
And means dry, or parched, and the primary determinant of aridity in most areas is the lack of rainfall (Slatyer and Mabbutt, 1964). Aridity is defined as a lack of moisture which is basically a climatic phenomenon based upon the average dimatic conditions over a region (Agnew and Anderson, 1992); therefore, arid regions have been identified by dimatological mapping. Of the many classifications based on climate Meigs(1953) developed a set of maps for UNESCO that received wide international acceptance and were recognized by the World Meteorological Organization. Meigs divided xeric environments into extremely arid, arid, and semiarid. Meigs defined the arid areas as those in which the rainfall is not adequate for regular crop production, and semiarid areas as those in which the rainfall is sufficient for short-season crops and where grass is an important element of the natural vegetation. To avoid confusion the term desert is based upon land surface characteristics and can be considered as areas of low or absent vegetation cover with an exposed ground surface (Goudie, 1985). Agnew and Anderson (1992) considered the arid realm to encompass arid and semi-arid environments from desert through to steppe landscapes. They used the term desert to convey hyper-arid conditions where rainfalls are particularly low and vegetation is sparse. Figure 2.1 shows the arid regions.of the world based on UNESCO (1977). Note that the four areas shown are hyper-arid, arid, semi-arid and sub-humid.
Figure 2.1. Arid regions of the world (UNESCO, 1977)
2.1.2 Geomorphology From a geomorphological viewpoint no single process dominates arid environments. Arid lands vary from tectonically active mountainous regions in North and South America to the geologically stable shield areas in Africa and Australia. Table 2.1 lists the major and regions of the continents and their main geomorphology and vegetation types (after Shmida, 1985 as presented in Dick-Peddie, 1991). The boundaries of these regions conform closely to the arid and hyper and homodimates of Meigs(l953). Dick-Peddie (1991) present summary discussions of each continent along with the extent and vegetation of the semiarid, arid, hyperarid, and riparian habitats within each region. Table 2. 1. Major arid regions of the continents and their geomorphology and vegetation types
Regions Geomorphology type Vegetation types
Great Basin Sonora Chihuahua Baja California Basin and mountains Plateau, crystalline mountains Limestone plateau Diverse, coastal, sand Plains, dissected low plateau Coastal, badlands, Salinas Basins, mountains, salinas Huge sands, limestone plateau Limestone plateau, ergs Sans, Salinas, gravels Salinas, ergs, interplains Loess, sandy plains Interplains, ergs Basins, mountains, sands Huge sands, ergs, diverse Diverse plains, plateau Coastal sands, old relief Coastal sands, diverse Old diverse plateaux, mountains Huge plains, salines, dd relief, sands Artemisia-Atriplex steppes and pygmy open woodland Thorny succulent savanna Open shurbland and thickets Thorny succulent savanna and dwarf shurbs Perennial grassland Thorny succulent savanna Thorny succulent savanna Chenopod-Zygophyllum desert, dwarf shrubs, Artemisia and Poaceae on sands Artemisia - chenopod steppes and desert dwarf shrubs Thorny-rattanoid savanna Chenopod desert dwarf shurbs Artemisia-Stipa steppes and pygmy open woodland Chenopod desert dwarf shurbs Chenopod - Tamarix desert shrubland Chenopod-Zygophyllum desert, dwarf shrubs, Artemisia and Poaceae on sands Thorny-rattanoid savanna Thorny savanna and desert dwarf shrubs Succulent desert dwarf shrubs Thorny-succulent savana Chenopod shrublands and sclerophyl evergreen low woodland
Patagonia Peru-Chile Monte
Arab Syrian Thar Iran Turkestan Takla Makan Gobi
Sahara Sahel Somali Namib Kalahari
Source: Modified from Shmida (1985) as presented in Dick-Peddi (1991)
Agnew and Anderson (1992) define the following features of arid zone landscapes based upon Goudie (1985) Heathcote (1983) and Thomas (1989): l Alluvial fans which are fan-shaped deposits found at the foot of the slope, grading from gravels and boulders at the apex to sand and silt at the foot of the fan, called a bajada when coalesced. l Dunes which are aeolian deposits of sand grains (unconsolidated mineral partides) forming various shapes and sizes depending upon the supply and characteristics of the material and the wind system. l Bedrock fields including pediment, a piano-concave erosion surface sloping from the foot of an upland area; and hamada, a bare rock surface with little or no vegetation or surficial material. l Desert flats with slight slopes possibly containing sand dunes, termed playa when the surface is flat and periodically inundated by surface runoff. l Desert mountains are the most wmmon feature of and lands. l Badlands well dissected, unconsolidated or poorly cemented deposits with sparse vegetation. 2.1.3 Soil characteristics Soil characteristics are influenced primarily by low rainfalls, high evaporation rates, and low amounts of vegetation. The soils, therefore, have low organic matter, an accumulation of salts at the surface, little development of day minerals, a low cation-exchange capacity, a dark or reddish wlor due to desert varnish, and little horizon development due to the lack of percolating water (Fuller, 1974). Even though there are vast areas covered by thin, infertile soils, there are however, arid lands where soils are highly productive having a very high potential for agriculture. Dregne (1976) presents the following: l Entisols cover 41.5% of and lands (immature soils ranging from barren sands to very productive alluvial deposits. l Aridisols cover 35.9% of arid lands ( red-brown desert soils, dry and generally only suitable for grazing without irrigation) l Vertisols cover 4.1% of and lands (moderately deep swelling day which is difficult to cultivate) Agnew and Anderson (1992) report the fdlowing: l Mollisols cover 11.9% of arid lands (one of the world’s most important agricultural soils) l Alfisols cover 6.6% of arid lands (high base saturation, reasonably high day contents, agriculturally productive. As a result of the climate in arid lands, soil formation is dominated by physical disintegration with only slight chemical weathering. Elgabaly (1980) defines three main types of soils found in arid lands:
Saline soils - Characterized by the presence of excess neutral salts (pH less than 8.5) that accumulate on the surface in the form of a loose crust depending upon the depth and salinity of the groundwater table. Saline-alkaline soils - Charactenzed by the presence of excess soluble salts (pH approximately equal to 8.5). The structure is more compact at a certain depth and darker in wlor. Sodic soils - Characterized by the presence of low soluble salts (pH greater than 8.5). Surface cdor is usually darker and day accumulates in the B horizon and a columnar structure eventually develops.
The formation or origin of salt-affected soils is connected with: a.) climate, as saline soils are an element of arid lands; b.) relief, as saline soils are more common in low lands such as deltas and floodplains; and c.) geomorphdogy and hydrology as saline soils are related to the depth of the water table. 23
Aeolian systems are those in which wind plays a dominant role in sculpturing the landscape. According to White, et al.(1992) actiie aeolian systems occur in regions which are circumscribed by the 150 mm rainfall isohyet. By this criteria then they occupy about 20% of the Earths land surface, evenly divided between the hot deserts and the cold deserts of the middle and polar latiiudes. The creation of dune forms by aeolian deposition is the most distinctive feature of aeolian systems. Aeolian deposition creates distinctive landforms that are shaped on large spreads of sand. Dunefields only occupy a limited proportion of the area of individual deserts, commonly 20% -30%. Sands tend to collect in desert lowlands where the winds are less severe and erosive than in the adjacent uplands
2.2.1 Causes of aridity One of several processes can lead to aridity, however Hill (1966) believes that the major cause of aridity is explained through the global atmospheric circulation patterns. Thompson (1975) lists four main processes that explain aridity as presented by Agnew and Anderson (1992): l Hiah uressureAir that is heated at the equator rises, moves polewards and descends at the tropical latitudes around 20 to 30 degrees latitude. This descending air is compressed and warmed, thus leading to dry and stable atmospheric conditions covering large areas such as the Sahara Desert (see Figures 2.2 and 2.3).
Figure 2.2. General atmospheric circulation during January (Agnew and Anderson, 1992)
Wind direction-Winds blowing over continental interiors have a reduced opportunity to absorb moisture and will be fairly stable with lower humidities. These typically dry, northeasterly winds (in the northern hemisphere) are seasonally constant and contribute to the aridity of South West Asia and the Middle East.
Hfgh Prem#. Ftqpns IlOlEd!~
Figure 2.3. General atmospheric circulation during July (Agnew and Anderson, 1992) Touooraphy -When air is forced upward by a mountain range (Figure 2.4) it will cool adiabatically (A to B) at the saturated adiabatic rate once the dew point is reached (B to C) with possible precipitation. On the leeward side of the mountain the same air descends (C to D) warming at the dry adiabatic rate and hence the descending air is warmer at corresponding altiiudes compared to the ascending air. Hence a warmer, drier wind blows over the lands to the leeward side, providing the ascent is sufficient to reach the dew point temperature. Cold ocean currents -Onshore winds blowing across a cold ocean current dose to the shore will be rapidly cooled in the lower layers (up to 500 m). Mist and fog may result as found along the coasts of Oman, Peru, and Namibia, but the warm air aloft creates an inversion preventing the ascent of air and hence there is little or no precipitation. As this air moves inland it is warmed and hence its humidity reduces.
The majority of semiarid and arid regions are located between latitudes 25 and 35 degrees (see Figure 2.1) where high pressures cause warm air to descend, resulting in dry stable air masses. Aridity caused by orographic aridity is common in North and South America, where high mountain ranges extend perpendicularly to the prevailing air mass movements. As described above these air masses are cooled as they are forced up mountains, reducing their water holding capacity. Most of the moisture is precipitated at the high elevations of the windward slopes. The relatively dry air masses warm as they descend on the leeward side of the mountain ranges, increasing their water-holding capacity and reducing the chance of any precipitation. This orographic aridity is referred to as the rain shadow effect (Dick-Peddie, 1991). The positioning in a continent where distance from oceans lessens the chance of encountering moisture-laden air masses is the cause of the semiarid and arid conditions of central Asia. Cold ocean currents cause the coastal arid regions of Chile and Peru and the interior part of northern Argentina, where cold ocean currents in dose proximity to the coast supply dry air that comes on shore, but as the mass is forced up the mountain sides there is no moisture to be lost as the air mass cools. 25
2.2.2 Climate areas
Logan (1968) distinguished the four areas as subtropical, continental interior, rainshadow. and wol coastal arid lands, with the following definitions ( Agnew and Anderson, 1992):
Figure 2.4. Rainshadow effect leading to aridity (Agnew and Anderson, 1992)
SubtroDical areas (e.g. Sahara, Arabia, Sonora, Australia, and Kalahari) are characterized by anticydonic weather producing clear skies with high ground temperatures and a marked nocturnal cooling. The dimate has hot summers and mild winter so the seasonal contrasts are evident with rare winter temperatures down to freezing. Convective rainfalls only develop when moist air invades the region. Continental interior areas (e.g. arid areas of Asia and western USA) have large seasonal temperature ranges from very cold winters to very hot summers. Snow fall can occur however its effectiveness may be reduced by abalation as it lies on the ground through winter. Rainfall in the summers is unreliable and can occur as violent downpours. Rainshadow areas ( leeward sides of mountain ranges such as the Sierra Nevada, the Great Dividing Range in Australia and the Andes in South America) occur where conditions are diverse but are not as extreme as the continental interior areas. Cool coastal areas (e.g. Namib, Atacama, and the Pacific coast of Mexico)-have reasonably constant conditions with a cwl humid environment. When temperature inversions are weakened by moist air aloft, thunderstorms can develop.
2.2.3 What are deserts?
Desert implies aridity, however desert is a less precise term. There is no worldwide agreement as to what constitutes arid land and as to what gradations occur within the concept of arid (Dick-Peddie, 1991). Shmida (1985) equated extremely arid environments with extreme deserts, and environments with deserts or true deserts, and semiarid environments with semideserts. Mares, et al. (1985) equated arid and semiarid environments with semideserts, which results in equating extremely and environments with deserts (true deserts). Other authors use isohyets of annual precipitation to place limits on the various xeric zones. According to Dick26
(1953). In most instances the world’s deserts trend to be located in Meigs arid and extremely arid homoclimates.
2.3 Hydrology 2.3.1 Rainfall
Precipitation includes rainfall, snowfall, and other processes by which water falls to the land surface, such as hail and sleet (Chow, et al., 1988). The formation of precipitation requires the lifting of an air mass in the atmosphere so that it cools and some of its moisture condenses. In arid environments the processes leading to aridity tend to prevent the cooling through maintaining air stability, creation of inversions, or through the warming of the atmosphere resulting in lowering the humidity. The influence of these processes depends upon the atmospheric conditions. When rainfalls do occur they can be intense and localized downpours as moist air breaks through. Precipitation variability for the world is shown in Figure 2.5 . Slatyer and Mabbutt (1954) point out that the primary feature of precipitation in arid areas is the high variability of the small amount received, for which it is not uncommon for the standard deviation of the mean annual rainfall to exceed the mean value. They also point out that in most arid regions precipitation characteristics follow somewhat similar patterns, reflecting a high order of variability in time and space of individual storms, of seasonal rainfall, and of annual and cyclical totals.
- ---- ---
Figure 2.5. Variations in annual rainfalls (after Rumney, 1988, as presented in Agney and Anderson, 1992) Schick (1988) discusses the immense temporal variability of rainfall and the very high intensities in hyperarid areas of the world. In typical cloudbursts in the extreme desert areas the transition between total dryness and full-blast rain is near instantaneous, with the first few minutes of the rainfall having intensities in excess of 1 mm/min. The excessive intensities in hyperarid seem to be associated with relatively high temperatures, and are therefore the result of convective processes. The convective storms tend to form at preferred distances from each other, as opposed to being randomly scattered in space. Sharon (1981) found that the convective storms in the extremely arid Namib Desert had preferred distances of around 40 - 50 km and 80 - 100 km. The rain front are often very sharply defined both in direction of cell movement as well as laterally. Sharon (1972) reported cases where the velocity of rain cells in
the extreme desert was found to vary from near zero ( a stationary cloudburst) to several tens of kilometers per hour. The lateral boundaries of maving cells tend to be sharp. There are also widespread rainfalls that cover vast desert areas with lower intensity but relatively high quantity rains. Goodrich, et al. (1990) studied the impacts of rainfall sampling on runoff computations in arid and semi-and areas of the Southwestern U. S. This study concluded that the appropriate rainfall-sampling interval for arid land watersheds depends on many factors including the temporal pattern of the rainfall intensity, watershed response time, and infiltration characteristics. The study recommended that either breakpoint rainfall data of data sampled at uniform time increments be used for watersheds with equilibrium times smaller than about 15 minutes and that a maximum interval of 5 minutes be used for more slowly responding basins. Using a physically based rainfall-runoff modeling (KINEROS, Woolhiser, et al, 1990), they found that the outflow hydrographs were more sensitive to the rainfall input than to the model parameters. Feneira (1990) used Opus, an agricultural ecosystem model with an infiltration-based hydrology option, to simulate field responses in arid and semi-arid areas to rainfall inputs of various time intervals. The results using synthetic rainfall data from the statistical analysis of rainfall data from watersheds in the Southwestern U. S. showed a strong sensitivity of runoff predictions to the time interval of input rainfall data.
In arid lands the physical process if soil formation is active, resulting in heterogeneous soil types, having properties that do not differ greatly from the parent material, and having soil profiles that retain their heterogenous characteristics (Elgabaly, 1980). Soils in arid lands may contain hardened or cemented horizons known as pans and classified according to the cementing agent such as gypserious, calcareous, iron, and so on. The extent to which the horizons affect infiltration and salinization depend upon their thickness and depth of formation as they constitute an obstacle to water and root penetration. In salt mediums salt crusts can form at the surface under specific conditions. Large quantities of soluble salts cause coagulation of clay particles. Enrichment of soil in sodium salts modifies the soil structure as a result of the dispersion and swelling properties of sodic clays generally formed and the soils become impermeable. Changes in soil structure due to the action of different salts has an important influence on the behavior of soil under irrigation and drainage. Salt affected and sodic soils have a very loose surface structure making it susceptible to wind erosion and water erosion. There are numerous methods available to the hydrologist to compute infiltration (Chow, et al., 1988), varying from the constant infiltration rates to the Green-Ampt method. Which model to use should depend upon the use for the hydrologic modeling and the availability of data for calibration of the model. The Green-Ampt infiltration model is a physically based that is a recommended method for semi-arid and arid lands. The Green-Ampt equation for cumulative infiltration, F(t), as a function of time t, is expressed as F (t) = Kt + YAB In ( 1 + F(t)/YAO .. . ... ... . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . ... . .. .. . .. . ... .. . ... . .. . .. (1)
and the infiltration rate, f(t), is given as f(t) = K ((wAe/F(t)) + 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .._._......._.._.......... where the Green-Ampt parameters are defined as K = hydraulic conductivity (saturated; \v = soil suction head; and A8 = change in moisture content from the initial content, 8i , to the porosity, n.
Table 2. 2. Green-Ampt Soil Class
Infiltration Parameters for Various Soil Classes Porosity Efective Porosity 9 Wetting front soil suction head Wcm)
0.417 (0.354-0.480) 0.401
Hydraulic conductivity K(cm/h)
Sand Loamy sand Sandy loam Loam Silt loam Sandy clay loam Clay loam Silty clay loam Sandy clay Silty clay Clay
0.437 (0.374-0.0-500) 0.437 (0.363-0.506) 0.453 (0.351-0.555) 0.463 (0.375-0.551)
0.34 0.65 0.15
0.412 (0.283-0.541) 0.434 (0.334-0.534) 0.486
21.85 (4.42-108.0) 20.88
0.471 (0.418-0.524) 0.430
0.432 (0.347-0.517) 0.321 (0.207-0.435) 0.423 (0.334-0.512) 0.385
0.06 0.05 0.03
(0.425-0.533) 0.475 (0.427-0.523)
(6.39-156.5) value given (Rawis,
The numbers in parentheses below each parameter Brakensiek, and Miller, 7983)
are one standard deviation around the parameter
The determination of the effect of impervious area is particularly important (Dawdy, 1990). Impervious area increases volume of runoff and increases the velocity of the water, both of which tend to increase peak flows. However the effect of increased impervious area depends upon its location in the basin and the “connectedness” of the impervious area to the channel (Dawdy, 1990). Runoff from the impervious areas not directly connected to the channel system must flow over pervious areas, and thus contribute less runoff.
2.3.3 Runoff and flooding
In arid and semiarid regions flash floods are caused by high intensity, short duration storms with a high degree of spatial variability. Runoff hydrographs from these storms typically exhibit very short rise times, even for large catchments (Goodrich, et al. 1990).
When the rainfall rate exceeds the infiltration capacity and sufficient water ponds on the surface to overcome surface tension effects and fill small depressions, Hortonian overland flow begins (Woolhiser, et al., 1990). When viewed from a micro-scale over-land flow is a threedimensional process, however, at a larger scale it can be viewed as a one-dimensional flow process in which the flux is proportional to some power of the storage per unit area, as Q=ahm . . .. . .. .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . .. .. . .. .. . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . .. .. . .. . . .. . . .. . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. .. . . . . . ..
where Q is the discharge per unit width, h is the storage of water per unit area (or depth if the surface is a plane), and m are parameters related to slope , surface roughness, and whether the flow is laminar or turbulent. The continuity equation for flow is expressed as
= q(x,t) .. .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . . .. . .. .. . .. . ... .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . ... . .. . .. . .. . .. .
where t is time and, x is the spatial coordinate, and q(x,t) is the lateral inflow rate. Substituting equation into equation the resulting kinematic wave equation for one-dimensional flow on a plane surface (Hortonian overland flow) is
ah I at + amh”-‘ah I & = q(x, t)
...... ... ...... ... ...... ... ...... ... ...... ... ...... ... ...... ... ...... ... ...... ...... (5)
The kinematic assumption requires only that discharge be some unique function of the amount of water stored per unit of area; it does not require sheet flow ( Woolhiser, et a al., 1990). The kinematic wave formulation is an excellent approximation for most overland flow conditions (Woolhiser and Liggett, 1967 and Moms and Woolhiser, 1980). Lane, et al. (1978) studied the partial area response (variable source area response) on small semiarid watersheds. This refers to the response of a watershed when only a portion of the total drainage area is contributing runoff at the watershed outlet or point of interest. The generation of overland flow on portions of small semiarid watersheds was analyzed using three methods: an average loss rate procedure, a lumped-linear model, and a distributed-nonlinear model (kinematic wave). The results showed that significant errors in estimating surface runoff and erosion rates are possible if a watershed is assumed to contribute runoff uniformly over the entire area, when only a portion of the watershed may be contributing.
Floods and channel routing
From a geomorphology viewpoint the response of fluvial systems to flood discharges depends in large part on the amount of time that has passed since the major climatic perturbation switched the mode of operation of hillslopes (midslopes and footslopes) from net aggradation to net degradation ( Bull, 1988). During the early stages of hillslope stripping, the amount of available sediment was so large that intense rainfall-runoff events caused debris flows and accelerated valley floor aggradation. During later stages an opposite result occurs when major rainfall events accelerated the removal of remaining sediment on the hillslopes, thereby causing still larger increases of stream power relative to resisting power. Resulting degradation cuts through the valley fill to bedrock. Unsteady free surface flow in channels can also be represented by the kinematic wave approximation to unsteady, gradually varied flow, given as
. .. .. . .. . .. .. .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. .. .. (6) where A is the cross-sectional area, Q is the channel discharge, and q, (x,t) is the net lateral inflow per unit length of channel. Using the kinematic assumption, Q can be expressed as a unique function of A so that Eq. 6 is
8A / iTit+ (dQ / dA)(iTA / 8x) = q, (x, t)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (7) The kinematic assumption is embodied in the relationship between channel discharge and cross sectional area, is
. .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. .. .. . ..
Where R is the hydraulic radius. If the Manning’s equation is used, CL 1.O S”2 n and m = 5/3. =
Table 2. 3. Recommended Manning’s roughness coefficients for overland Flow (Woolhiser, et al., 1990)
Cover or treatment Residue rate Value recommended Range
tons/acre Concrets or aspalt Bare sand Graveled surface Bare clay loam (eroded) Fallow - no residue Chisel plow 0.011 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.07 0.18 0.30 0.40 0.08 0.16 0.25 0.30 0.04 0.07 0.30 0.10 0.13 0.10 0.45 0.15 0.010 0.010 0.012 0.012 0.006 0.006 0.07 0.19 0.34 0.008 0.10 0.14 0.03 0.01 0.16 0.05 0.01 0.02 0.39 0.10 - 0.013 - 0.016 - 0.03 - 0.033 - 0.16 - 0.17 - 0.34 -0.47 -0.46 - 0.41 -0.25 -0.53 - 0.07 -0.13 - 0.47 -0.13 - 0.32 - 0.24 - 0.63 -0.20
<l/4 l/4 - 1 l-3 >3 <l/4 l/4- 1 l-3 >3 <l/4 l/4- 1 1-3
Moldboard plow (fall) Colter Range (nature) Grass (bluegrass sod) Short grass prairie
Many semiarid and arid watersheds have alluvial channels that abstract large quantities of streamflow referred to as transmission losses (Lane, 1982, 1990; Renard, 1970). These losses are important in the determination of runoff because water is lost as the flood wave travels downstream. The transmission losses are an important part of the water balance because they support riparian vegetation and recharge local aquifers and regional groundwater (Renard, 1970). Procedures to estimate transmission losses range from inflow-rate loss equations, to simple regression equations, to storage -routing as a cascade of leaky reservoirs, and to kinematic wave models incorporating infiltration (Smith, 1972; Wwlhiser, et al., 1990). Stream channels also transport water across alluvial fans from mountain fronts to lower portions of the watersheds. These channels are unstable and are variable in time and space; however they retain their ephemeral character and thus transmission losses can exhibit their influence on flood peaks, water yield, and groundwater recharge just as for ephemeral stream channel networks (Lane, 1990). From the viewpoint of flood routing and transmission losses, the main differences between ephemeral stream channel networks forming the drainage patterns in watersheds and ephemeral channel segments transversing alluvial fans are due to the nature of their structure and linkage (Lane, 1990). In watersheds the channel systems tend to be dendritic with the main channels collecting tributary inflow in the downstream direction. On alluvial fans the channel segments tend to be singular or bifurcating in the downstream direction. On alluvial fans there usually is no tributary inflows; however, channels can split or diverge resulting in tributary outflows in the downstream direction. As pointed out by Lane(l990), in spite of the differences many of the same flow processe s occur in watersheds and on alluvial fans; therefore methods that have been developed to consider streamflow and transmission losses in individual stream channel segments can be applied to both ephemeral streams in watersheds and to ephemeral stream segments transversing alluvial fans. 31
Sheet and rill erosion
Water is the most widespread cause of erosion, which can be classified into sheet erosion and channel erosion. Sheet erosion is the detachment of land surface material by raindrop impact and thawing of frozen grounds and its subsequent removal by overland flow (Shen and Julian, 1993). Transport capacities of thin overland flow or sheet flow, increases with field slope and flow discharge per unit width. As the sheet flow concentrates and the unit discharge increases, the increased sediment transport capacity scours microchannels, also referred to as rills. The till erosion is the removal of soil by concentrated sheet flow. Surface erosion begins when raindrops impact the ground and detach soil particle by splash (Shen and Julien, 1993)
Bennett (1974) presented the following mass balance equation similar to that for kinematic water flow to describe the sediment dynamics at any point along a surface flow path, given as (Wollihiser, et al., 1990)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (9)
in which C, = sediment concentration A= cross-sectional area of flow e = rate of erosion of the soil bed qs = rate of lateral sediment inflow for channels The rate of erosion of the soil bed, e, can be composed of two components: 1) soil erosion by the splash of rainfall on bare soil, gs, and 2) hydraulic erosion (or deposition),g,,. Hydraulic erosion is due to the interplay between the shear force of water on the loose soil bed and the tendency of soil particles to settle under the force of gravity. The total rate of erosion of the soil bed is then expressed as
e=gs+gh Channel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. erosion (10)
Channel erosion includes both bed and bank erosion, which can be very significant in alluvial channels. Sediment transport capacity is generally proportional to the water discharge and channel slope. The sediment transport capacity vanes inversely with the bed sediment size. Lane (1955) proposed the following qualitative 3equilibrium relationship between hydraulic and sediment parameters, QSozQQsd .. . . . . .. . .. . . . .. .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . ... . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. (11)
In which Q is the channel discharge, So is the downstream slope of the channel, Qs is the bed sediment discharge, and d is the bed sediment size. Sediment transport simulation for channels can be nearly the same as for upland areas. The difference is that splash erosion is neglected for channel erosion and the term qs becomes important in representing lateral inflows (Woolhiser, et al., 1990).
Wind erosion can be important in semiarid and arid areas. The rate of wind erosion depends upon the particle size distribution, wind velocity, soil moisture, surface roughness, and vegetative cover. Chepil and Woodruff (1954) proposed an empirical equation for estimating the rate of wind erosion. This equation provides a rough estimate of wind erosion rates.
The physical and climate features as well as the distinguished hydrologic characteristics of arid areas are reviewed and discussed. Alluvial fans, dunes, bedrock fields, desert flats and mountains, and badlands; well dissected - unconsolidated or poorly cemented deposits with sparse vegetation, are the main features of and zone landscapes. Low rainfall, high evaporation rates, and low amounts of vegetation influence the soil characteristics. The soils have low organic matter, an accumulation of salts at the surface, little development of clay minerals, a lowexchange capacity, a dark or reddish wlor due to desert varnish, and little horizon development due to the lack of percolating water. Their formation is dominated by physical disintegration with only slight chemical weathering. Main types of soils include saline soils, saline-alkaline soils, and sodic soils are found in these areas. The specific climate features affect the hydrologic characteristics. The main feature of precipitation is the high variability in time and space of the small amount received. The soils have a very loose surface structure making it susceptible to wind and water erosion. Infiltration is of relatively high rates and variable in space. Flash floods are caused by high intensity, short duration storms with high degree of spatial variability. Runoff hydrographs from these storms typically exhibit very short rise times, even for large catchments. Transmission losses are important in the determination of runoff. Due to the particular properties of flash floods and soils, both sheet and channel erosions as well as wind erosion are important processes in the arid areas, resulting in significant amounts of suspended sediment to be produced and transported with the floods to downstream facilities.
A Woolhiser GNEW, C. AND E. ANDERSON (1992) ‘Water Resources in the And Realm”, Routledge, London. BENNETT, J. P. (1974) “Concepts Of Mathematical Modeling Of Sediment Yield”, Water Resources Research, AGU, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 485492. BULL, W. B. (1988) “Floods, Degradation And Aggradation”, in Flood Geomorphology, ed. by V. R. Baker, R. C. Kochel, P. C. Patton, John Wiley & Sons, New York. CHEPIL, W. S. AND N. P. WOODRUFF (1954) “Estimates Of Wind Erodibility Of Field Surfaces”, J. Soil Water Cons. Vol. 9, No. 6, pp. 257-265. CHOW, V. T., D. R. MAIDMENT, AND L. W. MAYS (1988) “Applied Hydrdogy”, McGraw-Hill, New York. DAWDY, D. R. (1990) “The Sorry State Of The Flood Hydrology In The And Southwest”, in Hydraulics/Hydrology of Arid Lands, ed. by R. H. French, American Society of Civil Engineers, New York. DICK-PEDDIE, W. A. (1991) “Semiarid And Arid Lands: A Worldwide Scope, Semiarid Lands And Deserts”, Soil Resource and Reclamation, edited by J. Skujins, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York. DREGNE, H. E. (1976) “Soils of Arid Regions”, Elsevier, Oxford, 1976. ELGABALY, M. M. (1980) “Problems Of Soils And Salinity”, in Water Management for And Lands in Developing Countries, A. K. Biswas, et al., editors, Pergamon Press, Oxford. FERREIRA, V. (1990) “Temporal Characteristics Of Arid Land Rainfall Events”, in Hydraulics/Hydrology of Arid Lands, ed. by R. H. French, American Society of Civil Engineers, New York. FULLER, W. H. (1974) “Desert Soils”, in Desert Biology, Vol. 2, ed. by G. W. Brown, Academic Press, London. GOODRICH,. D. C., D. A. WOOLHISER, AND C. L. UNKRICH (1990) “Rainfall-Sampling Impacts On Runoff’, in Hydraulics/Hydrology of Arid Lands, ed. by R. H. French, American Society of Civil Engineers, New York. GOUDIE, A. (ed.) (1985) “Encyclopaedic Dictionary Of Physical Geography”, Blackwell, Oxford. HEATHCOTE, R. L. (1983) “The And Lands: Their Use and Abuse”, Longman, London. HILLS, E. S. (1966) “Arid Lands”, Methuen, London. LANE, L. J. (1982) “Distributed Model For Small Semiarid Watersheds”, Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE, Vol.108, No. HYlO, pp. 1114-l 131.
LANE, L. J. (1990) “Transmission Losses, Flood Peaks, And Groundwater Recharge”, in Hydraulics/Hydrology of And Lands, ed. by R. H. French, American Society of Civil Engineers, New York. LANE, L. J., M. H. DISKIN, D. E. WALLACE, AND R. M. DIXON (1978) “Partial Area Response on Small Semiarid Watersheds”, Water Resources Bulletin, AWRA, Vol. 14, No. 5, pp. 1143-l 158. LOGAN, R. F., Causes (1968) “Climates, And Distribution Of Deserts”, in Desert Biology, edited by G. W. Brown, Academic Press, London, pp 21-50. MEIGS, P. (1953), “World Distribution Of Arid And Semi-Arid Homoclimates”, Rev. Res. On And Zone Hydrol., UNESCO, Paris, pp. 203-210. MICHAUD, J., AND S. SOROOSHIAN (1994), “Comparison Of Simple Versus Complex Distributed Runoff Models On A Mid-Sized Semiarid Watershed”, Water Resources Research, AGU, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 593605. MORRIS, E. M. AND D. A. WOOLHISER (1980), “Unsteady One-Dimensional Flow Over A Plane: Partial Equilibrium And Recession Hydrographs”, Water Resources Research, AGU, Vol. 16, No 2, pp. 355360. RAWLS, W. J., D. L. BRAKENSIEK, AND N. MILLER (1983) “Green-An@ Infiltration Parameters From Soils Data”, Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE, Vol. 109, No. 1, pp. 62-70. RENARD, K. G. (1970), “The Hydrology Of Semiarid Rangeland Watersheds”, ARS 41-162, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Washington, D.C.. RUMNEY,, G. R. (1968) “Climatology and the World’s Climates”, Macmillan, New York. SHARON, D. (1972) “The Spottiness Of Rainfall In A Desert Area”, J. Hydrology, Vol. 17, p 161175. SHARON, D. (1981) “The Distribution In Space Of Local Rainfall In The Namib Desert”, J. Climatology, Vol.1, p. 69-75. SHEN, H, W. AND P. Y. JULIEN (1993) “Erosion And Sediment Transport”, in Handbook of Hydrology, edited by D. R. Maidment, McGraw-Hill, New York. SCHICK, A. P. (1979) “Fluvial Processes And Settlement In Arid Environments”, GeoJournal, Vol. 3, p. 351360. SCHICK, A. P. (1988) “Hydologic Aspects Of Floods In Extreme Arid Environments”, in Flood Geomorphology, ed. by V. R. Baker, R. C. Kochel, P.,C. Patton, John Wiley & Sons, New York. SHMIDA, A. (1985) “Biogeography Of The Desert Flora”, in Ecosystems of the World, Vol. 12A, Hot Deserts and Arid Shrublands, edited by M. Evenari, I. Noy-Meir, and D. W. Goodall, Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, pp. 23-77. SLATYER, R. 0. AND J. A. MABBUTT (1964) “Hydrology Of And And Semiarid Regions”, Section 24 in Handbook of Applied Hydrology, edited by V. T. Chow, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York. THOMAS, D. S. (ed.) (1989) “And Zone Geomorphology”, Belhaven Press, London. THOMPSON, R. D. (1975), “The Climatology Of The Arid World”, Paper No. 35, Department of Geography, Reading University. UNESCO (1977) “Map Of The World Distribution Of Arid Regions”, MAB Technical Note 7, Parts. WHITE, I. D., D. N. MOTTERSHEAD, AND S. J. HARRISON (1992) “ Environmental Systems: An Introductory Text”, 2nd edition, Chapman & Hall, London. WOOLHISER, D. A. (1975) “Simulation Of Unsteady Overland Flow’, in Unsteady Flow in Open Channels, Vol. II, edited by K. Mahmood and V. Yevjevich, Water Resources Publications, Fort Collins. WOOLHISER, D. A. AND J. A. LIGGETT (1967) “Unsteady, One-Dimensional Flow Over A Plane-The Rising Hydrograph”, Water Resources Research, AGU, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 753771. WOOLHISER, D. A., R. E. SMITH, AND D. C. GOODRICH, KINEROS (1990) “A Kinematic Runoff And Erosion Model: Documentation And Users Manual”, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, ARS-77.
Chapter 3 Problems of urban drainage in arid and semi-arid regions
The previous chapter reviews the particular characteristics of arid and semi-arid climates. This chapter emphases on the effect of such characteristics on urban drainage. It emphasis on specific problems in urban facilities’ design by traditional methods.
Proper design of urban facilities requires reliable prediction of water quantity and quality. Such prediction needs - among others - information on rainfall, runoff, evaporation, infiltration, sedimentation, and water quality.
3.1 .I. Rainfall
For the purpose of design of urban drainage facilities, a rainfall event should be identified and then used in generating design hydrographs. The rainfall event is either an actual rainfall event or an artificial one. Generally, the former is used when runoff volume is of interest while the latter is used when the peak flow is of prime consideration. The artificial rainfall event is commonly termed as “a design storm” and is determined based on depth-duration-frequency “DDF” analyses of historical data. It is used in the design of the majority of urban drainage facilities. The traditional method of design is to develop DDF curves and then use them to identify the depth of a design storm for a selected duration and a selected return period. This depth is then modified to account for the areal effect on point rainfall. The modified depth is used together with an assumed time distribution of rainfall to determine the design “hyetograph”, which is the prime input to a variety of runoff prediction methods. In arid and semi-arid dimates, problems in the application of the above traditional method of design could include: . In developing DDF curves for historical rainfall records, independent rainstorm events should be available, and thus criterion for the independence should be established. One approach is to perform autocorrelation analyses for various rainstorm durations to determine the time lag between rainfall periods such that there is no significant statistical correlation between them. This approach could not be feasible in most of the world arid areas due to the normal shortage of necessary reliable data.Another approach ( Restrepo -Posada and Eagleson, 1982) is to identify the minimum time interval between two successive rainstorms during which average rainfall is or close to zero (i.e. dry period). According to this approach, tv~ successive rainstorms statistically belong to each other if they are separated by a dry period less than the identified minimum dry period. The two successive rainstorms are statistically independent if they are separated by a dry period equal to or longer than the identified minimum time interval. Based on the assumption that the Poisson process describes the completely random arrivals of storm events, they have established that the intervals (i.e. rainless dry periods) between Poisson arrivals are distributed exponentially. In applying this approach, trial dry period values are assumed, for each individual set of record, and the coefficient of variation of the dry period distribution are accordingly computed. The value of the dry period corresponding to a coefficient of variation equal to unity can therefore be determined and considered as the minimum dry period (i.e. rainless period) necessary to separate any two successive rainstorm events into statistically-independent rainstorm events. A typical example is shown in Fig. 3.1. Analyses of rainstorm events in the southwest region of Saudi Arabia (Nouh, 1987b) have indicated that this minimum dry period necessary is in the order of 5
days. Same analyses of rainstorm events in other arid catchments produced similar results as shown in Table 3.1.
0.9 0 TRIAL
1 1 VALUE
1 2 OF WI~IMUU
1 I 3 TM%
1 4 BEfWEEM
I1 6 STORMS tMVSl
Figure 3.,l . Minimum dry period between successive rainstorms (Abha, Saudi Arabia)
Table 3.1. Minimum dry period between two successive rainstorms
Country Number of Investigated Ftainstorms Minimum Dry Period (Days)
Saudi Arabia Qatar Oman UAE Kuwait Bahrain Yemen
298 118 217 189 112 96 56
5 4 4 5 5 4 4
The traditional DDF analysis is based on the assumption that rainfall depths within a certain duration have variate values which wme from a single probability distribution function, and accordingly the records of rainfall depths are normally fitted to a selected single variate probability distribution function. This assumption may not be valid in some arid catchments where rainfall depths vary significantly with season and may be generated by more than one mechanisms of dimate (Nouh and El-laithy, 1988b). A typical example of this situation is in the southwest region of Saudi Arabia, where rainfall depth is affected by two systems of dimate; the monsoon system during summer and the cyclonic system during winter. Such seasonal rainfall variation is shown in Table 3.2 (Nouh, 1987a) where seasonal maxima were expressed as percentages of the corresponding annual maxima. In this table, M5 refers to the annual maximum rainfall depth with a return period of 5 years and for durations from 10 minutes to 120 minutes. Similarly, MlO, M20, . . . , Ml00 are the same for return periods of 10, 20, . . _, 100 years, respectively. The considered season for summer is from May to October, and that for winter is from November to April. The results of fling rainfall records to various probability distribution functtons in such a case (Nouh, 1987b) have indicated that the rainstorm depth is best described by a mix
of two probability distribution functions (two extreme value type 1 distribution functions for the maximum depth, and TV lognormal probability distribution function for the average depth). The mix of the functions f (x) is described as: f(x)=pf,(x)+(l-p)fz(x), .................................. (1)
where p is the proportion units that have f, (x) variate values which come from a probability distribution function for summer rains, and the remainder “(l-p)” have variate values which wme from another probability distribution function f 2 (x) for winter rains. Table 3.2. Percentage of seasonal to annual rainfall maxima for diierent return periods
M5 percentage I Ml0 percentage Winter 1 Summer 19 29 38 46 56 64 72 86 M20 percentage Winter ~Summer M30 percentage Winter 1 Summer 21 33 43 53 66 81 86 96 M!50 percentage Winter I Summer 16 26 30 36 53 58 70 82 23 34 44 54 66 79 87 98 Ml00 percentage Winter 1Summer I
40 50 60 90 I a0
22 34 54 64 I 88
43 76 97
The procedure of the fitting in such a case. is to split the rainstorm reconds within a duration into two sets: the first set includes the summer rains while the other indudes the winter rains. A best-fitted probability distribution function for each set of records is identified. Then, an optimization methodology can be adopted to determine a proportion units “p.” The methodology changes automatically the value of “p” until1 the standard error, resulting from comparing the observed rainfall depths with the estimated ones, is minimized.
The DDF curves provide a way to estimate the average rainstorm depth for a specified duration and a specified return period over a catchment. The effect of rainfall spatial and temporal variabilities over small size catchments is normally ignored in the traditional method of urban drainage design. However, many investigators have found that the produced runoff from a rainstorm varies with both rainstorm depth and spatial (Schiling, 1983) as well as temporal (Akan and Yen, 1984) variabilities of the rainstorm over the catchment. In arid areas, such variabilities are significant even over small size Neglecting these variablitites can be one important source of errors in catchments. runoff prediction. The depth of rainfall should, therefore, be reduced to account for such high variabilities of rainfall over catchments. The reduction factors are found tc vary with both catchment size and rainfall return period (Nouh, 1991). The following table shows typical results obtained from data analyses in the eastern and western zones of the southwest region of Saudi Arabia (Nouh, 1988~~).
Table 3.3. Areal reduction factors (%) in western and eastern areas in the southwest region for Saudi Arabia
2 5 10 m 9s 7s 1 so 92 7s so la0 93 74 83 48 95 93 *3 Sl 75 1s 8s85UWM SI s8 s8
bW,pIiLld:~ O#lW9priod:~ 2 J IO 30 50 IQ) 2 J 10 38 m 108
%95959595 4797479694 91 41 91 mmb’lomm 878787nr 7070703010 91 91 91 91 90 9s 9999999Bu 8s 9393939393 I 9s 9s 9s 6882828ZPQ 8s 70 91 9393939393 mma*la Y 94 u 95 9s 97 90 93 n
484848474716 83 76 a3 w 83 4943494949
4s 83 74 47
91 94 9(
Traditionally, the return period of the design rainstorm is normally assumed to ,be the same as the return period of the produced runoff. This assumption is proved to be invalid in arid catchments (Nouh, 1990a) where rainstorms as well as various hydrologic abstractions (i.e. evaporation, infiltration, depression storage, . ..etc.) have distinguished characteristics. These characteristics result normally in having return periods of runoff longer than the corresponding return periods of rainstorms. The ratios between the return periods of runoff simulated by the SWMM model and those of the corresponding design rainstorm increase with the increase in the return period, and vary with both catchment The following figures show the trend of such variations and rainstorm characteristics. (Nouh, 1990a). In these figures, A is catchment size, f= is the constant intItration capacity, SRV and TRV are measures of the spatial and temporal variabilities of rainfall over the catchments, respectiiely, and defined as: SRV = A measure of spatial rainfall variation, taken as the ratio of the time-average rainfall intensity of a hyetograph at the center of a rainstorm to the time-average rainfall intensity of the rainstorm over the catchment, TRV = A measure of temporal rainfall variation, taken as the average ratio of time to peak intensity of hyetographs to the total duration of the hyetographs over the catchment, D is total rainfall depth (mm), and P is the average daily variation of temperature over catchments (Co ).
Figure 3.2. Return period ratios for simulated runoff peaks (top) and for simulated runoff volumes (bottom) using different shapes of hyetograph.
The decision on the time distribution of rainfall depth could be another source of runoff prediction in arid dimates. Akan and Yen (1984), among others, have shown that different shapes of hyetographs of same rainfall depth produce different runoff hydrographs. Figures 3.4 & 3.5 show different hyetographs simulated from the same rainfall depth, and the corresponding runoff hydrographs.
sRvpo.2,TRv=o.2 3321 r/hr
l ____ L . . ..a w
PBLIOD O? TRIARGW
Figure 3.3. Effect of catchment, climate and rainfall characteristics on the return period ratios for the simulated peaks (left) and volumes (right)
Analyses of large number of rainstorms in arid climates in the Arabian Gulf Sates (1990b) have indicated that the hetograph in these climates can be reasonably described by the following linear relationships:
ii U)Hpv&t-a),(tl-a) (t) HP e
where HP is the peak intensity from the following Table 3.4. of hetograph,
for 0 S t I a for a 5 t s D .’ .’ .’ .’ .’ . . .’ .. .. .’ . and k and a are parameters
to be determined
For rainstorm return period longer than 5 years, the parameters k and a may be modified as km and am , respectively, as: km = k ( 1 + am=a(
T* + Ck T3 )
; for5ITI ; for5 ~TI
... . . . .
where A, B, and C are coefficients
to be determined from the following Table 3. 5. may be adopted as: ............. ............... (6) (7)
For rainstorm duration more than one hour, further modification km (d) = km ( 1 + 0.268 e-“d ) am(d)=am(1-0.109e-"d) ;forlSdS12 ;forlSdS12
where km (d) and am (d) are the modified parameters km and am , respectively, d hours.
for a duration of
6 IC8-0 hf 8
4 lifaldm Pll#riDbCore*r)
Figure 3.4. Shapes of design hyetographs
3 trBposo~d8l 0 CoDSo*ito -
Y E :: s 0.2 ii
0 0 30 90
Figure 3.5. Simulated runoff hydrographs from different hyetographs
Table 3.4. Average values of k and a ( d < 1 hr and T < 5 yrs)
Location No. Saudi Arabia, Southwest Saudi Arabia, Central Saudi Arabia, Northeast Kuwait Bahrain Oman UAE Qatar 914 175 98 12 48 a 8 Summer Rain& a a 10 12 15 13 12 10 12 ms k 12 10 9 8 9 11 8 10 No. 809 637 514 33 26 29 32 27 wi nter Rainsto a 11 11 15 17 15 IO 8 9 ns k 9 a a ; 9 a 12
Table 3. 5. Coefficients for modifying hyetograph parameters.
Location Summer Rainstorms , Winter Rainstorms (X $5) 0.93, 0.55 0.50, 0.50 1.55, 0.80 1.70, 1.00 2.56, 1.00 2.50, 1.00 1.80, 1.0 6.33, 3.17 4.50, 2.50 1.50, 2.00 1.oo, 2.00 1.75, 0.50 1.50, 0.80 1.50, 0.80 2.50, 0.90 6.50, 1.00 6.00, 1.00 1.50, 0.60 1.50, 0.70 1.50, 0.70
Saudi Arabia, Southwest Saudi Arabia, Central Saudi Arabia, Northeast Kuwait Bahrain Oman UAE Qatar 1.35, 0.67 1.10,0.50 0.85, 0.50 0.90, 1.70, 2.70, 2.50, 0.50 0.80 1.00 1.20 3.47, 1.15 1.05, 0.90 0.65, 0.95 0.70, 0.90 2.50, 0.90 1.55, 0.90 1.50, 1.00
4.77, 2.13 2.15, 1.00 1.50, 0.90 2.00, 3.80, 2.70, 2.50, 0.90 1.40 1.00 1.00
3.1. 2. Evaporation
Because urban drainage deals generally with short duration processes, the evaporation process is normally neglected in the traditional procedure of design. However, in arid climates, the evaporation amount is significant and represent an important rainfall abstraction even during rainstorms duration shorter than 30 minutes (Nouh, 1982, 1987c, 1988a). Thus, neglecting this evaporation amount may result in considerable over-estimation of runoff.
Infiltration is a major rainfall abstraction in and dimates. Its rate is a function of soil permeability and initial soil-moisture content. The estimation of such rate at a time in most cases is guess-work unless site specific inflltrometer results are available. Even at a site at which infiltration tests have been performed, a change in ion concentration due to major rainfall or runoff events or due to some form of surface pollution may alter the soil permeability, and accordingly infiltration parameters drastically. Nouh (1996c) has investigated the effects of changes in the infiltration parameters on runoff prediction in arid catchments. The investigation was based on comparing observed hydrographs with hydrographs simulated by calibrated D& model. In the simulation, three routing methods are considered. These are the characteristics, the explicit and the implicit methods. The results, which are summarized in Fig. 3.6, show that infiltration parameters have significant effects on runoff predicted using any of the routing methods. In the figure, EVC is a soil moisture parameter; BMSN is the available soil water at field capacity; and RR is the proportion of rainfall that infiltrates into the soil. For the purpose of urban drainage design, infiltration is accounted for by one of the following methods:
Use of the infiltration curves that have been proposed by ASCE and WPCF for sandy soils, residential areas, and industrial-commercial areas (ASCE, 1970). These curves have the major drawback of not accounting for soil water storage, which is an important consideration in arid catchments. 1.2 -la -mI iEzzrEI
Figure 3.6. Effect of changes in the infiltration parameters of the D& model on (A) sum of squares of differences between observed and predicted flows; (B) magnitude of peak discharge; and (C) magnitude of runoff volume.
Use of equations describing the infittration process ( e. g. Horton, Green and Ampt, Phillip,. . .etc). A review of these equations can be found elsewhere (Viessman et al., realistically to determine. Use of the SCS procedure (USDA, 1975). In this method, the initial soil abstraction is assumed to be equal to 0.20 times the catchment storage. This assumption is proved to be invalid in and climates (Nouh et al., 1988b). It has been found (Nouh et al., 1988b) that the initial abstraction is within the range of 0.25 and 0.40 times the and catchment storage. Due to the high spatial variation in soil parameters, even with the use of a calibrated value for the initial abstraction, significant prediction error ‘PE (defined as the ratio of the difference between observed and predicted peak discharge to the observed peak discharge) have been identified (Nouh, 1988c). Table 3.6 show
typical results in some arid catchments in Saudi Arabia. It can be seen that PE increases as catchment size and/or as return period of predicted flow increases. In addition to the above difficutties in determining the infiltration in arid catchments, there are the problem of recovery and the problem of high temporal and spatial variabilities of infiltration capacity. The former problem arises when rainfall ceases and there is a recovery of infiltration capacity with time. The extent of recovery at any point in time depends on the dryness of the period. Although this condition is recognized in the SWMM continuous simulation model, the results of the simulation model in extremely and catchments have been found to be less than satisfactory (Nouh et al., 1988b). The latter problem of the high variability of infiltration may be overcome by subdividing the total catchment into components, each has an approximately uniform soil and cover properties, and then deal with each subdivision independently. The results of this approach suggest further development in reasonably determining the infiltration in arid catchments. Table 3.6. Prediction error “PE” (%) for different flow return periods
tion Size of drainage basin: km2 80 120 1200 2671 4713 33000 Return period af prediction flood flow : years Mean predictions error : % 26.92 29.97 31.03 36.63 36.83 41.78
2 21.5 23.0 23.0 31.4 35.0 37.0
3 23.0 26.7 27.5 33.6 36.0 41.5
5 26.8 30.2 31.7 35.7 36.5 42.5
Climate in arid areas affect the concentration of sediments in runoff. The high temperature and low humidity and their large daily variations destruct the soils from pervious surfaces and provide loose materials to be carried with flash stonnwater to the drainage system. In addition, dust, dirt, sediments carried with sandstorms and pollutants of various kinds, settled from the atmosphere and generated by urban activities, accumulate on the impervious surfaces during the long rainless period and are eventually washed off by the flash runoff during the rainstorms. These mechanisms result in large amounts of sediments to be transported to the various elements of drainage systems. The transported sediments create one or more of the following two major problems in the design of urban facilities: l Decrease of accuracy in routing the flow through the various drainage system components (Nouh, 1996e). The main reason is that the common routing models assume clear-water flow. This assumption is not realistic due to the large amount of suspended sediments carried by the flow. The flows in fact could be described as sediment-laden flows or hyperconcentrated flows, which have characteristics different from those of dear-water flows (Nouh, 1989, 199od). Generally, dynamic viscosity as well as friction slope change with the change of suspended sediment concentrations. Recalling the relative dynamic viscosity as the ratio between the dynamic viscosity in flow with sediment (i.e. hyperconcentrated or sediment-laden flow) and the dynamic viscosity in dear-water flow, Fig. 3.7 shows such changes with mean suspended sediment concentration. l Partial or full blockage of sewers due to settlement of large amounts of sediments during the rapid recession of hydrographs, and then the consolidation of such sediments during the long dry period “rainless” between successive rainstorms. Such blockage leads to formation of street lakes, which cause many environmental hazards (Fig. 3.8).
Figure 3.7. Variation of viscosity and friction slope with suspended sediment concentrations
Figure 3.8 Formation of Street Lakes Due to Drainage Sewer Blockage
3. 1. 5. Water quality
Stormwater quality in arid climates is mainly affected by suspended sediments transported with flash floods. The sediments may be originated from soil erosion during rainfall events and/or from duststorms that normally exist in and climates. The amount of soil erosion depends on local conditions; such as degree of urbanization, type of land use, densities of automobile traffic and animal populations, and rainstorm characteristics. The effect of
various factors on soil erosions and accompanied transported pollutants can be found elsewhere (Foster et al., 1974; Wischmeier et al., 1978; McElroy et al. 1976). Duststorms also play important role in the transportation of suspended sediments and pollutants in stormwater runoff. Recent investigations (Nouh, 1998a) have shown that the increase in the concentrations of total suspended particulate matter “TSP” in the air increases the concentrations of suspended sediment “c” in sewer flows (Figs.3.9 & 3.10). In addition, both the spatial and temporal variations, measured by the coefficient of variation and the coefficient of kurtosis, of a duststorm have significant effect on the concentrations “c” (see Figs. 3.11 & 3.12). Another investigations (Nouh, 1998b) have shown that both the duststorm mean concentration of TSP and its spatial and temporal variabilities have considerable effect on the concentrations of pollutants in the stormwater runoff (see Figs 3.13, 3.14, 3.15).
CONCENTRATION OF TSP, u&urn
Figure 3.9. Variation of mean TSP s concentrations with mean C in sewer flows
Figure 3. 10. Variation of maximum TSP with maximum C in sewer flows.
OF VARL%TlON OF DUSEXORM
Figure 3. 11. Effect of spatial variation of duststorm on C in sewer flows
Figure 3. 12. Effect of temporal variation of duststorm on C in sewer flows.
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
TSP CONCENTRATION (ug/cu.m)
Figure 3. 13. Influence of mean concentration of TSP (mg/m” ) on mean concentration of pollutants (mg/l) in stormwater runoff.
j-DC +“‘$I &Pb*ld
“ARRIATION OF D”S,-STORM
Figure 3.14. Influence of duststorm coefficient of variation on concentration of pollutants (mg/l) in stormwater runoff
Figure 3.15. Influence of duststorm coefficient of kurtosis on concentration of pollutants (mg/l) in stormwater runoff.
A recent study (Nouh, 1997) has indicated that the concentrations of pollutants in stormwater runoff can be predicted from a regression type relationships as:
. . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . .
where C is the mean concentration of suspended sediments (gpl); q is the stormwater runoff depth over catchment (mm); S is the total suspended particulate matter concentration averaged over the catchment (@ m’); h, a, 6, a and b are regression parameters to be determined. The subscript d refers to a division range of suspended sediment diameters. The regression parameters together with their statistical inferences are given in Tables 3.7 to 3.9. The tables indicate that the suspended sediment concentrations in the stormwater runoff are affected by the characteristics of both flash floods and duststorms over catchments. Although the effect of flash floods is more signiffcant than that of duststorms, the influence of duststorms on suspended sediments and pollutants transport can not be ignored. This observation is absolutely valid especially in developing areas.
3. 2. Maintenance,
Generally, maintenance is required from time to time to protect the integrity of drainage facilities. The maintenance intends to resolve problems mainly generated by erosion, sedimentation, and accumulation of leaves and trash in a drainage system. Due to the distinguished climate characteristics in and areas, maintenance in and catchments should be Normally, made more frequent than that in similar catchments in non-arid areas. maintenance in non-arid catchments is made once a year or after a major rainstorm. In and catchments, the maintenance should be made after each rainstorm (I.e. 3 to 4 times yearly). Extreme fluctuations in temperature, high nocturnal and low diurnal humidity, and violent solar action that normally exist in arid areas cause chemical changes in certain soil elements, frequently resulting in the breakdown of rocks and disintegration of soils. The broken rocks and the disintegrated soils furnish the flash intense rainfall with large amounts of solids to be carried downstream. These solids size varies from very fine sediment to large boulder (Fig. 3.16).
Figure 3. 16. Sediments of varying size transport to drainage facilities
Table 3.7. Regression parameters for mean concentration of suspended sediments.
d > 0.20 0.20 2 d > 0.06 0.06 2 d > 0.02 0.02 2 d > 0.002 0.002 2 d
h (lower, upper) 23.3( 19.6,27.4) 37.6(3 1.4,43.8) 5 1.3(48.6,55.2) 67.4(63.7,74.8) 73.6c184.108.40.206)
al (lower, upper) -1.43(-l .49, -1.38) -1.41(-1.43, -1.32) -1.53(-1.62, -1.39)
-1.71(-1.89, -1.59) -1.74(-1.91, -1.62)
p1 (lower, upper) 0.53(0.49,0.58) 0.67(0.61,0.72) 0.73(0.61,0.82) 0.92(0.88, 1.03) 0.93cO.8 1.0.98)
a2 (lower, upper) 3.62 (3.11,3.94) 4.26 (3.91,4.72) 4.93 (4.28, 5.61) 5.27 (4.87, 5.63) 6.47 (220.127.116.11)
f32(lower, upper) 0.033(-0.008, 0.041) 0.043 (0.037,0.050) 0.053 (0.042, 0.061) 0.078 (0.071, 0.087) 0.082 (0.069.0.093)
R’ 0.76 0.81 0.83 0.88 0.87
Ir 0.103 0.101 0.092 0.087 0.083
Table 3. 8. Regression parameters for heavy metals concentrations.
d (mm> d > 0.20 0.20 2 d > 0.06 0.06 2 d > 0.02 0.02 r d > 0.002 0.002 2 d
Copper “Cu” r a b 0.032 0.046 0.89 0.042 0.057 0.88 0.776 0.093 0.89 0.916 0.153 0.96 0.103 0.196 0.93
Lead “Pb” b a 0.007 0.051 0.009 0.063 0.005 0.096 0.006 0.162 0.011 0.123
r 0.62 0.63 0.69 0.86 0.77
Nickel “Ni” a b 0.056 0.009 0.062 0.031 0.091 0.053 0.072. 0.096 0.083 0.104
r 0.39 0.57 0.59 0.64 0.69
Zinc “Zn” a b 0.033 0.106 0.029 0.098 0.045 0.102 0.061 0.120 0.097 0.155
r 0.71 0.73 0.78 0.86 0.85
a 0.089 0.097 0.107 0.126 0.133
Iron “Fe” b 0.117 0.103 0.125 0.216 0.238
r 0.78 0.81 0.81 0.87 0.91
Table 3.9. Accuracy of performance of the regression equations.
d > 0.20 0.20 2 d > 0.06 0.06 2 d > 0.02 0.02 r d > 0.002 0.002 2 d
Rat Dev 1.08 0.24 1.06 0.22 0.92 0.20 0.96 0.16 0.98 0.11
Abs 18 16 11 9 6
Copper “Cu” Rat Dev Abs 1.12 0.19 11 1.13 0.13 15 1.08 0.12 12 0.96 0.10 9 0.97 0.15 7
Lead “Pb” Rat Dev Abs 1.26 0.33 26 1.17 0.29 30 1.12 0.23 34 0.87 0.22 19 0.88 0.27 25
Nickel “Ni” Rat Dev Abs 1.26 0.66 59 1.36 0.51 53 1.28 0.47 47 1.94 0.45 42 1.96 0.46 38
Zinc “Zn” Rat Dev 1.18 0.29 1.12 0.22 0.92 0.23 0.96 0.21 0.94 0.19
Abs 23 22 19 18 20
Iron “Fe” Rat Dev 1.14 0.24 1.08 0.23 1.04 0.21 0.96 0.19 0.98 0.16
Abs 19 17 15 15 13
In addition, because hyetographs as well as resulting hydrographs are characterized by sharp rise, slide of embankments does normally exist with large amount of sediment transport to the drainage facilities. Rainfall has normally significant impact on the movement of slide materials, through surface erosion and mass washing events - sediment slumping and sliding. In these cases, two types of solids can be produced and transported to the drainage facilities: the suspended fraction of silt, and the coarser materials that are rolled down along the slope. The removal of fine-grained soils from the slopes allows the rainwater to enter tissues and fractures, while the movement of huge boulders on the slopes increases the voids in the soils. The water filling of the generated tissues and fractures in addition to the rise in groundwater levels during the heavy rainfalls result in high pore water pressure that reduce the soil shear strength and its slope stability, leading to serious landslides. Fig. 3.17 shows typical examples of such landslide. Details of these problems are reported elsewhere (Nouh and El-Laithv. 1988b 1.
Figure 3. 17. Typical Landslides in And Climates In addition to the above, and as previously mentioned, the arid climate is normally characterized by existence of duststorms, which cause considerable amount of solids to be suspended in atmosphere and to settle on land surfaces. The amount of these suspended solids in atmosphere can be in the order of 10 times more than that in areas of insignificant duststorms. As rainfall moves through the atmosphere it washes out the suspended solids and carries them to the land surface. Upon reaching the ground it will dislodge some particles
(mostly soil on pervious surfaces, and wide variety of settled solids and debris on impervious surfaces) and dissolve other materials. The produced stormwater runoff carries the particles dislodged by initial precipitation impact, other particles dislodged by the movement of the runoff itself, and a variety of dislodged materials to the drainage system. The result is the transport of considerable amounts of sediments to the drainage system. The long dry period between two successive rainstorms assist in accumulating large quantity of sediments settled from atmosphere, leaves and trash, . ..miscellaneous rubbish on the land surface to be washed by the flash floods to the drainage facilities, causing serious operation management problems. Normal practice in arid climates include: . Embankment and slopes protection against sliding may be by placing granular materials and/or planting grass cover on the slopes. . Retardation of sheet erosion by using grass cover plantation and/or riprap placement on the surface. . lnstallment of concrete sediment racks in the detention basin to avoid the transport of debris and boulders. The area of the rack should be large enough to hold up quite a large mass of material without impeding the flow of water. . lnstallment of trash racks to hold rubbish, papers, leaves, etc. Routine maintenance in such climates should include after each rainstorm checking the embankrnents and repair the damages, checking the concrete and metal components of the drainage system and make necessary restoration, clean both the concrete sediment racks and trash racks, and clean the settled sediments and the rubbish materials from the streets.
3. 3 Data acquisition
Acquisition of reliable data in and climates requires sophisticated sampling program due to the following factors: 1. The random nature of stormwater runoff 2. The short duration and high rise of both hyetographs and hydrographs 3. The high spatial variation of catchment parameters 4. The high spatial and temporal variations of rainfall and stormwater runoff 5. The high concentration of sediments in the stormwater 6. The long dry period between two successive rainstorms The random nature of stormwater runoff and the high spatial variations of rainfall, runoff, and catchment parameters need large amount of reliable data in order to properly describe the distribution of water quality and quantity. The high temporal variation does not allow reliable data to be sampled manually. The high concentration of sediments in the stormwater imposes limitations on the use of some sampling equipment and on the implementation of common stormwater runoff models in stonnwater simulation. The long dry period between two successive rainstorms allows settlement of large amounts of sediments and accumulation of rubbish materials on the catchment surface, which impose further limitations on data sampled by common methods. Considering the above factors, successful sampling can be done as in the following: Water aualitv measurements: Due to the short duration hyetogmohs, especially in small size catchments, peak loading of pollutants borne by stormwater takes place before personnel are able to occupy sites and start manual sampling. So, automatic sampling can only provide reliable data. A series of flow measurements and samples are collected at the same time of the measurements during the runoff event monitored. The time between two successive samples is as short as 5 minutes. Laboratory analyses of the collected samples can then be made. Based on the measurements and the laboratory analyses, the runoff hydrograph and a curve of pollution loading as a function of time may be plotted. The area under the curve gives a good estimate of the total pollution load for the event. This method is expensive, but provide reliable information on either the total loading or the mean loading (concentration) of pollution.
Flow measurements: Many methods are generally used to measure stormwater flows. These include Current meter, Flumes, Weirs, Float velocity, and Tracer dilution. Analyses of the majority of these methods are given elsewhere (Grant, 1979). In arid climates, because of the previously explained distinguished characteristics, the use of a flume is found to be the most suited one (Nouh, 1988b). However, it requires continues cleaning, especially from sediment and rubbish settlement. Rainfall measurements: There are several rainfall measurement devices availabte for runoff study. Measurement techniques include sight gages, weighing and counting tips of a balanced duel cell bucket. In arid climates, reliable rainfall measurements may be taken by using automatic gages. It is recommended to have a rain gage every 10 km* of catchment. For catchments of large topographical variations, the rainfall gage should cover an area of catchment as small as 5 km’ (Nouh, 1988b).
As it has been indicated earlier that stormwater flows in arid climates are normally accompanied by transport of large amount of suspended sediments. The flow properties in these situations are different from the properties of clear-water (i.e. clear water free of sediment) which are commonly assumed to be in most urban drainage models. The anticipated predicted results are hydrographs of .low (may be unacceptable) accuracy. It has been found (Nouh, 1987d) that the increase in suspended sediment concentrations in the stormwater runoff decreases the channel friction slope “Sr”, which is basically used in the runoff prediction by common urban drainage, models. The decrease in the friction slope “A St ” due to a concentration of suspended sediment in the flow is expressed relative to the friction slope ‘Sr y (evaluated using a calibrated Manning’s coefficient for clear water) and plotted against the sediment concentration in Fig. 3.18. It can be seen that the decrease in the friction slope can be as much as 20% of its clear water value if the concentration of suspended sediment in the flow is as high as 40 gpl.
2’. gpl .
Figure 3.18. Percent decrease in friction slope with increase in suspended sediment concentrations
The deficiency of urban drainage models in predicting stormwater runoff is demonstrated through the use of SWMM in two urban catchments of diierent size in the southwest region of Saudi Arabia ( Nouh, 19874 ). The catchments are of similar properties and have almost the same rainfall characteristics. However, the smaller size “RABHA” is of area equal to 1430 x 1O4m* , whereas the larger size “AI-DAWAL” is of area equal to 3718 x 10” m* . The SWMM was used to predict peak flow, time to peak flow, and volume of runoff hydrograph. The prediction was made twice; the first prediction was made according to the common procedure
using E+ evaluated as if the water free of sediments (i.e. dear-water flow), whereas the second prediction was made with S modified according to the concentrations of suspended sediments in the flows (i.e. using Fig. 3.18). The two predictions were compared with the corresponding measured quantiiies and the results are shown in Fig. 3.19. Similar results were obtained by using ILLUDAS and UCUR models (Shaheen et al. 1998).
D 5 Figure 3. 19. Measured and predicted hydrographs in two arid catchments It is apparent that the consideration of suspended sediment concentrations in the stormwater runoff is a key issue in the process runoff prediction by common models.
with other urban water systems
Generally, stormwater runoff interacts with other urban water systems. If properly collected, it can be a measure for environment protection and a source for fresh water to cover significant part of the water supply shortages that are expected to be faced in many countries in the years to come. Fig. 3.20 Shows the world water shortages in 2025 (Seckler, 1999). This role of stormwater runoff is dearly noticeable in arid climates, where renewable fresh water supply is insufficient to meet urban demand. Considering the Arabian Gulf States, as countries of typical arid climates, severe water shortages would be faced. This will require that almost all-fresh water resources be allocated for domestic consumption or other municipal and industrial purposes. While Kuwait and Qatar face this problem today, within a 25year period countries such as Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates will have from their current renewable natural water reserves (without desalination) just about the limit of what is needed for survival, with no fresh water available for agriculture. It is estimated that the available quantity of water from natural renewable sources, excluding desalination in the year 2025 will range from 10 to 20 m3 /person/year. The actual domestic water consumption required in a modem home with indoor plumbing, hot and cold running water and minimal household equipment such as a washing machine ranges from 35 to 70 m3 /person/year. The expected population growth together with water supply and demand in some of the Arabian Gulf States are shown in Table 3.10.
wat8r water scarcRy rcuctly
cl chup group watar
2 - economk 3 - modemte devrtopmaat
‘$!j$! Not estimated n
1WMl Indicator of Relative Water Scarcity
Figure 3. 20. World water shortages in 2025 (after Seckler, 1999)
Table 3. 10. Water supply and demand in some of the Arabian Gulf States Per capita water withdrawat(cu. m) Country Popuiation lndustlial 2025 DomastIc 1990 Millions x 2025 1990 2025 1999 increase from 1990
Arabia UAE Kuwait Oman
742 212 677 [
478 106 452
prgure 3.21. c;onstruct1on aamages due to tloods(southwest of Saudi Arabia) In almost all these states, treated wastewater supplied for domestic, urban, an industrial use can often generate the only significant and sustainable source of water resources for agriculture, industrial and urban non-potable purposes. Desalinated seawater, estimated to wst about $1.00 /m3 or more, will not normally be economically feasible for agriculture use. The capital investment in sewerage infrastructure is high, in the order of $300-$5OO/person. However, under certain conditions, a high level of wastewater collection and treatment is essential to protect the public health and to prevent environmental pollution. Thus, the additional marginal cost of treatment, storage and conveyance of purified wastewater required for unrestricted agricultural reuse, meeting strict WHO health criteria, till be only a fraction of
the total wastewater treatment and disposal cost or about US$ 0.10 out of a total of US$ 0.35/m3 . Recycling of wastewater can have the multiple benefit of protecting the environment and serving as a major source of water and nutrients for the soil. Some of the Arabian Gulf States (UAE included) have embarked on successful wastewater recycling programs. On the &her hand, the rare flash floods that are generated from intensive rainstorms in these satates, have significant economic and environmental impacts. The floods, if properly managed, can be significant fresh water source instead of being a source of public inconvenience and serious environmental impacts. Fig. 3.21. Shows construction damages due to flash floods in the southwest region of Saudi Arabia (Nouh et al. 1988b). Recent investigations (Zuhair et al. 1999) have shown that proper harvesting of flash floods in the places of severe water shortages in the Arabian Gulf States can secure a significant fresh water quantii as in the following. Kuwait: 12% of water demand for agriculture; Oman (Muscat): 27% of water demand for industry; UAE (Al-Ain): 16% of water demand for agriculture; and Saudi Arabia (Abha): 11% of water demand for industry and landscape irrigation. These results confirm the strong interaction of stormwater runoff with other urban water systems.
This chapter discusses specific problems arise from the design of urban facilities by traditional methods in arid and semi-arid areas. The problems are originated from the fact that the distinguished climatic characteristics in arid and semi-arid areas are different from those in other climates, where the traditional methods of design are developed and practiced. In arid and semi-arid areas, rainfall amounts are small with high seasonal variations. So, utilizing a mix of two probability distribution functions to model rainfall depth could be more appropriate than using a probability distribution function to model the same. In addition, the rainfall has high spatial and temporal variations, even over catchments as small as 5 km* , so accounting for these variability are seriously needed. This chapter proposes a reduction of the rainfall amount by a factor, which has been found to depend on catchment size and on rainfall return period. On the other hand, the return period of simulated runoff hydrographs has been found to be significantly diierent from that of design rainstorm. This chapter proposes a methodology to realistically identify the design hyetograph and to estimate the runoff return period from a given return period of rainstorm. Evaporation and infiltration are found to be important hydrologic abstractions even during the short duration of runoff. Evaporation is subject to high ddly as well as seasonal variations. The infittration is subject to high spatial and temporal variations. Realistic consideration of evaporation and infiltration in the urban runoff prediction by tradiional methods is not available at present, so this chapter suggests further developments to be made to reasonably determine the infiltration in and and semi-arid catchments. Sedimentation is another important factor affecting runoff hydrograph and its quality. Transported suspended sediments, generated from soil erosion and from particles deposited from heavy duststorms, affect the physical properties of water and thus results in deweasing the accuracy of available flow routing models. The transported sediment results in sewer blockage, and requires careful drainage system maintenance program. This chapter a methodology is presented to predict the concentration of suspended sediments in sewer flow, and also to predict the effect of such concentrations on the chemical constiiuents in the flow. Due to the above limitations of the existing tradiional methods, further research in the prediction of runoff in and and semi-arid climates is recommended.
AMERICAN SOCIETY OF ClVlL ENGINEERS AND WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FEDERATION (1970) “Design and Construction of Saniiry and Storm Sewers,” Manual of Practice, No. 9, Water Pollution Control Federation, New York. Al&N, A. 0. AND YEN, 8. C. (1980) “Effect Of Time Distribution Of Rainfall On Overland Runoff,” Proceedings, 3ti International Conference on Urban Storm Drainage, IAHRIIAWPRC, Goteborg, June 1984, pp. 193-202.
FOSTER, G. R., WISCHMEIER, W. H. (1974) “Evaluating Irregular Slopes For Soil Loss Prediction,” Transactions of ASCE, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 305309. GRANT, D. M. (1979) “Open Channel Flow Measurements Handbook,” Instrumentation specialties Co., Lincoln, Nebr. RESTREPO-POSADA, P. J. AND EAGLESON, P. S. (1982) ‘Identification Of Independent Rainstorms,” Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 55, pp. 303-319. MCELROY, A. D. ET AL. (1976) “Loading Functions For Assessment Of Water Pollution From Nonpoint Sources, y EPA-600/2-76-151, U.S.EPA, Washington D. C. NOUH, M., (1982), ” On The Uses Of Minicomputers For Identification Of Nonlinear Surface Runoff Systems,” Int. J. of Control and Computers, Int. Assoc. of Sc. & Tech. for Development, Publisher: ACTA Press, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 1521. NOUH, M. (1987a), “Analysis Of Rainfall In The Southwest Region Of Saudi Arabia,” Proceedings, Institution of Civil Engineers, Part 2, Vol. 83, pp. 339349. NOUH, M. (1987b), “Point Rainfall Distribution In The Southwest Of Saudi Arabia,” Journal of Engineering Sciences, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 85106. NOUH, M. (1987c), ” Effect Of Rainfall Runoff Model Assumptions On Optimal Storm Sewer System Design,” Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, Publisher: John WI@ & Sons Ltd, Volume 12, Number 1, pp. 19-35. NOUH, M. (1987d), “Effect Of Very Large Sediment Concentrations On Highway Sewer Flows,” the 4th International Conference on Urban Storm Drainage and the XXII Congress of the International Association for Hydraulic Research, The International Association for Hydraulic Research and the lntemational Association of Water Pollution Research and Control, Laussane, !%tzerland, pp. 343348. NOUH, M. (1988a), ” Estimate Of Floods In Saudi Arabia Derived From Regional Equations,” Journal of Engineering SSciences, Publisher: John Wiley & Sons, Volume 14, Number 1, pp. l-26. NOUH, M. AND EL-LAITHY, A. (1988b), “Construction Damages Due to Floods in Wadi Addilah,” Find Technicd Report Prepared on the Saudi Arabian National Water Research Project Number AR-562 for the King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 212~. NOUH, M. (1988c), ” On The Prediction Of Flood Frequency In Saudi Arabia,” Proceeding of the lnstiiution of Civil Engineers of UK, Part 2, Publisher: Thomas Telford Ltd, Volume 85, pp. 121-144. NOUH, M. (1989) “The Von-Karman @efficient In Sediment Laden Flow,” Journal of Hydraulic Research, The International Association for Hydraulic Research, Volume 27, Number 4, pp. 477499. NOUH, M. (1990a), ” Relationships For Return Periods Between Design Storms And Simulated Runoff In Urban And Catchments,” the International Conference on Urban Storm Drainage, The International Association for Hydraulic Research/The International Association of Water Poflution Research and Control, Suita, Osaka, Japan, July, pp. 1137-l 142. NOUH, M. (1996b), “Design Hyetographs For Arabian Gulf States,” Seventh Congress of the Asian -and Pacific Regional Diiision,The International Association for Hydraulic Research, Beijing, China, November, pp. 317-326. NOUH, M. (199(k), ” Calibration And Verification Of The DR3 Model In Arid Watersheds,” the lnternationd Symposium on the Hydrological Basis for Water Resources Management, The International Association of Hydrological Sciences, Beijing, China, October 1999, Paper B19, IAHS Publication No. 199, pp. 67-77. NOUH, M. (199Od), “Reliability Of Experimental And Numerical Methods Of HyperConcentrated, Sediment-Laden, And Clear-Water Flood Flow Routing,” the International Conference on Physical Modeling of Transport and Dispersion, The International Association for Hydraulic Research/ The American Society of Civil Engineers, Massachusetts institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, August, pp. 14B.l-148.6. NOUH, M. (199Oe), “Hyperconcentrated, Sediment-Laden, And Clear-Water Flow Routing Using Numerical Methods,” Int. Conference on River Flood Hydraulics, IAHR/ Wallingford Hydraulic Research, Wallingford, England, September, pp. 359-368. NOUH, M. (199Of)“Relationships For Return Periods Betwen Design Storms And Simulated Runoff In Urban Arid Catchments,” the lnternational Conference on Urban Storm Drainage, The International Association for Hydraulic Research/The International
Association of Water Pollution Research and Control, Suita, Osaka, Japan, July, pp. 1137-1142. NOUH, M. (1991) “Urban Drainage In Arid Climates,” Invited Paper, Proceedings (Supplements Volume), The International Conference on Urban Drainage and New Technologies. UNESCO/ IAHR, Dubrovnik, Former Yugoslavia, June, pp. 8893. NOUH, M. (1998a), “Effect Of Duststorms On Sediment Concentrations In Sewer Flows In An Arid Catchment,” 7th International Conference on Urban Storm Drainage, IAHR/IAWPRC, Hannover Germany 9-l 3 September, pp. 212-224. NOUH, M. (19986) “Influence Of Duststorms On Stormwater Runoff Quality,” 3rd International Conference on Environmemal Pollution, European Center for Pollution Research / UNESCO, Budapest, 1519 April, Vol. 1, pp. -357. NOUH, M. (1997) “Regression Analyses Of Heavy Metal Concentrations In Urban Flash Floods,” 3rd International Conference on Flow Regimes from International Experimental and Network Data, IAHSIUNESCOMIHO, Slovenia l-4 October. SCHILING, W. (1983)” Effect Of Spatial Rainfall Distribution On Sewer Flows,” Proceedings, Seminar on Rainfall as the Basis for Urban Runoff Design and Analysis, Copenhagen, August, pp. 177-188. SECKLER, D. (1999) Water For Foods In 2925: The Major Issues,” Newsflow, No. 2/99, IWMI. SHAHEEN, S., NOUH, M., AL-NASRIRY, A. (1998),“Prediction Of Stormwater Runoff In Arid Catchments,” Journal of Water Resources Engineering, Vd. 13, No. 4, pp. 18-32. VIESSMAN, W., LEWIS, G., AND KNAPP, J. (1989) ‘Introduction To Hydrology,” Harper & Row, Publishers, New York. USDA, SOIL CONSERVATION SERVlCE (1975) “Urban Hydrology For Small Watershed,” Technical Release 55, Washington D. C. WISCHMEIER, W. H., AND SMITH, D. D. (1978) “Predicting Rainfall Erosion Losses: A Guide To Conservation Planning,” USDA Agricultural Handbook No. 537. ZUHAIR, A., NOUH, M., EL-SAYED, M. (1999) “Flood Harvesting In Selected Arab States, ” Final Report No. M31/99, Institute of Water Resources, 217~.
of urban drainage
This chapter deals with the various factors affecting runoff prediction and design of urban facilities. Common methods of estimating design rainfall and runoff are reviewed and discussed.
4.1 Effects of urbanisation
Urbanisation causes changes in catchment hydrdogy due to the increase in the impervious area and the reduction in catchment storages as waterways become channeled and piped. The effects of urbanisation on runoff can be summarised in terms of the following changes to the characteristics of runoff hydrographs from a developing catchment (see Figure 4.1) l increased peak discharges and runoff volumes l decreased time of concentration l increased frequency and severity of flooding l urban waterways altered from an ephemeral system to a perennial system. Stormwater runoff volumes in urban areas are considerably higher than runoff volumes in nonurban areas because impervious surfaces such as paved roads, parking lots and roofs prevent rainfall from infiltrating into the ground. The runoff coefficient of directly connected impervious surfaces is about 0.9 (some of the rainfall is loss to surface pores and depressions) while the runoff coefficient in non-urban areas varies from less than 0.1 in arid areas to greater than 0.3 in temperate and wet areas. The effect of urbanisation on runoff volumes is therefore greater in arid areas than in non-arid areas because the increase in runoff coefficient as a result of urbanisation is greater in and areas. The example in Table 4.1 shows that urbanisation can increase the annual runoff in arid and semi-and areas by more than four times.
higher peak discharge
less gradual Pat urban-development
bigger runoff I’ \ volumes / :
Figure 4.1 Effect of urbanisation on the characteristics of runoff hydrograph (adapted from Schueler, 1987) Peak flow rates in urban areas are also much higher than in non-urban areas because of higher runoff vdumes and shorter times of concentration. The higher flow velocities result from the increase in the amount of impervious surfaces which are smoother than surfaces in rural catchments, and from
natural streams being straightened and lined with concrete to move stormwater away from built-up areas. As urbanisation results in a decrease in the time of concentration, the catchment response to rainfall becomes more sensitive to the high rainfall intensities and short duration events. The effect of catchment urbanisation on peak discharges can thus be expected to be more pronounced for regions with IFD relationships that are highly skewed (see Section 4.2). Table 4.1 Example calculation of post-urban and pm-urban mean annual runoff volumes in a semi-arid area Mean annual rainfall = 300 mm Impervious area runoff coeffident = 0.9 Pervious area runoff coefficient = 0.1 Urban catchment Fraction impervious = 0.4 Impervious area runoff = 0.4 x 0.9 x 300 = 108 mm Pervious area runoff =0.6x0.1x300=18mm Total runoff = 126 mm Rural catchment Fraction impervious = 0.0 Impervious area runoff =Omm Pervious area runoff = 1.0x0.1x300=30mm Total runoff = 30 mm
The peak flow rates for the more frequent storms (more than once a year) in urban areas can be more than 100 times higher than in non-urban areas (see Figure 4.2). In the extreme events (1 in 50 or 1 in 100 years), the peak flow rates in urban and non-urban areas are more similar because in extreme events the saturated pervious surfaces behave more like the impervious surfaces. It is therefore wmmon for flash floods to occur in urban catchments, particularly in areas where the drainage systems are not designed adequately. The changes in catchment hydrology as a result of urbanisation have a direct impact on the aquatic ecosystem, most notably the loss of aquatic habitats and biodiversity due to poor stormwater quality and increased frequency and severity of habitat disturbances. Vegetation removal in urban areas can also accelerate streambank erosion.
4.2 Estimation 4.2.1
The concept of a design event is used in designing urban stormwater projects, like the sizing of pipes in drainage systems. For economic reasons, some risk of failure is allowed for in the design. The considerations that are taken into account in selecting an appropriate design standard for hydraulic structures may include the operation of the structure during above-design events, the consequences of above-design events (in terms of public safety, disruption to services, flood damages and environmental impacts) and the frequency of above-design occurrences. Implicit in the adoption of a probabilistic approach to selecting a design standard is the concept of designing a structure for a given risk of “failure”, or perhaps more appropriately, risk of above-design operating conditions. The terms “recurrence interval” and “return period” are commonly
used in the water engineering profession but often in a manner that can be misleading. A common misconception is the implication that these probabilistic events are exceeded at regular intervals as defined by the “return period” or “recurrence interval” This can be a problem when disseminating information to the public and decision makers.
Denver, USA I rainfall of 380 mm)
Average recurrence interval (years)
Figure 4.2 Ratio of flood peaks in two urban catchments relative to pm-urban flood peaks Two more acceptable probability terms are ‘average recurrence interval” (ARI) and “annual exceedance probability” (AEP). The term “average” is added to the former to reflect that the recurrence interval of a particular sized rainfall or runoff event is, in the long term, equal to the average interval specified. The term AEP is perhaps the more technically correct term in that it represents the probability of a rainfall or runoff event exceeding the design value at least once in a year. Estimates of design runoff are required to design hydraulic structures, but because runoff data are not available in most areas, a model is usually used to convert a design rainfall to design runoff. It is also difficult to obtain long runoff records that retlect present catchment conditions because of the continuous development in urban areas. The design rainfall is characterised by the AEP, average rainfall intensity and the rain duration. The time/temporal distribution of rainfall over the event (hyetograph) is also needed to generate storm hydrographs. The rain intensity can also vary spatially, but this variation is usually ignored in urban catchments because they are generally small catchments. It is worth noting that rainfall depths are smaller in arid and semi-and areas than elsewhere. Not only does rain seldom fall, not much falls when it does. Although intense storms that cause flash flooding are wmmon in urban catchments, the volumes are generally smaller in arid and semi-and areas. Therefore, channel capacities and detention basins required for urban catchments in arid and semi-arid areas are considerably smaller than those required elsewhere and stormwater quality in arid and semi-arid areas can often be treated with less than half the storage needed for other areas.
The rainfall intensity corresponding to the selected storm exceedance probability at a site is needed for design. This information is usually provided in the form of a rainfall intensity-frequencyduration (IFD) chart. The IFD chart for Alice Springs, Australia in Figure 4.3 illustrates the characteristic relationship of decreasing probabilistic average rainfall intensity for increasing storm duration for any
given storm AEP. These charts are readily available for most areas, through the analyses of rainstorm data from many locations by regional or national meteorological, engineering or hydrological agencies.
0.1 ' 0.1
Storm duration (hrs)
Figure 4.3 Rainfall intensity-frequencyduration chart for Alice Springs, Australia (mean annual rainfall of 280 mm) Accurate IFD relationships can be obtained by analysing local rainfall data. Where local data are available, and/or where IFD charts are not available, a rainfall frequency analysis can be used to determine the IFD relationships. In the analysis, the annual maximum rainfall depths over durations of interest (typically from fwe minutes to 72 hours) are first extracted from the rainfall records. The annual rainfall data series obtained for each duration is then fitted to a statistical distribution to determine the AEP of the various rainfall depths. Common statistical distributions used for rainfall frequency analysis include the log-normal, log-Pearson III and Generalised Extreme Values. However, the use of mix of two probability distribution functions may better suit arid areas of significant seasonal rainfall (see chapter 3).
The variation of rainfall intensity over a storm event (hyetograph) is required to estimate a runoff hydrograph. Estimates of runoff hydrographs are needed for some applications, for example the design of stormwater detention storage facilities. The temporal pattern of storm events can vary considerably, often without any consistent trend because of the inherent stochastic nature of the meteorological factors influencing storm mechanisms. Nevertheless, there is a need to derive a probabilistic storm temporal pattern to estimate a design hydrograph. Consistent with the probabilistic approach to estimating stormwater runoff, the probabilistic storm temporal pattern represents the average temporal pattern to be used in conjunction with the design average rainfall intensity to determine the design runoff hydrograph. The average temporal pattern of rainfall can best be determined by analysing lots of local rainstorm data. Nevertheless, like the IFD charts, recommended probabilistic temporal patterns of design storms are sometimes available, through the analyses of many rainburst data for various locations by national meteorological agencies. As indicated in chapter 3, the temporal as well as the spatial rainfall variations in and catchments are high, and have significant impact on the produced runoff. These variations also affect to great extent the accuracy of design models (see chapter 9).
There are a number of methods for estimating design runoff from urban catchments, all of which involve the conversion of rainfall over the catchment to runoff. Table 4.2 provides a general description of the most popular methods in increasing order of complexity. The methods can be categorised into three groups. . Methods that estimate only the peak discharge from the design rainfall intensity, like the rational method. These methods are usually used to analyse individual pipe capacities. . Methods that convert rainfall excess hyetograph to a full catchment runoff hydrograph. Examples include unit hydrograph, time-area, storage routing and kinematic wave methods. l Conceptual models that simulate the catchment physical processes in detail. Examples include SWMM and HSPF. These models can be used as an event model to estimate design runoff hydrographs from single storm events, or as a continuous model to produce continuous hydrographs spanning years of flows. These models are usually used to simulate flow behaviour through large drainage networks. Table 4.2 Selected hydrological models for urban drainage design and analysis (adapted from O’Loughlin and Robinson, 1998). Model Empirical equations Rational method Unit hydrographs Time area Storage routing Kinematic wave Physical models 1including those involving storages Hydrograph 1Design or analysis of all sizes of systems, including those involving storages Hydrograph Design or analysis of all sizes of systems, including those involving storages Continuous Detailed analysis of large drainage hydrograph netirks and scientific research. Requires lots of data. 1required) 1Medium to complex (computers required) Medium to complex (computers required) Complex (computer required)
The rational method is the most commonly used method for estimating peak stormwater discharge. The underlying principle of the rational method is that under a uniform rainfall intensity, the maximum discharge from a drainage area will occur when the entire area is contributing to runoff. The entire area starts contributing to runoff when rainwater from the hydrologically most remote point reaches the design location. This time is called the time of concentration. The rational method assumes that the peak discharge is proportional to the rainfall intensity
This chapterpresents methods for estimating “ditlkzd” runoff 6om urban catchments. Sewerage overflows and discharges in combined stormwater-sewage systems are not considered.
where Q,, is the peak or design discharge, C is a dimensionless runoff coefficient, I is the rainfall intensity, and A is the drainage area. The runoff coefficient depends on the land use and the size of the storm. In urban areas, the most important land use parameter is the amount of impervious area. The runoff coefficient for impervious surfaces is typically about 0.9, and the runoff coefficient for pervious surfaces vary from less than 0.1 in and areas to more than 0.3 in temperate and wet areas. For urban areas, the runoff coefficient in equation (4.1) can therefore be viewed as the areal weighted average of the runoff coefficients in impervious and pervious surfaces. The runoff coefficient also varies with the size of the storm. For frequent events with low rainfall, there is little runoff contribution from the pervious surfaces, and the runoff coefficient is essentially the fraction imperviousness of the catchment. The runoff coefficient becomes higher for higher intensity storms (low AEPs) due to the reduced effect of inftltration in the pervious surfaces. The time of concentration is an important parameter in the rational method, because in determining the design peak discharge, the rainfall intensity for the duration equal to the time of concentration is used. In urban catchments, the time of concentration is estimated as the sum of flow travel times for the longest flow path. The main flow paths considered include roof-to-gutter conduits, overland flow, gutter flow along roads and pipe and/or open channel flow. The travel time for each flow path can be calculated using standard hydraulic methods. As the flow velocity is dependent on the geometric and hydraulic properties of the various flow paths, it may be necessary to adopt an iterative process to estimate the time of concentration. For example, the design rainfall intensity depends on the time of concentration, which in turn depends on the adopted rainfall intensity because the travel time decreases with increasing rainfall/flow. In urban catchments, sometimes a higher peak flow can occur at a duration less than the time of concentration. This is called a partial area effect and it occurs because impervious areas contribute a large proportion of the flow due to their high runoff coefficient and rapid response. Here, the rational method should be used to estimate the peak discharge from the partial area (lower subarea) as well as the combined catchment, and the larger of the two estimates used as the design peak discharge. In the rational method, the assumption of uniform rainfall intensity will lead to an underestimation of the peak discharge. On the other hand, neglecting the storage effects in the catchment leads to an overestimation of the peak discharge. The rational method is therefore more accurate for small catchments with little channel storage and for short duration storms (short time of concentration) because short duration storms tend to be more uniform in time than long duration storms. In and catchments, where the spatial and temporal variations of rainfall are high, the accuracy of the rational method is unacceptable in catchment size larger than 2 km* (Shaheen et al., 1998).
4.3.2 Methods 18.104.22.168
Rainfall excess is defined as the component of rainfall that becomes surface runoff. The computation of rainfall excess involves the estimation of losses from rainfall. The losses may include interception, surface depression storage and infiltration. Losses due to evapotranspiration are negligible because of the relatively short duration of rainstorms. Methods used to calculate rainfall losses include (see Figure 4.4) 1st. loss calculated as a constant fraction of rainfall (runoff coefficient method) 2nd. constant loss rate 3rd. initial loss 4th. initial loss followed by a continuing loss occurring at a constant rate 5th. initial loss fdlowed by a continuing loss occurring at a constant fraction of rainfall 6th. infiltration curve or equation representing infiltration capacity, with losses decreasing with time. The choice of method depends on the study problem, data availability and likely runoff processes. The sixth method is generally used only for large design projects and where there is sufficient data. It is usually used with detailed event models (see Section 4.3.3).
(i) constant fi-action
(ii) consta.nt loss
(iv) initial loss followed by constant continuing loss
(v) initial loss followed by constant fraction continuing loss
(vi) infiltration curve
Loss models used to estimate rainfall excess
In urban catchments, it is useful to separate the impervious and pervious parts. For impervious surfaces, there is usually a small amount of initial loss (about 1 mm) due to water filling the surface depressions and pores. The losses can therefore be estimated using method (iii) or method (iv) or (v) with very little continuing loss. Losses from the pervious surfaces are usually determined using methods (iv) or (v), with the initial and continuing loss parameters estimated by analysing rainfall and runoff data in the catchment. Since there is no reason for expecting loss rate values to conform to a particular distribution, the median of the derived values from several storms is probably the most appropriate for design. Where data are not available on the catchment of interest, loss rates can be estimated using rainfall and runoff data from nearby similar catchments. Like the IFD charts and the temporal distribution of rainfall, recommended design loss rates are sometimes available, and these can be used where local data are not available to compute the losses.
Many of the hydrograph methods listed in Table 4.2 are based on variance and modification of the principles of the time-area method of computing stormwater runotf. Like the rational method, the time area method neglects the effect of catchment storage. However, it accounts for the temporal distribution of rainfall. For steady uniform rainfall conditions, both the rational method and time-area 64
method will give identical peak discharges. However, by accounting for the temporal distribution of rainfall, the peak discharge determined using the time-area method will be higher than that determined using the rational method. The time-area method is based on combining the rainfall excess hyetograph with the time-area diagram of the catchment. The time-area diagram represents the relationship between subareas of the catchment and its corresponding stormwater travel time from the centroid of the subarea to the catchment outlet. The method is illustrated in Figure 4.5 and described below. 1. Draw isochrones (lines of equal travel time of runoff to the catchment outlet) for the catchment. The time interval of the isochrones should be consistent with the rainfall time interval. 2. Derive the cumulative catchment area to travel time relationship. 3. Derive the area versus travel time relationship (time-area diagram). It appears in this illustration that the time-area diagram can be derived directly from step (i), but step (ii) is usually necessary for urban catchments because of the complicated drainage network. 4. Combine the rainfall excess hyetograph and the time-area diagram, with the start time of the rainfall excess hyetograph aligned to the vertical axis of the time-area diagram. At each time step, runoff is calculated as the sum of the products of corresponding ordinates of the rainfall excess hyetograph and the time-area diagram.
Derivation of the time-area diagram Combination of rainfall excess hyetograph and time-area diagram to calculate discharge hydrograph
123456 Time interval
Time I ~!&!w--1 )&AI
2 lhAz+ 12A1
2 3 4 Time interval
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1I,A3+ 1I,Aa+ i I,As+
12A2+ 14 I 12A3+ hAz+ IzA4+ I3A3+
u2+ w3+ 5&+ Is.41
I IA& I I I IO j 11 1
IA-s+ I3A4+ k!As+ 4As+
&As+ b&+ k4 4&v+ kAs+ k& b&b+ bAs kA6
6 Time interval
Figure 4.5 Time-area method for estimating runoff hydrograph
In large urban catchments, the conveyance of stormwater runoff through the drainage network would alter the shape of the runoff hydrograph due to the effect of storage in the system. Routing models attempt to simulate the translation and attenuation of the hydrograph as it moves through the drainage system. Various computer softwares for routing stormwater runoff are available (see O’Loughlin and Robinson, 1998). In applying routing models, the catchment is divided into subcatchments. Runoff hydrograph for each subcatchment is computed and routed through the drainage network which “links” the hydrographs from the various subcatchments. A storage or hydrologic routing method is usually used. The storage routing method computes the outflow hydrograph at the downstream end of each individual drainage “IinK (pipe or open channel) by solving the continuity equation and the storage function. The continuity equation can be written as I - Q = dS/dt and expressed in finite difference form as 0.5 (II+ It+r) - 0.5 (Qi + Qt+,) = (St+, - St)/ q t (4.3) (4.2)
where I is the inflow rate to the drainage link, Q is the outflow discharge from the drainage link, S is the volume of temporary storage in the drainage link, and q lt is the time interval in the finite difference approximation of the continuity equation. Equation (4.3) can be rearranged such that all the known variables are placed on the left hand side 0.5 (It+ It+,) - 0.5 Qt + SJot = 0.5 Qt+, + St+,/Ot (4.4)
To solve the routing problem, the continuity equation is combined with the storage equation which expresses the relationship between the storage in the drainage link and the discharge
s = fn (Q)
The storage function represents the combined effect of the various hydraulic and geometric factors affecting the discharge characteristics of the drainage system. Common relationships used include power relationships like S = aQb or relationships based on uniform flow equations like Manning’s equation. For a given relationship, a table relating the outtlow discharge Q and (0.5 Q + S/at) and (0.5 Q - S/Dt) can be established. The term (0.5 Q, - S&It) on the left hand side of equation (4.4) can be determined from the tabulated relationship as Qt is known. This and the inflow terms give the right hand side of equation (4.4), from which Qt+l can be determined from the tabulated relationship between Q and (0.5 Q + Wit).
Event and short time-step
Two of the more commonly used water quantity and water quality models that simulate the physical catchment processes in detail are SWMM (Huber and Dickinson, 1988) and HSPF (Johansen et al., 1984). SWMM was initially designed as a single event model but can now also be used to simulate continuous runoff hydrog-raphs. HSPF is usually used for continuous simulation, typically with hourly time steps. SWMM is by far the most popular urban stormwater model. Its reputation for being a difficult model to use is probably compensated by the extensive body of literature describing its applications to various problems. Nevertheless, modelling with SWMM requires a significant time investment, and
models like SWMM are generally useful only for reasonably large design projects and where there are sufficient data to estimate/calibrate the many model parameters. SWMM represents the modelling area as several subcatchments with the runoff estimated for the subcatchments routed through the drainage network (gutters, pipes, sewers and channels). The routing routines in SWMM allow for the simulation of complex drainage networks, indudirg overflows and pressurised flows. The catchment surface is modelled as a nonlinear reservoir with a finite capacity (called maximum depression storage) (see Figure 4.6). Surface runoff occurs only when the depth of water in the reservoir exceeds the maximum storage capacity. Each subcatchment is divided into three parts, pervious surface, impervious surface with a maximum storage capacity and impervious surface with zero storage capacity. The input into the reservoir is precipitation excess and the output is surface runoff.
Continuity equation Add= AI-Q is subcatchment is depth of
Manning’s equation r W is width of overland flow n is Manning’s roughnes coefficient dP is maximum storage capacity S is subcatchment slope n
A area d
Figure 4.6 Nonlinear reservoir representation of subcatchment in SWMM The precipitation excess is calculated as rainfall less infiltration and evapotranspiration. In event modelling, the evapotranspiration is negligible and can be ignored. infiltration occurs only from the pervious surface and is modelled using either the Horton or Green-Ampt equation. The equations are used to calculate the infiltration capacity (reducing the infiltration capacity with time), with all the rainfall exceeding the infiltration capacity at that time step becoming rainfall excess. SWMM also allows for the routing of infiltrated water through upper and lower subsurface zones that can contribute to delayed subsurface runoff. This may be important only in continuous runoff simulation over long
The catchment (nonlinear reservoir) process is modelled using a continuity equation and Manning’s equation, with the combined equation solved numerically to estimate surface runoff (see Figure 4.6)..
of daily and longer
At the outset in any modelling exercise it is important that the objectives of the exercise be clearly enunciated. This is important so that a model of appropriate detail can be prescribed and data requirements specified. If an annual runoff estimate can provide the decision-maker with an output with an error level appropriate to that decision, using a daily model would be inappropriate. There will be occasions of course where a more sophisticated model (and data) than necessary are available.
For these cases the more complex model could be used. But the key principle is the simple one of ‘horses for courses’ and the model will need to reflect the data availability. It is fair to say that many models dealing with the hydrology and water quality of urban systems are available. Overall we have a broad understanding of the processe s involved, and we are usually only limited by data. Available models can be classified by considering their operational time step and spatial scale (see Figure 4.7). Because of their detail to hydrological processe s the short time-step models are known as ‘complex’ models, those operating at a daily time-step are known as ‘simple conceptual’ models, and those operating at longer time-steps will be empirical in form (see Chiew and McMahon, 1999; and Grayson and Chiew, 1994).
Time step over which model output is generally applied
minute 1 ha hour day week month war
Figure 4.7 Classifiion
of selected common urban hydrologic and water quality models
The average annual runoff can be estimated as Runoff = rti A. Rainfall + r, (1 - A) (Rainfall + Outdoor Water Use)
where A is the fraction of catchment with effective impervious area, and rd and r, are the runoff coefficients in the impervious area and pervious area respectively (see Table 4.1). Most of the runoff in urban catchments comes from impervious surfaces. The key variable in estimating runoff in urban catchments is therefore the fraction of catchment with effective impervious area. All the rain falling onto effective impervious surfaces becomes runoff after an initial loss (due to water filling the surface depressions and pores) is satisfied. The fraction of catchment with effective impervious area can be estimated from a rainfall-runoff plot of small events (see Figure 4.8) but there
can be large scatter in the data. As runoff from small events is generated only from the effective impervious surfaces, the slope in the rainfall-runoff plot gives an estimate of the fraction of catchment with effective impervious area, and the intercept of the rainfall axis is an estimate of the initial loss.
Data from 180 ha urban catchment in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia (mean annual rainfall of 80 mm) Data fhm 200 ha urban catchment in Melbourne, Australia (mean amma rainfkll of 650 mm)
g2cz l . 0 l/i n m
. 10 i.+ .
30 ;-I 0 0 40 Storm rainfall (mm)
Plots show all storm events. Points above the line indicate events where surface runoff is also generatedfkom the pervious area. Slope is an estimate of the diction of catchment with effective impervious area. Intercept of the rainfkll axis is an estimate of impervious area initial loss
Figure 4.8 Event rainfall-runoff plot to estimate fraction of catchment with effective impervious area The fraction of catchment with efiedive impervious area can also be estimated from aerial photographs and knowledge about the drainage system. The aerial photograph can be used to estimate the fraction of catchment with directly conneded impervious area (impervious surfaces that are directly connected to the drainage system). This is often similar to the fraction of catchment with a// types of impervious surfaces, except in catchments where roofs are not directly connected to the drainage system. The fraction of catchment with effective impervious area is typically about 80 to 90% of the fraction of catchment with direct/y conneded impervious area (see Boyd et at., 1993) because not all impervious surfaces that appear to be directly connected are directty connected (for example, blockages in gutters can result in water flowing onto pervious surfaces). The impervious area runoff coefficient, rd, in equation (4.6) is typically about 0.8 to 0.95, depending on the initial loss and the number of raindays. The pervious area runoff coefficient, r,, is dependent on the climate and physical catchment characteristics. The pervious area runoff coefftcient is 1-r in drier areas, and in arid and semi-arid areas, it is usually less than 0.1.
Daily and monthly
Daily estimates of runoff are often required to investigate shorter term impacts, to determine seasonal characteristics of urban runoff, to study water quality management options, and as inputs to water quality models. Runoff from effective impervious surfaces can be easily modelled because all the rainfall becomes runoff after an initial I- is satisfied. Runoff from the pervious area (‘pervious’ refers to all surfaces that are not effective impervious area) can be simulated using conceptual models that mimic the catchment processes. These models consist of one or more storages and equations that describe the movement of water between the storages. There are hundreds of models available in the literature for simulating runoff from rainfall and potential evapotranspiration data for rural catchments, and most of them can also be adapted to estimate pervious area runoff in urban catchments. There is usually little difference beMzn these conceptual models when used to estimate runoff in urban areas, partly because most of them can estimate runoff satisfactorily once they are calibrated, but mainly because pervious areas contribute only a small proportion of the total runoff from urban catchments.
model to characterise
In the absence of data, the simple,wnceptual model in Figure 4.9 can be used to characteriti daily runoff. The catchment is divided into an effective impervious area and a pervious area. All the daily rainfall in the effecGve impervious area becomes runoff once the daily initial loss is satisfied. In the pervious area, surface runoff is generated when saturation occurs, and baseflow is simulated as a linear recession of the soil store. Evapotranspiration is dependent on the amount of water in the soil store, but cannot exceed the atmospherically controlled rate of areal potential evapotranspiration (see Figure 4.9).
use mm (gq ET= -
x 10, PET) surface runoff _
Figure 4.9 Structure of a simple conceptual daily rainfall-runoff model for urban catchments (parameters are highlighted in bold italics) With no model calibration, the reliability of the runoff volumes estimated using this simple model would be no better than the annual volumes estimated using equation (4.6). However, unlike equation (4.6) the model can provide an indication of the daily flow characteristics, as illustrated in Figure 4.11. The impervious area rainfall threshold is typically about 1 or 1.5 mm (‘thres’ in Figure 4.9) while the pervious area storage capacity and baseflow factor generally range between 50 and 200 mm and 0.01 to 0.1 respectively (the parameters ‘Scap’ and ‘k’ in Figure 4.9).
model for estimating
Where there is runoff data for model calibration, better estimates of daily runoff can be obtained by simulating the pervious area catchment processes in more detail. An example of such a model is the daily urban runoff model developed by the Cooperative Research Centre for Catchment Hydrology in Australia (CRCCH). The model retains the simplicity of the earlier model, but provides a better conceptual representation of the processes. The model structure is shown in Figure 4.10 with the nine parameters (one for the impervious area and eight for the pervious area) highlighted in bold italics (see also Chiew and McMahon, 1999). Like the earlier model, all the rainfall in the effective impervious area becomes runoff once the daily initial loss is satisfied. The remaining area is modelled as two separate parts with different storage capacities (related to effective soil depth). The first has a smaller storage capacity and represents parts of the catchment that saturates easily. The second represents the remainder of the catchment with a greater soil storage capacity. Rainfall on the pervious area is first subjected to an infiltration function that determines the infiltration capacity. Rainfall that exceeds the infiltration capacity becomes infiltration excess runoff, while the remaining moisture fills the soil moisture stores. Surface runoff occurs when the storage capacities are exceeded (when saturation occurs). Water from the soil stores recharges a groundwater store when the storage exceeds a certain amount (‘field capacity’). The recharge is
calculated as a parameter (which mimics the hydraulic conductivity) times the amount the storage exceeds the ‘field capacity’. The infiltration excess runoff, infiltration, saturation excess runoff and groundwater recharge from the two pervious parts of the catchment are estimated separately.
Rainfall + Outdoor water use
saturation excess runoff
Need to specify the fraction imperviousness, and the two fi-actions of the remaining area (AZ and AZ) and their storage capacities (Slcap and S2cap). Infiltration capacity = coeflx exp (-sq x storage / storage capacity). Rainfall exceeding the capacity becomes infiltration excess runoff. Evapotranspiration = min (S&cap x 10, PET), where S and Scap are the area1weighted values of the two storages. Evapotranspiration is satisfied first fkom the larger store.
Figure 4.10 Structure of the CRCCH daily urban runoff model (parameters are highlighted in bold italics) Baseflow from the groundwater store is simulated as a linear recession of the groundwater store. Evapotranspiration is calculated as a linear function of the weighted soil wetness (see Figure 4.10) but cannot exceed the potential rate. The evapotranspiration demand is satisfied first from the larger store, therefore allowing for some redistribution of water between the two stores. The model thus distinguishes the runoff contributions from surface (impervious area runoff, infiltration excess runoff and saturation excess runoff) and subsurface (baseflow) flows. This is important for water quality modelling because the water quality characteristics in the surface and subsurface flows can be very diierent. The plot in Figure 4.11 shows an example comparison of the daily runoff estimated by the two rainfall-runoff models described here for an urban catchment with the recorded daily flow characteristics. As expected, the more complex model (Figure 4.10) which was calibrated performed better. Nevertheless, the simple model (Figure 4.9) without any calibration, can also simulate satisfactorily the relative daily flow characteristics, although in some cases, the actual runoff estimates can be poor. Thus, where adequate rainfall-runoff data are available, a more complex model could be
used to estimate daily runoff via model calibration, but where there is little data, the use of a simple uncalibrated model may be able to provide an indication of the daily flow characteristics.
---Recorded runoff Runoff estimated using simple made1 in Figure 4.9 (no calibration) Runoff estimated using model in Figure 4.10 (model was calibrated)
Percentage of time daily runoff is exceeded
Figure 4.11 Flow duration plots comparingdaily runoff simulated by two conceptualmodels with the recorded runoff (using data for a 450 ha urban catchment in Canberra, Australia, mean annual rainfall of 550 mm)
Data and model calibration
The input data required to run the conceptual daily rainfall-runoff models are rainfall and areal potential evapotranspiration. The availability of reliable continuous daily rainfall data is important because the model simulations are most sensitive to the input rainfall data. The catchment-average rainfall data can be obtained from one or several rain gauges within or close to the catchment. The modds presented above are lumped conceptual models, vvith single ‘lumped’ parameters used to represent the entire catchment. There are also no routing algorithms to route the flows to the catchment outlet. Nevertheless, the use of these models is usually sufficient because they are used on small urban catchments (generally less than 10 km*, and seldom more than 100 km*), and because although they run on a daily time step, they are often used to provide estimates of runoff characteristics over longer time periods (weekly, monthly or seasonal). In any case, where accurate estimates of runoff over short time-steps are needed and where data are available, the more complex event and short time-step models are used (see Section 4.3.3). Generally, evapotranspiration has little influence on the water balance on a daily time scale. In such cases, the inter-annual variability of potential evapotranspiration is small compared to the variability in rainfall. Therefore, the use of mean monthly potential evapotranspiration is sufficient for the modelling exercise. The mean monthly areal potential evapotranspiration can be estimated as a factor of pan evaporation data or estimated from climate data using Penman-Monteith equations or Morton’s wet environment evapotranspiration algorithms (see Chiew and McMahon, 1991). However, in case of arid and semiarid climates, evaporation is significant and has substantial effects on the produced runoff (Nouh, 1991; Shaheen et al., 1998) and thus for such climate further research to achieve acceptable accuracy of the prediction models is needed. Results of case studies and accuracy of the most popular SWMM model in arid climates are presented and discussed in chapter 9.
The availability of runoff data for model calibration is probably the most important consideration for using the models because the models can only be as good as the data used to calibrate them. In the model calibration, it is also important to test the ability of the optimized parameters in estimating runoff for an independent period where the data are not used for the calibration; A split sampling method is commonly used where the available data is divided into two periods. The model is first calibrated on the first half of the data, and tested against the remaining data. Where there is little data for model calibration and verification, a cross-verification method can be used to increase the amount of independent data to assess the model. Here, the data set is divided into several periods. Data from each period is left out in turn and the model is calibrated against data from the remaining periods. The optimised parameter values are then used to estimate runoff for the period that was left out and compared against the recorded runoff.
As urbanization increases, peak Urbanisation has significant impacts on stormwater runoff. discharges and runoff volume increase but time of concentration decreases. Due to the small amounts of runoff volumes in arid areas, required detention basins are normally smaller than those needed for other areas. However, the basins should be designed based on careful consideration of rare flash floods. Common statistical distributions used for rainfall frequency analysis include the lognormal, log-Pearson III and Generalized Extreme Values. However, the use of mix of two probability distribution functions may better suit arid areas of significant seasonal rainfall. Temporal rainfall variations have significant impact on the produced runoff in arid areas, and thus there is a need to derive a realistic probabilistic storm temporal pattern to estimate a design hydrograph in these areas. Available common methods used by professional engineers for design of urban facilities may not be unsuitable for application in arid catchments due to the distinguished characteristics of soils and rainfall in these catchments (see chapter 3) and also due to the normal scarcity of data needed for the calibration and verification of the methods.
BOYD, M.J., BUFILL, M.C. AND KNEE, R.M. (1993) “Pervious And Impervious Runoff In Urban Catchments”, Hydrological Sciences, Vol. 38, pp. 463-478. CHIEW, F.H.S. AND MCMAHON, T.A. (1991) “The Applicability Of Morton’s And Penman’s Evapotranspiration Estimates In Rainfall-Runoff Modelling,” Water Resources Bulletin, Vol. 27, pp. 61 I-620. CHIEW, F.H.S. AND MCMAHON, T.A. (1999) “ Modelling Runoff And Diffuse Pollution Loads In Urban Areas,” Water Science & Technology, Vol. 39, pp. 241-248. GRAYSON, R.B. AND CHIEW, F.H.S. (1994) “An Approach To Model Selection,” Proceedings of the Joint 25th Congress of the International Association of Hydrogeologists and the 22nd International Hydrology and Water Resources Symposium of the Institution of Engineers, Australia, Adelaide, November 1994, National Conference Publication (Institution of Engineers Australia), 94/10(l): pp. 507-512. HUBER, W.C. AND DICKINSON, R.E. (1988)” Storm Water Management Model, Version 4: User’s Manual,” University of Florida, Gainesville, U.S.A. JOHANSEN, R.C., IMHOFF, J.C., KITTLE, J.L. AND DONIGAN, A.S. (1984)” Hydrocomp Simulation Program - Fortran (HSPF): User’s Manual Release 8.0,“. USEPA, Athens, Georgia, U.S.A. MORTON, F.I. (1983),“0perational Estimates Of Actual Evapotranspiration And Their Significance To The Science And Practice Of Hydrology,” Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 66, pp. l-76. NOUH, M. (1991) “Urban Drainage In Arid Climates,” Invited Paper, Proceedings (Supplements Volume), The International Conference on Urban Drainage and New Technologies, UNESCO/ IAHR, Dubrovnik, Former Yugoslavia, pp. 86-93. O!LOUGHLIN, G.G. AND ROBINSON, D.K. (1998)“Urban Stormwater Management,” Book Eight of Australian Rainfall and Runoff, Institution of Engineers, Australia.
SCHUELER, T.R. (1987), “Controlling Urban Runoff: A Practical Manual for Planning and Designing Urban BMPs,” Washingto Metropolitan Water Resources Planning Report, 185 pp. SHAHEEN, S., NOUH, M., AL-NASRIRY, A. (1998), “Prediction Of Stormwater Runoff In Arid Catchments,” Journal of Water Resources Engineering, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 18-32.
A pollutant can be defined as a material present in a concentration greater than that which naturally occurs in the water, air or soil. Stormwater pollution loads in urban areas are much higher than in unimpaired areas because urban activities generate more pollutants, and higher runoff volumes in urban areas can transport more of the available pollutants to the drainage system. Stonnwater pollution comes from point and non-point sources. Point sources are those where the polluted water is discharged at a single location, such as a factory or a sewage treatment plant. Non-point or diffuse sources are those where pollution is generated over a large area and flows into the drainage system at more than one point. This chapter is concerned with only non-point source Non-point source pollution in urban runoff can come from atmospheric deposition, pollution. automobiles and roads, residential and industrial activities, construction activities and soil erosion (see Table 5.1 and Makepeace et al., 1995). The different types of pollutants in urban stonnwater are briefly described below. sediments in urban waterways can smother aquatic habitat and reduce channel capacity. Sediments also reduce the aesthetic appeal of waterways and increase the need for filtration in water supplies. Suspended solids (SS) is used to describe sediments suspended in water. Turbidity, a water quality parameter that quantifies the cloudiness of water, is often related to suspended solids. Nutrients and heavy metals can easily adsorb to sediment and utilise it as the medium for transportation in urban runoff. The deposition of sediments can result in the release of these nutrients and toxins at a later time when the ambient condition is favourable for their release. It is for this reason that many management methods target the removal of sediments with the expectation that a significant amount of organic and inorganic pollutant till also be removed. Nutrients (phosphorus (P) and nitrogen (N)) are essential to living organisms, but excessive levels can upset the natural balance of the ecosystem. Excess nutrients promote the growth of one species of aquatic plant to the exclusion of others (such as blue-green algae in the process of eutrophication). The thick mats of algae formed at the water surface reduce light penetration and oxygen exchange between the water and the atmosphere, chpking the waterways. The buildup of toxins in excessive algal growth can cause the closure of fisheries, water farming industries and public beaches. Oxygen demanding materials include biodegradable organic debris, such as decomposing food and garden wastes, that contribute to oxygen depletion in stormwater. Chemical oxygen demand (COD) and biological oxygen demand (DOD) are measures of the oxygen used when these materials react with chemical and biological substances in the water. Low oxygen levels in the water can stress the aquatic community and facilitate chemical reactions that lead to sediment desorption of nutrients and metals. Heavy metals include lead (Pb), zinc (Zn), copper (Cu), chromium (Cr), cadmium (Cd), nickel (Ni) and other inorganic substances. Heavy metals are toxic to animals, birds and humans. The toxic
effects can either be chronic (gradual buildup causing long-term illness and eventual death) or acute (high concentration causing sudden illness or death). Toxic organic wastes come from garden and household chemicals (herbicides and pesticides), industrial chemicals and landfill-waste leachates. Organic pollutants can accumulate in an ecosystem, causing long-term toxicity. Pathogenic micro-organisms include bacteria, viruses and protozoa found in soil, decaying vegetation and animal wastes. The Escherichia wli (E. wli) bacterium is widely used as an indicator of faecal pollution levels in stonnwater. Bacteria and pathogens excreted in human and animal faeces may initiate outbreaks of infectious hepatitis and gastrointestinal diseases. Hydrocahonscome from oil and grease used for combustion and lubrication, and from surfactants in detergents. Oil spills in urban areas are wmmon and can cause short-term toxicity problems while surfactants can damage biological membranes of aquatic plants and animals. Litter includes plastics, paper, bottles and other rubbish discarded by people. Liier is aesthetically unpleasant, smells and attracts vermin. Some litter, such as broken glasses and syringes, can pose health risks. Liier and plant refuse such as dead leaves are commonly termed gross pollutants due to their large unit size.
5.2 Urban stormwater
The process of stormwater contamination is often viewed as occurring in two phases - buildup and washoff (see Chiew et al., 1997a). Buildup is the accumulation of pollutants on catchment surfaces over dry periods and washoff is the removal of surface pollutants during storms. However, it may be more helpful to view the stormwater quality process as a process of dynamic equilibrium between deposition and removal at a point, and between contributing and non-contributing areas (see Duncan, 1995). The pollutant sources include atmospheric deposition, vehides, road and pavement wear, residential and industrial activities, construction materials, vegetation and nearby dry soil (see Table 5.1). Removal processes include wind, vehicle induced eddies, decomposition, street sweeping, and of course washoff by rain (James and Shivalingaiah, 1988). Figure 5.1 shows the typical pattern of pollutant load on impervious catchment surfaces over time. The level of surface pollutant load depends on the rate of deposition and the length of the dry period, and any removal by redistribution, decomposition, street sweeping or washoff. Because the system is in dynamic equilibrium, a larger departure from equilibrium will generate a larger restoring effect. The cleaner a surface is made, the faster it gets dirty again, by redistribution of material from surrounding areas (Novotny et al., 1985). This explains why the surface pollutant load increases rapidly after a storm, but the rate of increase in the surface load reduces with increasing length of dry period. The accumulated load is also typically large compared with the washoff load in any single event, and therefore the surface pollutant load tends to remain largely the same over time (see Chiew et al., 1997b). Washoff is the removal of soluble and particulate pollutants by rainfall and runoff. During storms, turbulence created by falling raindrops and flowing water loosens particles, which become suspended in water and are carried to the drainage system. Pollutants washed out from the atmosphere by rainfall (wet deposition) can add to the load carried in the flow. In an urban drainage system, water flow is concentrated in gutters, pipes and channels and the pollutants can be transported as bottom sediments, suspended particles and dissolved material. The rate of pollutant transport depends on the water velocity and depth, and the degree of turbulence. Dissolved pollutants can become adsorbed onto particle surfaces, and fine particles can flocculate to form larger particles. Most of the pollutants in sediments are associated with smaller particles due to their greater surface area relative to the larger pat-tides. Pollutants attached to fine particles are easily carried because a small flow velocity is sufficient to mobilise them and keep them in suspension. Pollutant concentration often peaks before the peak in stormwater runoff, a process known as ‘first flush’ (see Figure 5.2). The poll&graph varies between pollutants, with peak levels of dissolved pollutants and micro-organisms occurring before peaks in particulate pollutants because less energy is required to detach them from catchment surfaces and keep them in suspension. The first flush effect
is more detectable in smaller catchments and on impervious areas. In larger catchments, the flows from individual subcatchments arrive at different times, leading to a longer lasting but less detectable first flush. Table 5.1 Common sources of pollutants in urban runoff Pollutant Source
Road and pavement wear Vehicle wear Vehicle fuels and fluids Fuel combustion Soil erosion Human and animal waste Pesticides and Paint and solvents Industrial activities Household chemicals
Main sources of metals in urban stormwater
Petrol additives Lubrication oil Pesticides and fertilisers Dve and oaint \ Paper
In arid and semi-arid areas, the surface pollutant load is likely to be high. The equilibrium load is high under dry conditions and reduced vegetation, and a long inter-event period means that the actual load closely approaches the equilibrium load. Where rainfall is dominated by thunderstorm activities, rainfall and runoff energies are also likely to be high. Both these factors lead to typically higher pollutant concentrations and loads during stormwater events in arid and semi-arid areas compared to elsewhere. Sediment loads transported during storm events are also generally much higher in arid and semi-arid areas because sparse native vegetation in arid areas offers little protection against soil erosion. However, the total annual pollutant loads from urban catchments in arid and semi-arid areas are generally less than those from temperate and humid areas, because annual runoff volumes are lower and storm events are less frequent in arid and semi-arid areas.
Figure 5.1 Typical pattern of surface pollutant load on impervious catchment surface over time
Figure 5.2 Hypothetical pollutant and flow hydrographs showing first flush effect of pollutant remtrJal
5.3 Event mean concentrations
of water quality
Most of the pollutant load from urban areas is generated during big storm events. This is particularly so in and and semi-arid areas where the storms are fewer and more intense than elsewhere. There is also little subsurface flow in and and semi-and areas. As such, pollutant concentration during storm events is an important parameter for estimating urban pollution loads. The event mean concentration (EMC) is commonly used to describe the storm pollutant concentration, and it is defined as the pollutant load washed off by a storm event divided by the event runoff volume. The event mean concentration can be estimated by monitoring pollutant concentration and discharge over a storm event. The EMCs can vary between storm events, and EMCs of different storms are usually averaged to provide a representative EMC value for a catchment. The EMC depends on many physical and climatic factors of the catchment, and can vary by more than an order of magnitude between catchments. Therefore a good event monitoring program is essential where accurate estimates of pollutant loads are required. The EMC is generally higher in drier areas. For example, the plots in Figure 5.3 show statistically significant inverse relationships betin EMC and mean annual rainfall for several important water quality parameters. The data for Figure 5.3 come from over 500 worldwide urban
stormwater quality data sets reported in the English language literature analysed by Duncan (1999) and include the data from the U.S.A. Nationwide Urban Runoff Program (see Athayde et al., 1983). The same study found very few significant differences between the EMCs from the subcategories of urban land use - residential, industrial and commercial. The EMCs vary considerably between catchments, but the standard land use zonings explain only a very small part of the variation (see Figure 5.4). The mean k one standard deviation EMC values of the 21 water quality parameters reported by Duncan are tabulated in Table 5.2. The table also gives the EMC values for areas with a mean annual rainfall of less than 550 mm for eight water quality parameters where there are data from at least ten catchments. The data for the arid and semi-arid areas come mainly from Saudi Arabia, California and inland western U.S.A. It should be noted that all the data (except for pH) are analysed in the log domain.
linear relationship is statistically significant at a = 0.0 1 linear relationship is statistically significant at a = 0.05 linear relationshiD is not statisticallv significant at a = Sumended solids Total Nitrogen CHS)
Chemical Oxygen Demand (HS) , . .
Total Organic Carbon (HS) 10001
10 ’ 0
Total Zinc (S) .
Total Copper (S)
1 0.001 I 2000 0
Total Iron (NS)
Mean annual rainfall (mm)
Figure 5.3 Event mean concentration versus mean annual rainfall for several water quality parameters
Residential Industrial Commercial
Residential Industrial Commercial
10 ii~ i ~
Residential Industrial Commercial
0.01 Concentration (mgk)
Figure 5.4 EMC values (mean one standard deviation) for different urban land uses showmg the large variability and difficulty in distinguishing between the different land uses (from analyses of worldwide data by Duncan, 1999) Table 5.2 Mean f one standard deviation EMC values fr& analyses of worldwide data by Duncan (1999) - analyses carried out in the log domain I Water aualitv Darameter
I Unit I Number of data points and mean EMC (and lower and upper
Total Organic Carbon PH T~dkiitv . -. -.v.. Total Lead (Pb) Total Zinc (Zn) Total Copper (Cu) Total Caamlum (l;a) ’ . ‘- ‘.
mg/L pH NTIJ ._.mg/L mg/L mg/L - ,. 1 UQlL
24 (13-44) I I 6. 9 (6.2 - 7.6) 16 61 (14-260) -0 0.14 (0.040- 0.52) 13 0.22 (0.08 - 0.58) lil 0.33 (0.20 - 0.57) 156 0.24 (0.089- 0.65) 10 0.064 (0.033 - 0.12) IO 140 0.050 (0.017 - 0.15) r‘.3 1 31 1 4 (1.3- 15) 1641 2! 23 48
1#/lOOmL I 19
The total pollutant load washed off urban surfaces depends on the runoff volume and the concentration of a given contaminant. Even in the absence of runoff data, the storm runoff volume can be estimated reasonably reliably as a proportion of the rainfall. However, as discussed in Section 5.3, the pollutant concentration can vary considerably from one catchment to another. Because of this, the monitoring of stormwater quality is essential where accurate estimates of pollutant loads are required.
5.4.1 Water quality
Monitoring should be carried out over storm events because most pollutants are transported during storms. Pollutant load is the product of runoff vdume and pollutant concentration, but for a given catchment the runoff volume varies over a much larger range than the pollutant concentration. During a single storm, most of the pollutant load is also transported during the higher discharges, even when first flush occurs. The most effective event monitoring is with automatic samplers. These samplers are triggered by storm events (usually by water depths) and collect many water quality samples during the event that can then be tested in the laboratory. The total pollutant washoff load as well as the load characteristics throughout the storm (loadograph) can be estimated from the discharge hydrograph and the pollutograph (hydrograph of pollutant concentration) (see Figure 5.5). Many authorities take ‘grab samples from urban waterways periodically (usually monthly) and test them for various water quality parameters. This data is useful in providing an indication of pollutant concentrations during dry weather (from subsurface flow), but may be of little use in estimating the total pollutant loads from baseflow and stormwater flow combined. Data from grab sampling can also be used to study long-term water quality trends.
3 2 600& ia Jz 3002 .a
0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00
Figure 5.5 Hydrograph, pollutograph and loadograph for one storm event in 1994 in a 150 ha urban catchment in Melbourne, Australia (mean annual rainfall of 650 mm)
of daily and long-term
The average annual pollution load can be estimated as (see Chiew and McMahon, 1999)
Pollution Load = EMC x Runoff
As discussed above, the EMC can vary considerably between catchments, and it should be measured where accurate estimates of pollution loads are required. Nevertheless, in the absence of data, the EMC values in Table 5.2 can be used together with the estimated runoff to provide a guide to the probable range of diffuse pollution load generated from a catchment. For most studies, there is only sufficient data to estimate daily diffuse pollution load as Pollution Load = (surface runoff from impervious and pervious area) x EMC + subsurface flow x dry weather concentration
The different components of runoff can be estimated using the conceptual daily rainfall-runoff models discussed in Chapter 4. Table 5.2 provides the typical range of EMC values for various water quality parameters, but accurate EMC values can only be obtained from water quality monitoring during storm events. The dry weather concentration of most urban pollutants is usually much lower than the EMC, and it can be determined from several dry weather baseflow samples. In and and semi-and areas, the modelling of pollution loads from baseflow may be supertluous because there is little baseflow. The baseflow water quality is also generally much better than the surface runoff water quality. There is little reason to use a more complex model than the linear one described by equation (5.2) to estimate daily pollution loads because it is difficult to define a clear relationship between runoff and EMC (see Section 54.3). Nevertheless, despite the la& of data, it is not uncommon to see many studies estimate the daily pollution load as a power function of runoff, Pollution Load = a Runof? (5.3)
where a and b are parameters found by optimisation or by relating the pollutant load and runoff data.
of event and sub-daily
time step pollution
Two of the more commonly used stormwater quality models are SWMM (Huber and Dickinson, 1988) and HSPF (Johansen et al., 1984). SWMM was initially designed as a single event stonnwater quantity and quality model, but now permits continuous simulation of stormwater hydrograph and pollutograpMoadograph. HSPF is usually used for continuous simulation, typically with hourly time steps.The hydrologic components of these and other event models have been discussed in Chapter 4. Water quality models either conceptually simulate the stormwater pollution process or empirically relate the pollutant load to the runoff. In the conceptual representation, the models consider the pollutant buildup and washoff processe s separately. For example, SWMM estimates the surface pollutant load either as a linear, power, exponential or Michaelis-Menton function of the length of dry days (see Figure 5.6). The model then estimates pollutant washoff using an exponential washoff algorithm that reduces the available surface pollutant load exponentially over the storm event (see Figure 5.6). The input into the water quality component of these models is the stormwater hydrograph and the output is the poll&graph and loadograph, which can be routed through the drainage network to the catchment outlet. The model parameters depend on the catchment surface characteristics and other factors and can be determined by calibrating the model against locally monitored water quality data. However, given the scarcity of event water quality data and the number of parameters used, the detailed modelling of pollutant buildup and washoff processe s in these models is rarely justified. Therefore, these models are generally used only for research purposes and in planning studies for comparing relative simulations for alternative design strategies. The pollutant washoff is governed by two main processes, the shear stress generated by flow and the energy input of rainfall. Recent studies (Vaze and Chiew, 1999) have shown that event pollutant loads can be estimated satisfactorily as power functions of the rainfall intensity or the runoff rate,
Event Load = a 2
(very short-duration rainfall intensity or runoff rate) b
with the parameters, a and b, determined by calibrating the equation against locally monitored event pollutant load data. The implication of this is that washoff is dominated by short periods of high intensity rainfall and/or runoff, which are not adequately represented by data averaged over longer durations. The rainfall energy is the larger component in overland flow, but runoff energy is likely to dominate in channel flow.
start of storm (PO)
(a, b and limit are model parameters)
Figure 5.6 Buildup algorithms and exponential washoff decay algorithm used in SWMM In most applications, if there are sufficient data to calibrate the models on a particular catchment, the optimised parameter values (in Figure 5.6 and equation (5.4)) can be used to estimate the pollutant washoff loads and washoff characteristics satisfactorily for future events on that catchment. However, because of the large variability between catchments, it is unlikely that parameters calibrated against data from one catchment can be confidently used to estimate pollutant loads from another catchment. In the model calibration, it is important to test the ability of the optimised parameters to estimate the pollutant loads for independent data that are not used for the calibration. A split sampling method is commonly used where the availabte data are divided into two. The model is calibrated against the first half of the events, and then tested against the remaining events. However, as it is rare to have data from many events, a cross-verification method can also be used to increase the amount of data for independently testing the calibrated model. Here, each event is left out in turn, with the model calibrated using data from all the other events. The optimised parameter values are then used to estimate the pollutant load for the event that was left out, which is then compared against the recorded load.
Many modelling studies use an empirical power function to relate the pollutant load to the total stormwater runoff volume Event Pollutant Load = a (Event Runoff Volume) b
The coefficients, a and b, are usually determined by plotting the event load and runoff on a log-log scale. The correlations reported in the literature for the relationship in equation (5.5) are almost always spurious and are very much higher than the actual correlations in the basic data. This is because runoff is used both to estimate the load (load is either estimated from the discharge hydrograph and the poll&graph or as total runoff times EMC) and as the explanatory variable in equation (5.5). Therefore, to reftect the true correlation in the basic data, the relationship between EMC and event runoff, rather than the relationship between event load and runoff, should be used (see Figure 5.7).
Data from 180 ha urban catdxnent in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia (mean annual rainfU of 80 mm) 3
Data Corn 670 ha urban catchment in Sydney, Australia (mean annual rainfall of 1200 mm) . R* = 0.05
RL = 0.01
loo00 . R* = 0.74
R* = 0.26
4000 2000 0 0 2 4 6
Storm runoff (mm)
Storm runoff (mm)
Figure 5.7 Pollutant EMC versus runoff and load versus runoff showing spurious correlation in load versus runoff relationship
5.5 Other issues
in the estimation
5.5.1 GIS and pollutant
Geographic information system (GIS) is increasingly being used with pollution load models to estimate and present relative load contributions from different catchments to receiving waters. The pollution loads are either estimated directly using a pollutant mass loading (kg/ha) for each urban land use or as the product of runoff and EMC, with the runoff estimated as a proportion of rainfall, and an EMC (mg/L) value associated with each land use (e.g., Wong et al., 1997). The pollutant mass loading and EMC values are usually obtained from the literature with some sampling on different land use locations within the catchments to narrow the uncertainty in the data.
This method can at best provide only approximate estimates of the long-term pollutant loads from urban catchments. Nevertheless, GIS is a powerful technology because it can facilitate the handling of large volumes of data and can carry out complex spatial operations and link spatial and descriptive information. The GIS can also present graphical results of the spatial estimates of pollution loads in a useful way that will allow catchment managers to consider alternative management practices or to identify potential problem areas to be monitored or treated.
It is often necessary to integrate the pollutant loads estimated from individual catchments (using the models presented in Section 5.4) to assess their impact on the receiving waters. The addition of longterm pollutant loads from individual catchments is usually facilitated in the water quality models or can be done using spreadsheets or GIS. However, increasingly more in-house models are being developed to simulate the fate of the pollutants as they are transported through the drainage network and natural urban waterways to the receiving waters. The in-transit processes simulated by these link-node models (see Figure 5.8) may include deposition and scouring/resuspension of sediments, biochemical transformation of pollutants, and the pollutant adsorption to and release from sediments. The link-node models can also simulate the removal of pollutants by structural treatment methods (in particular, ponds and wetlands), and are commonly used to study altemative water quality management strategies. The empirical and/or process based algorithms used to simulate the in-transit precesses are usually intuitive and realistic, but there is rarely field data to test these algorithms as used in the model.
Nodes represent pollutant export from subcatchment and inputs from upper subcatchments. Nodes can also be used to represent stormwatcr treatment devices or large points sources. Links simulate in-transit prwesses (deposition and resuspension of sediments, biochemical transformation of pollutants, pollutant adsorption to and release t&n sediments, etc.. .)
Figure 5.8 Link-node representation of pollutant generation and transport
In addition to estimating total pollutant loads, it is also important to know the relative loads associated with different sediment sizes. For example, if most of the pollutants are attached to the finer sediments, it may be necessary to design stonnwater treatment methods to remove the finer sediments (via vegetation in wetlands) rather than the total suspended solid loads (via settling in ponds and sedimentation basins). There is little data in the literature on contaminants associated with different sediment sizes. Table 5.3 shows metals and phosphorus loads from urban road data quoted by Dempsey et al. (1993) and Figure 5.9 shows the nutrient loads from a stormwater sample in Melbourne, Australia. The data can vary across catchments (as indicated in the TP data in Table 5.3 and Figure 5.9) but they generally show that a large proportion of the pollutants are attached to the finer sediments. For example, the Melbourne data suggests that to effectively reduce nutrient loads from particulate pollutants in the catchment, the treatment facilities should target the removal of sediments down to at least 50 j.un for TP and 10 pm for TN. Event monitoring programs to estimate pollutant loads are now common in water quality studies, and some of these programs also determine the particle size distributions of the collected samples. However, depending on the objectives of the study, it may also be important to also assess the contaminant load associated with different sediment sizes. Table 5.3 Metals and phosphorus loads associated with different particle sizes (from urban road data analysed by Dempsey et al., 1993) Contaminant Pb Zn cu TP 74 pm 14 24 8 13 Percentage of pollutant in par-tide size finer than 105pm 250 pm 840 pm 34 56 88 60 87 96 21 92 98 35 58 69
2000 km 95 100 loo 83
80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0.1 1 IO loo loo0
Particle size (mm)
Figure 5.9 Nutrient load associated with different particle sizes from an urban stormwater sample in Melbourne, Australia (mean annual rainfall of 650 mm)
Important issues related to urban stormwater pollution are reviewed and discussed. In arid and semiarid areas, the surface pollutant load is likely to be high. Due to the dry conditions and reduced vegetation in and areas, higher pollutant concentrations and loads during stormwater events in these areas compared to the same elsewhere. Sediment loads transported during storm events are also generally much higher in arid and semi-arid areas because sparse native vegetation in and areas offers little protection against soil erosion. However, the total annual pollutant loads from urban catchments in and and semi-and areas are generally less than those from temperate and humid areas, because annual runoff vdumes are lower and storm events are less frequent in and and semiand areas. The monitoring of stormwater quality is essential where accurate estimates of pollutant loads are required. In addition to the pollutant loads, the relative loads associated with different sediment sizes should be known. The GIS is a useful technology, especially in large and arid catchments, because it can facilitate the handling of large volumes of data and can carry out complex spatial operations and link spatial and descriptive information.
ATHAYDE, D.N., SHELLEY, P.E., DRISCOLL, E.D., GABOURY, D. AND BOYD, G. (1983) Results of the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington DC., U.S.A., PB84-185537. CHIEW, F.H.S. AND MCMAHON, T.A. (1999) Modelling Runoff And Diffuse Pollution Loads In Urban Areas. Water Science & Technology, Vol. 39, pp. 241-248. CHIEW, F.H.S., MUDGWAY, L.B., DUNCAN, H.P. AND MCMAHON, T.A. (1997a) Urban Stormwater Pollution. Cooperative Research Centre for Catchment Hydrology, Melbourne, Australia, Industry Report 9715. CHIEW, F.H.S., DUNCAN, H.P. AND SMITH, W. (1997b) Modelling Pollutant Buildup And Washoff: Keep It Simple. Proceedings of the 24th International Hydrology and Water Resources Symposium, Auckland, November 1997, New Zealand Hydrological Society, pp. 131-I 38. DEMPSEY, B.A., TAI, Y.L. AND HARRISON, S.G. (1993) Mobilisation And Removal Of Contaminants Associated With Urban Dust And Dirt. Water Science & Technology, Vd., 28, pp. 225230. DUNCAN, H.P. (1995) A Review Of Urban Storm Water Quality Precesses. Cooperative Research Centre for Catchment Hydrdogy, Melbourne, Australia, Report 95/9. DUNCAN, H.P. (1999) Urban Stormwater Quality: A Statistical Overview. Cooperative Research Centre for Catchment Hydrology, Melbourne, Australia, Report 99/3. HUBER, W.C. AND DICKINSON, R.E. (1988) Storm Water Management Model, Version 4: Users Manual, University of Florida, Gainesville, U.S.A. JAMES, W. AND SHIVALINGAIAH, B. (1988) Continuous Mass Balance Of Pollutant Build-Up Processes. In: Urban Runoff Pollution, Vdume 10 (Editors: H.C. Tomo, J. Marsalek & M. Desbordes), Springer-Verlag, Benin, pp. 243-271. JOHANSEN, R.C., IMHOFF, J.C., KITTLE, J.L. AND DONIGAN, A.S. (1984) Hydrocomp Simulation Program - Fortran (Hspf): User’s Manual Release 8.0. USEPA, Athens, Georgia, U.S.A. MAKEPEACE, D.K., SMITH, D.W. AND STANLEY, S.J. (1995) Urban Stonnwater Quality: Summary Of Contaminant Data. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Techndogy, Vol. 25, pp. 93-l 39. NOVOTNY, V. SUNG, H.-M., BANNERMAN, R. AND BAUM, K. (1985) Estimating Nonpoint Pollution From Small Urban Watersheds. Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation, Vol. 57, pp. 339-348. VAZE, J. AND CHIEW, F.H.S. (1999) Investigation Of The Relationship Between Event Pollutant Load And Rainfall And Runoff Characteristics. Proceedings of the Water 99 Joint Congress, Brisbane, July 1999, Institution of Engineers Australia, Vdume I, pp. 27-32. WONG, K.M., STRECKER, E.W. AND STENSTROM, M.K. (1997) GIS To Estimate Storm-Water Pollutant Mass Loadings. Journal of Environmental Engineering, Vol. 123, pp. 737-745.
Traditional methods of urban drainage in arid and semi-arid regions
Urban drainage programs did not develop as quickly as drinking water or wastewater programs since they are capital intensive and expensive. The concept of “need” in urban drainage is hard to pin down, and is based on decisions aboutaffordable levels of service especially in arid and semi-and dimates. Stormwater needs are based on flood protection, convenience, and protection of water quality, dong with cordlary objectives such as urban beautification and improvement of life. In water short areas, the capital needs have been for water harvesting and water quality management. Although urban drainage facilities are often neglected, the growing wncerns about environmental protection will increase the future needs for urban drainage, which include combined and separate storm sewers. Storm runoff in drainage basins undergoing urbanization is a major concern. Runoff vdumes from newly urbanized drainage basins are significantly attered due to an increase in impervious surfaces (i.e. roadways). Studying available data and characterizing the temporal nature of and and semi-and land rainfall events are important steps in planning and designing urban drainage systems. Good planning generates good projects and programs, and good projects and programs can wst4fectively stop and solve problems. Today’s use of computers allows for the manipulation of large amounts of data and for more precise solutions by the use of sophisticated algorithms. The dimate of and and semi-and areas is characterized essentially by rainfall variability in both space and time coupled with high potential evaporation rates (chapter 2). The phenomena need to be understood in order to explain the environmental constraints imposed upon human activities and in order to investigate common and and semi-and lands’ urban drainage problems. Effective disposition of stormwater is essential. Drainage systems have changed from primitive ditches to complex networks of curbs, gutters, and underground conduits. Modem urban drainage systems spotlight sewers: storm, combined and sanitary. Along with the increasing complexity of these systems has wme the need for a more thorough understanding of basic hydrologic processes. Simple rules of thumb and crude empirical formulas are generally inadequate. The approximation of maximal rates of flow to be expected with some relative frequency is not sufficient for many modem designs. It is, therefore, essential to account for all key hydrologic processes and combine them in composite models that yield outputs at points of interest in time and space. In, addition, demands by society for better environmental wntrd require that water quality considerations be superimposed on estimates of quantii for effective urban water management. The fdlowing sections present the state-of-the-art of wmmon methods of urban drainage in and and semiarid regions. In this regard, the methods used may differ according to the size and shape of the catchment. Moreover, the hydrologic design differs according to the type of hydraulic structure used. Such structure range from small crossroad culverts, levees, and drainage ditches to urban storm drainage systems. Meanwhile, the traditional urban drainage methods are evaluated and compared with modem methods in the following sections.
Runoff occurs when precipitation moves across the land surface, some of which eventually reaches natural or artificial streams and lakes. The land area over which rain falls is called the catchment and the land area that contributes surface runoff to any point of interest is called a watershed. A large watershed can contain many smaller subwatersheds. In urban drainage systems, serving areas up to few hundred acres (or hectares in size, the stormwater is usually collected in the streets and conveyed through inlets to buried conduits that carry it to a point where it can be safely discharged into a water body as shown in Fig 6.1. In some instances
stormwater is percolated into the ground using infiltration ponds but the underlying strata must have a high permeability. Another method considers collection of stormwater by open ditches but such open channels are not always acceptable in developed areas. The banks of an open ditch also may be eroded from a high groundwater table. Thus, an underground piping system (french drain) that removes the water without removing the soil partides may be necessary. Excessive soil loss reduces the carrying capacity of the soil and can cause subsidence. Some types of protective filter material and select aggregate placed adjacent to the erodable soils can provide a solution to soil loss. A fabric filter must be specified to prevent piping, reduce fabric clogging, and pass the water. These criteria must all be present. A french drain is a perforated or slotted pipe placed in selected backfill aggregate material with a fabric filter surrounding the aggregate as shown in Fig. 6.2. Also, a french drain may consist solely of aggregate materials. The purpose of a french drain is to lower the water table or remave stormwater through the bank of a stormwater pond. Since surface runoff quantities are usually small in arid and semiarid lands, the runoff could be collected along with sanitary wastewater in combined sewers.
Fig. 6.1 Collection of runoff by storm sewers
Fig. 6.2 A French drain
The Rational Formula for estimating peak runoff rate was introduced in the United States in 1889. Since then it has become the most widely used method for designing drainage facilities for small urban areas and highways. Description of this formula is given in chapter 4. Attempts to verify the Rational Method have not produced encouraging results. 89
Specially in arid and semiarid areas, where the spatial variation of infiltration is high, high uncertainty exists in the discharge coefficient. In addition, it is impossible to observe or measure a uniform or an average rainfall over catchment. Furthermore, times of concentration do not seem to accord with the time to peak. The reasons are inherent in adopting a simple model to express a complex hydrologic system. Yet the method continues to be used in practice with results implying acceptance by designers, officials, and the public. The method is easy to apply and gives consistent results. From the standpoint of planning, for example, the method demonstrates in clear terms the effects of development: Runoff from developed surfaces increases because times of concentration decrease and runoff coefficients increase.
6.1.2 Design of storm sewers
Storm drainage can be divided into two aspects: runoff prediction and system design. The design of storm drains conforms to the principles of flow in open channels, and Manning’s or similar type equation is used to calculate the required pipes sizes. The main rules governing selection of pipe size and slope are as follows: 1.Free-surface flow exists for the design discharges; that is, the sewer system is designed for “gravity flow” 2.To avoid clogging, the minimum pipe diameter should preferably be 10 or 12 in. (25 to 30 cm), although 8-k-r.(2O-cm) pipes are used in some cities. 3.The minimum velocity flowing full should be at least 2.5 Wsec (0.75 m/s). This is required to prevent or reduce excessive deposition of solid material in the sewers. 4.To prevent scour and other undesirable effects of high-velocity flow, a maximum permissible flow velocity is also specified. S.The design diameter is the smallest commercially available pipe having flow capacity equal to or greater than the design discharge and satisfying all the appropriate constraints. 6.Pipes sizes should not decrease is the downstream direction even though increased slope may provide adequate capacity in the smaller pipe. Any debris that enters a drain must be carried through the system to the outlet, and the possibility of clogging a smaller pipe with debris that may pass a larger pipe is too great. 7.Pipe slope should conform to the ground slope insofar as possible to use a smaller pipe by exceeding the ground slope. If this makes the use of smaller pipe possible for some distance downslope, it may be economic despite increased excavation. 8.Pipe grades are described in terms of the elevation of the invert, or inside, bottom of the pipe. Where pipes of different size join, the tops of the pipes are placed at the same elevation, and the invert of the larger pipe is correspondingly lower than that of the smaller pipe. This does not apply to tributary drains, which may enter the main sewer through a drop manhole. The design of storm sewers is a direct application of the principles from both hydraulics and hydrology. Intensity-Duration-Frequency (IDF) curves are used to specify rainfall intensities. Watershed characteristics are used to calculate pipe or channel sizes necessary to convey the calculated rates of flow. The fundamentals of the storm sewer design process using the rational method are as follows:
of storm sewer flow rates
A storm sewer is typically designed for a specific return period storm, usually 10 or 25 yr. This return period is used in conjunction with a local IDF curve to determine a rainfall. The duration used in the determination of the rainfall intensity is equal to the time of concentration of the contributing watershed. The widely accepted storm sewer design regulations usually specify a minimum time of concentration, and if the watershed time of concentration is less than the specified minimum, the specified minimum is used rather than the watershed time of concentration. In cases where a storm sewer inlet has upstream piping, the maximum of the watershed time of concentration or the accumulated upstream travel time is used. The intensity (I) of the rainfall is used in the rational equation (Q = CIA) to determine the flow rate at the storm sewer inlet. The rational equation is thought traditionally to be applicable because in most storm sewer design situations, the entire watershed is broken up into a number of smaller subwatersheds each influent to a manhole or inlet. Flows into each inlet are then summed in a downstream direction. These flow rates are used to determine the 90
size of the storm sewer piping. Pipe sizes should be selected to meet or exceed the required capacity for the design storm. The use of the rational formula for each inlet and the sum of these flows are considered a conservative estimate for pipe sizing.
Once flow rates have been calculated throughout the system, the hydraulic grades in the systems also should be calculated. Using the principles of hydraulics and a known tailwater elevation at the outlet along with other physical parameters of the systems the hydraulic grades can be calculated. Within storm sewer pipe systems the slope of the hydraulic grade line (HGL) may be calculated using Manning’s formula:
velocity in meter per second hydraulic radius in meter slope of the hydraulic grade line as a fraction
In the case of open channel flow this slope assumes that flow is at the normal depth and the slope of the HGL is parallel to the slope of the pipe. With a known slope of the HGL, it is possible to calculate upstream hydraulic grade with a known downstream hydraulic grade.
where HG = s = = L
hydraulic grade slope of HGL length of piping Head loss at junctions, inlets, or
The term SL is also the head loss in the pipe section. manholes can be calculated using the equation:
where hL K v 9 = = = =
head loss head loss coefficient dependent upon geometry maximum velocity influent to junction gravitational constant
By summing head losses in an upstream direction the hydraulic grade at any point within the system can be calculated. Storm sewer design follows a number of design constraints which must be met. Minimum velocities inside the storm sewer piping must usually be greater than 0.5 to 0.8 m/s. This ensures that materials do not deposit in the piping. The velocity must also usually be less than 3 to 5 m/s to prevent scouring. The pipe crown, or the top of the pipe, must be (typically) 0.8 m below the level of the ground to prevent crushing or collapsing of the pipe under loads. The distance between the pipe crown and the ground elevation is referred to as pipe cover. Pipes must be sized large enough to prevent flooding. Surcharge conditions are often discouraged in design.
6.1.3 French drains
The retention ability of a filter material to retain soil is a function of its openings and the size of the soil particles. Cedergren et al. (1972) reports on a criteria that states that the equivalent opening size of the fabric (standard test method for fabrics) divided by the nominal diameter of soil particles for which 85% of the soil degradation is finer must be less than 2 to retain the soil and prevent excess piping. Particles larger than the fabric pore size will be retained, and some of the smaller ones will interact with the fabric filter and will be impacted. Other smaller ones will be “bridged” between the fabric and the soil particles and further retention is possible. Clogging of the filter can be minimized by specifying the expected hydraulic gradient of the groundwater during the selection process. The permeability of the fabric filter should be at least 10 times greater than the protected soil, which should allow the soil water to drain. Proper specification of the size of pipe and trench depth below the expected water table is necessary if the water table is to be lowered. Darcy’s law can be used to approximate the seepage from saturated soil into the french drain Since the water table will fluctuate, the area normal to flow will fluctuate. The maximum water table elevation can be chosen, and the flow rate (size of trench) determined from this condition. Permeability of the soil can be estimated using laboratory or field permeability tests. Generally, lower values are chosen for determining drawdown time and higher values for determining pipe sizes. For the aggregate that is used around the pipe, its permeability must be specified to ensure that it is greater than the predicted soil. Furthermore, the aggregate must not deteriorate over time. Some limestones do break down and form an impermeable material. Cross-sectional area and hydraulic gradients are usually determined by site conditions, thus permeability of rock should be specified for desired flow conditions. During seepage, some fine soil particles do enter the aggregate, thus reducing the permeability.
Open channels (ditches) may be used to collect stormwater in small catchments. However, as areas urbanize, the drainage system will change due to increased runoff, increased velocities, and changing flow patterns caused by the use of stormwater management facilities. In order to increase the capacity of the channel system to take more runoff and greater velocities, the system must either be increased in size and/or stabilized. Stabilization techniques may be rigid designs using rigid materials such as concrete, or flexible designs using vegetation or rock riprap. Flexible linings of erosion resistant vegetation and rock riprap are often preferred because of their aesthetic appearance. When vegetation is chosen as the permanent channel lining, it may be established by seeding or sodding. Installation by seeding usually requires protection by using one of a variety of temporary lining materials until the vegetation becomes established.
Infiltration is the soaking of runoff into the ground. It reduces flooding, as does detention, by reducing the volume of runoff that is discharged. Most infiltration systems are backfilled with crushed stone. Runoff fills the void spaces of stone until it infiltrates the surrounding soil. Thus runoff floi-ving into these systems is essentially remaved from the flood hydrograph and will have no impact on downstream flooding. In addition, infiltration addresses water quality, groundwater levels, and surface water supplies. Unlike detention, infiltration puts the water in a part of the natural environment where it can be filtered, stored, and available for further use. Also, unlike detention basins, infiltration basins do not discharge runoff to the downstream channel system and thus, do not cause negative effects on the downstream channel system. Although seeming to be the ideal solution to the problems associated with increased urban runoff, infiltration systems are not without problems. Most of the problems are related to maintenance. The infiltration capacity of the system must be maintained and as portions of the system lose this capacity they must be removed and new material added to the system. Because most of these systems are underground, it is often difficult to inspect the system to determine if maintenance is required.
Another problem that is limiting the use of infiltration systems is their lack of acceptance within many municipal public works and engineering departments. Although design procedures are available, their use is still not extensive and these systems have “not proven themselves” to be effective stormwater management facilities, in many municipalities. More details and considerations on applying of these systems in arid and semiarid areas are given in chapter 7.
In large catchments stormwater is usually wllected in the streets and conveyed through inlets to buried conduits that carry it to a point where it can be safely discharged into a stream, or ocean. In some instances, stormwater is percolated into the ground using infiltration ponds. For such means of disposal to be practical, the underlying strata must have a high permeability. A single outfall may be used to convey the stormwater to the point of disposal or a number of disposal points may be selected on the basis of the topography of the area. The accumulated water should be discharged as close to its source as possible. Gravity discharge is preferable but not always feasible, and pumping ,plants may be an important part of a city stormdrainage system. Some communities require designers to provide detention basins or holding ponds with enough storage so that the outflow from the basins or ponds in a major storm is no greater than the peak outflow that would have occurred from the area prior to its development. This can be achieved in part by being careful not to overdesign the system. During intense storms substantial ponding in the streets will aid in reducing the peak outflows from the developed area. Care must be taken, however, to guard against synchronization of the peak outflows from the various subbasins. Until recently, most aspects of urban drainage design have been accomplished by using simplified formulas, nomographs, and “rules of thumb”. These techniques are often used by engineers to design urban drainage systems in small catchments. In addition, most drainage design is limited to the site being developed without regard or analysis of the effects of urban runoff on downstream areas or on the overall drainage system. Recently, some municipalities have adopted ordinances which require detailed comprehensive drainage designs, including analysis of downstream effects, and require the use of computer models to accomplish the engineering calculations that are required to comply with the.ordinance.
The first step in the design of urban drainage works is the determination of the quantities of water that must be accommodated. In case of sewer sizing only an estimate of the peak flow is required, but where storage or pumping of water is proposed, the volume of flow must also be known. Drainage works are usually designed to dispose of the flow from a storm having a specified return period. It is often difficult to evaluate the damage that results from urban stormwater, especially when the “damage” is merely a nuisance. Hence, the selection of the return period is often dependent on the designer’s judgment. In residential areas, there may be little harm in filling gutters and flooding intersections several times each year if the flooding lasts only a short time. In a commercial district, such flooding may cause damage and inconvenience, and a greater degree of protection may be warranted. Areas of relatively good natural drainage need less protection than low areas, which serve as collecting basins for flow from a large tributary area. Return periods of 1 or 2 yr. in residential districts and 5 to 10 yr. in commercial districts are all that can be justified for the average city. The most satisfactory method for estimating urban runoff is by simulation using a computer. In this approach, flows are simulated throughout the system from available rainfall data. For adequate definition of the lo-yr. event., at least 30 yr. of flow should be simulated. Output is the simulated flow at all key points in the system. From this output annual flow peaks can be selected and subjected to frequency analysis to define the design flow at each point. The effects of small storage reservoirs or pumping plants can be investigated in the simulation, and if more than one rainfall record is available the etfect of a real rainfall variation can be included. Calibration of the simulation model should be made against the nearest gauged stream having soil characteristics similar to those of the urban area under study. Parameter adjustment accounts for the impervious area in the urban area. A preliminary layout of the drainage system is required so that the effect of the improved drainage can be reflected in the 93
simulated flows. The simulation approach avoids the arbitrary assumptions of constant runoff coefficient, uniform rainfall intensity, equal frequency of rainfall and runoff, etc. as used in the Rational method.
The first computetized models of urban storm drainage were developed during the late 1960s and since that time a multitude of models have been discussed in the literature (Messman and Lewis, 1996). The models applicable to design of storm sewer systems can be classified as design models, flow prediction models, and planning models.
Design models determine the sizes and other geometric dimensions of storm sewers (and of other facilities) for a new system or an extension or improvement to an existing system. The design computations are usually carried out for a specified design return period. Flow prediction models simulate the flow of stormwater in existing systems of known geometric sizes or in proposed systems with predetermined geometric sizes. Most flow prediction models simulate the flow for a single rainfall event, but some can simulate the response to a sequence of events. The simulation might be for historical, real-time, or synthetically-generated storm events. At least some simple hydraulics is considered in most models. A model may or may not include water quality simulation. The purpose of a flow simulation may be to check the adequacy and performance of an existing or proposed system for flood mitigation and water pollution control, to provide information for storm water management, or to form part of a real-time operational control system. Planning models are used for broader planning studies of urban stormwater problems, usually for a relatively large space frame and over a relatively long period of time. The quantity and quality of stormwater is treated in a gross manner, considering only the mass conservation of water and pollutants without considering the dynamics of their motion through the system. Planning models are employed for such tasks as studies of receiving water quality and treatment facilities. They do not require detailed geometric information on the drainage facilities as do the first two groups of models.
Mathematical equations used in Hydrology and Hydraulics have been adapted to software used on computer extremely well. As computers have become faster and more powerful, engineers have utilized the computer’s potential to solve more complex problems. Today, hundreds of computer programs and computer tools exist which are useful for solving urban drainage and related problems. Nine of the most frequently American used publicdomain urban stormwater packages are presented in Table 6.1 (Viessman and Lewis, 1996). Models of similar popularity include MOUSE, Hydroworks, and Hystem. Some of these models just simulate the urban rainfallrunoff process; others provide specifies on the type, size, and location of drainage and stormwater handling facilities. The model acronyms and dates of original release as software are shown in Table 6.1. These models are periodically updated, and the current version should be requested when acquiring the code. Most are either single-event models or continuous models that are primarily used in a singleevent mode. A very widely accepted and applied storm runoff simulation model is the Storm Water Management Model (SWMM) which was jointly developed by Metcalf and Eddy, Inc., the University of Florida, and Water Resources Engineers (Metcalf & Eddy, 1971) for use by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This model has been successfully used for urban drainage systems in and and semi-and regions (see chapter 9). Therefore, it will be discussed in some detail. The SWMM model is designed to simulate the runoff of a drainage basin for any predescribed rainfall pattern. The total watershed is broken into a finite number of smaller units or sub-catchments that can readily be described by their hydraulic or geometric properties. This model has the capability of determining, for short-duration storms of given intensity, the locations and magnitudes of local floods as well as the quantity and quality of stormwater runoff at several locations both in the system and in the receiving waters. The original SWMM was an event-simulation model, and later versions keep track of long-term water budgets.
Table 6.1 Frequently used Urban Stormwater Simulation Code name CHM RRL ILLUDAS STORM TR-55 DR3M HYDRA SWMM UCURM Model name Chicago Hydrograph Method Road Research Laboratory Method Illinois Urban Drainage Area Simulator Storage, Treatment, Overflow Runoff Model SCS Technical Release 55 Distributed Routing Rainfall-Runoff Model Hydrologic Component of HYDRAIN Package Storm Water Management Model U. of Cincinnati Urban Runoff Model
Models in USA Year 1959 1962 1972 1974 1992 1978 1990 1971 1972
Agency originating City of Chicago Road Research Lab Ill. Water Survey Corps. of Engineers scs USGS FHWA EPA U. of Cincinnati
The fine detail in the design on the model allows the simulation of both water quantity and quality aspects associated with urban runoff and combined sewer systems. Only the water quantity aspects are described here. Information obtained from SWMM would be used to design storm sewer systems for stormwater runoff control. Use of the model is limited to relatively small urban watersheds in regions where seasonal differences in the quality aspects of water are adequately documented. The simulation is facilitated by five main subroutine blocks. Each block has a specific function, and the results of each block are entered on working storage devices to be used as part of the input to other blocks. The main calling program of the model is called the Executive Block. This block is the first and last to be used and performs all the necessary interfacing among the other blocks. The Runoff Block uses Manning’s equation to route the uniform rainfall intensity over the overland flow surfaces, through the small gutters and pipes of the sewer system into the main sewer pipes, and out of the sewer pipes into the receiving streams. This block also provides time-dependent pollutional graphs (pollutographs). A third package of subroutines, the Transport Block, determines the quality and quantity of dry weather flow, calculates the system infiltration, and calculates the water quality of the flows in the system. A useful package of subroutines for water quality determination is contained in the Storage Block. The Storage Block allows the user to specify or have the model select sizes of several treatment processes in an optional wastewater treatment facility that receives a userselected percentage of the peak flow. If used, this block simulates the changes in the hydrographs and pollutographs of the sewage as the sewage passes through the selected sequence of unit processes. The earlier version allowed simulation of any reservoir for which the outflow could be approximated as either a weir or orifice, or if the water was pumped from the reservoir. The newer versions allow input of 11 points of any storage-outflow relation and routes hydrographs through natural or artificial reservoirs, including backwater areas behind culverts. Routing is by the modified Puls method, which assumes that the reservoir is small enough that the water surface is always level. Evaporation from reservoirs is simulated by a monthly coefficient (supplied by the user) multiplied by the surface area. The Extran Block completes the hydraulic calculations for overland flows, in channels, and in pipes and culverts. It solves the complete hydrodynamic equations, assesses surcharging, performs dynamic routing, and provides all the depth, velocity, and energy grade line information requested. Subcatchment areas, slopes, widths, and linkages must be specified by the user. Manning’s roughness coefficients can be supplied for pervious and impervious parts of each subcatchment. Urban stem-r drainage components are modeled using Manning’s equation and the continuity equation. The hydraulic radius of the trapezoidal gutters and circular pipes is calculated from component dimensions and flow depths. A pipe surcharges if it is full, provided
that the inflow is greater than the oufflow capacity. In this case, the surcharged amount will be computed and stored in the Runoff and Transport Blocks at the head end of the pipe. The pipe will remain full until the stored water is completely drained. Alternatively, the Extran Block can be used to conduct a dynamic simulation of the system under pressure-flow conditions. Necessary inputs in the model are the surface area, width of subcatchment, ground slope, Manning’s roughness coefficient, infiltration rate, and detention depth. Channel descriptions are the length, Manning’s roughness coefficient, invert slope, diameter for pipes, or cross-sectional dimensions. General data requirements are summanzed in Table 6.2. A step by-step process accounts for all inflow, infiltration losses, and flow from upstream subcatchment areas, providing a calculated discharge hydrograph at the drainage basin outlet. Table 6.2 General Data Requirements for Storm Water Management Model (SWMM) (After Viessman and Lewis, 1996) Item 1. Define the Study Area. Land use, topography, population distribution, census tract data, aerial photos, and area boundaries. Item 2. Define the System. Plans of the collection system to define branching, sizes, and slopes; types and general locations of inlet structures. Define the System Specialties. Flow diversions, regulators, and storage basins. Item 3. Item 4. Define the System Maintenance. Street sweeping (description and frequency), catch basin cleaning; trouble spots (flooding). Item 5. Define the Base Flow (DWF). Measured directly or through sewerage facility operating data; hourly variation and weekday versus weekend; the DDWF characteristics (composited BOD and SS results); industrial flows (locations, average quantities, and quality). Define the Storm Flow. Daily rainfall totals over an extended period (6 months or Item 6. longer) encompassing the study events; continuous rainfall hyetographs, continuous runoff hydrographs, and combined flow quality measurements (BOD and SS) for the study events; discrete or cornposited samples as available (describe fully when and how taken). Three general types of output are provided by SWMM. If waste treatment processes are simulated or proposed, the capital, land, and operation and maintenance costs are printed. Plots of water quality constituents versus time form the second type of output. These pollutographs are produced for several locations in the system and in the receiving waters. Quality constituents handled by SWMM include suspended solids (SS), settleable solids, biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), nitrogen, phosphorus, and grease. The third type of output is hydrologic. Hydrographs at any point, for example, the end of a gutter or inlet, are printed for designated time periods. The Statistics Block will provide frequency analysis of storm events from a continuous simulation.
Urban storm drainage
Surface waters enter a storm drainage system through inlets located in street gutters or depressed areas that collect natural drainage. Catch basins under street inlets are connected by short pipelines to the main storm sewer located in the street right-of-way, often along the center line. Manholes are placed at curb inlets, intersections of sewer lines, and regular intervals to facilitate inspection and cleaning. Pipeline gradients follow the general slope of the ground surface such that water entering can flow downhill to a convenient point for discharge. Sewer pipes are set as shallow as possible to minimize excavation while providing 0.6 to 1.2 m of cover above the pipe to reduce the effect of wheel loadings. Common pipe materials used are clay, tile or concrete. Sewer outlets that terminate in natural channels subject to tides or high water levels are equipped with flap gates to prevent backflooding into the sewer system. Backwater gates are also used on combined sewer outfalls and effluent lines from treatment plants where needed.
The discharge capacity of gutters depends on their shape, slope, and roughness. Manning’s equation may be used for calculating the flow in gutter; however, the roughness coefficient n
must be modified to account for the effect of lateral inflow from the street. With the wide, shallow flow and the varying transverse depth common in gutters, the flow pattern is not symmetric and the boundary shear stresses have an irregular distribution. For well-finished gutters, n has a value of about 0.016 in the Manning equation. Unpaved gutters or gutters with broken pavement will have much higher values of n. Gutters are generally constructed with a transverse slope of 1 on 20. With such a transverse slope and a 15-cm curb height, the width of flow in a gutter will be 3 m when there is no freeboard.
Gutter flow is intercepted and directed to an underground storm-drain pipe system by drop inlets. There are two main types of inlets, with many commercial patterns available in each type. Grated inlets (Fig. 6.3) are openings in the gutter bottom protected by grates. A curb opening inlet (Fig. 6.3) is an opening in the face of the curb that operates much like a sidechannel spillway. Curb opening inlets are feasible only where curbs have essentially vertical faces. The location of street inlets is determined largely by the judgment of the designer. A maximum width of gutter flow of 1.8 m has been suggested as a suitable criterion for imporant highways. Under this rule an inlet is necessary whenever the gutter flow exceeds the gutter capacity within the limiting 1.8 m width. In residential sections the ultimate in inlet spacing provides four inlets at each intersection. With this arrangement flow travels in the gutter only one block before interception. A less expensive arrangement provides only two inlets at the uphill wmer of the intersection, and water is allowed to flow around two sides of the block.
22.214.171.124 Catch basins
At one time it was wmmon practice to provide catch basins (Fig. 6.4) at inlets to trap debris and sediment and prevent their entry into the drain. The expense of cleaning catch basins can be quite large, and it has become common practice to omit them from inlet design and depend on adequate velocities in the drain to prevent deposition of sediment.
126.96.36.199 Grated inlets
Few inlets intercept all the flow that reaches them in the gutter unless they are at low points from which the water has no other route of escape. The most efficient grated inlets have bars parallel to the curb and a sufficient clear length so that water can fall through the opening without hitting a crossbar or the far side of the grate. Experiment has shown that this free length ‘Y should be at least X =.: y “‘(English units) or X = 0.94 VY”~ (SI units) (6.4)
where V is the mean approach velocity in the flow prism intercepted by the grate, and y is the drop from the water surface to the underside of the grate. A grate which satisfies these requirements may be expected to intercept all the flow in the gutter prism crossing the grate. When water enters a curb-opening inlet, it must change direction. If the street has a low crown, the gutter flow will be spread out over a considerable width and a correspondingly greater length of inlet will be required for the change of direction to be accomplished. Curb-opening inlets, therefore, function best with relatively steep transverse slopes.
Manholes are used in underground storm-drain systems to permit easy access to the pipes for cleanout and to serve as junction boxes for situations where there is a change in pipe size or slope or where several pipes join one another. Manholes are installed at intervals of not more than 150 m along a line if the conduit is too small for a person to enter it. Manholes are usually constructed of brick or concrete, and occasionally of concrete block or corrugated metal.
Preformed Fiberglas manholes are now available. The general design of brick or concrete manholes is shown in Fig. 6.5.
Clay. tile. pr c0ncrete vpe Section A-A Maximum Section A-A
ar length, x
(a) Grated inlet
Plan (b) Curb-opening
Fig. 6.3 Some typical storm-drain
Curb Removable cast-iron grate \ :=d . . Concrete or brick Standard elbow
0’ J. c ‘“,’ .Jo a*.
Fig. 6.4 Inlet and catch basin
Fig. 6.5 Some typical manholes: (a) inside drop; (b) outside drop; (c) manhole for large pipe. 98
The bottom of the manhole is usually of concrete with a half-round or U-shaped trough for the water. Tributary conduits intersecting above the grade of the main drain may be brought directly into the manhole and flow allowed to drop inside (Fig. 6.5a), or a drop may be constructed outside the manhole (Fig. 6.5b). The latter method is preferred where drops in excess of 2 ft (0.6 m) occur in sanitary sewers to avoid splashing, which might interfere with work in the manhole. Manholes are usually about 4 ft (1.2 m) in diameter at the conduit, decreasing to 20 or 24 in. (0.5 to 0.6 m) at the top. If the conduit is less than 4 ft (1.2 m) in diameter, the manhole is usually centered over the pipe. For large conduits, .the manhole will spring from one wall of the pipe (Fig. 6.5~). Manhole covers and cover frames are usually of cast iron, and the combin’ation will weigh 200 to 600 lb. (9Oto 270 kg). The light frames and covers are used only where subject to negligible traffic loads, while the heavier combinations are employed on major highways.
The urban drainage system consists of sewers, gutters, street inlets, and culverts. The design of each element is discussed below.
Storm sewer design
The design of storm sewers in large catchments is similar to that discussed earlier in section 6.1.2 for small catchments, but estimation of flow in large catchments is often conducted using computer simulation models such as the SWMM model (sec. 6.2.3).
Rainfall excess from a roadway watershed either is by overland flow or intercepted by some form of a gutter. Typical gutter shapes are of three types: Curb, V shaped, and curb with depressed gutter. All three cross-sections are shown in Fig. 6. 6. Typical commercial area design is done using the curb type, whereas residential areas use both the curb and no-curb V shapes. The no-curb type is primarily used where swales (ditches that both infiltrate and transport) are used in a drainage plan, and usually average flow velocity is less than 2 fps. (0.6 mps). Details of design of the curb type gutter is given elsewhere (Wanielista et al., 1997)
1. Curb with stralghl
2. NO curb. V-shaped
3. Curb wth
Fig. 6.6 Typical gutter sections. (After FHWA, 1984). In arid and semiarid areas, special considerations should be placed on the deposited sediments in these curbs. Such sediments should be controlled in order to have proper drainage. From the top of a continuous slope to the end or bottom, the watershed area grows, and if the roadway width to the center line or cross-sectional slope peak remains constant, the area increases linearly. As the area increases, the depth and width of flow increases. Velocity of flow in the gutter is not constant but will vary with the depth and width of flow. If the watershed area vanes linearly with gutter distance, an average velocity may be at first estimated as the velocity of flow at the midpoint in the watershed. This velocity is used to estimate time of concentration, and thus intensity of rainfall. Gutter design may be iterative. However, the gutter area must be capable of transporting the flow rate for any condition, otherwise overtopping or flooding will occur. Inlets to capture the water are designed to eliminate flooding.
Street inlet design
There are essentially two types of inlets for the collection of stormwater: a curb opening and a gutter opening. These openings can also be used in combination. The typical curb and gutter inlets with grate are shown in Fig. 6. 7. The curb inlet is formed by an opening in the curb face and generally has a depressed gutter section in front. The gutter inlet is formed by an opening in the gutter which is covered by a metal grate. These are usually square or rectangular in However, in some applications, a slotted pipe that allows drainage to enter shape. continuously along its longitudinal axis is used (see Fig. 6. 8). The combination inlet is also shown in Fig. 6. 8.
Fig. 6.7 Perspective views of gutter and curb-opening
inlets. (After FHWA, 1984)
Fig. 6. 8. Perspective views of combination and slotted drain inlets. (After FHWA, 1984) Curb-opening inlets allow a capture of a specific maximum quantity and flow rate. They operate as weirs up to a depth equal to the opening height (h), then the inlet operates as an orifice at about 1.4 times the opening height. There is a transition section of flow from the weir to orifice flow rate There are many different grate configurations that affect the “catch” efficiency. Empirical design procedures for interception capacity and efficiencies for seven grate types, slotted inlets, curb inlets, and combination ones are given in greater detail by the U.S. Federal Highway Administration, FHWA (1984). Also presented are additional details on roadway geometry, embankment, inlets, bridge deck inlets, unsteady-state flow, and IDF curve development.
Detention and retention storage facilities (ponds) have been extensively used in urban areas to control runoff from developments. These facilities are normally designed to control the peak rate of runoff to the level which would have been expected from the site under predeveloped conditions. In most cases the design does not analyze the following: The increased velocities at the outset of the facility.
The effects of the facility on the downstream channel system. The combined effects of several storage facilities within a drainage area. The design and use of detention and retention storage facilities concentrated on their advantages including flood control, water quality improvement, and recreation and aesthetic qualities. The negative aspects of these facilities include problems related to maintenance, water quality, aesthetics, and cost. In addition, the effects of these facilities on the downstream channel system include increased velocity at the discharge, changes in the shape of the discharge hydrographs resulting in higher downstream stages for longer time periods. This creates streambank stabilization problems, and storing runoff for varying periods of time within the facility causing settling of suspected sediment which results in discharging runoff that will erode downstream channels in order to maintain its natural sediment carrying capacity. Detention and retention storage facilities are important elements in any comprehensive stormwater management program but their design must take into account their effects on the downstream channel system. Design must include measures to mitigate their negative aspects and decrease downstream erosion and streambank degradation. The effect of a detention facility on runoff flow rates can be shown most descriptively by observing the inflow and outflow hydrographs for a detention pond, as shown in Fig. 6.9. Note that although the total volume of runoff (area under the curves) is not reduced, the flow rate leaving the detention facility is significantly lower than the inflow rate. The objective, then, of any on-site detention facility is simply to regulate the runoff from a given rainfall event and to control discharge rates to reduce the impact on downstream drainage systems either natural or man made. Generally, detention facilities will not reduce the total volume of runoff but will simply redistribute the rate of runoff over a certain period of time by providing temporary “live” storage of a certain amount of the runoff. The volume of temporary live storage provided is the volume indicated by the area between the inflow and outflow hydrographs ( Fig. 6.9). The major benefti derived from properly designed and operated detention facilities is the reduction in downstream flooding problems. Other benefits include reduced costs of downstream drainage facilities, reduction in pollution of receiving streams, and even enhancement of aesthetics within a development area by providing the core of bluegreen areas for parks and recreation.
Stormwater detention ponds are frequently connected together with culverts. A typical culvert is a hydraulically short (generally, less than a few hundred feet) conduit that conveys stormwater from one detention pond to another, or through the culvert, friction forces, inlet losses, and exit losses force water on the upstream side to pond at a deeper elevation. Thus, various inlet configurations and a variety of materials are used in culvert design to decrease head losses. In addition, there are a variety of culvert shapes as shown in Fig. 6.10. The selected shape is based on construction cost, limitation on upstream water surface elevation, embankment heights, and flow-rate limitations. Flow rates through a culvert may be improved by reducing friction losses at the inlet side. Since upstream ponded areas and natural channel characteristics are usually wider than the culvert width (barrel width), there is a flow contraction at the culvert. A more gradual flow transition will lessen the energy loss; leveled edges are more efficient than square ones, and side or slope tapered inlets further reduce the flow contraction. Other factors affect flow rates and headwater conditions, many of which must be examined when determining culvert sizes, inlet construction details, and headwater elevations. &vales are vegetated open channels that infiltrate and transport runoff waters. By incorporating the hydroiogic processes of runoff and infiltration. A swale design based on quantity is possible. Low velocities are important to prevent particle transport and loss of soil. The vegetation within the swales are very effective for the removal of solids and retention of soil. Erosion can be lessened by a vegetative area immediately after construction. Swale volume must be available to contain the runoff waters. In highway designs for high speed situations, safety must be considered. Thus, a maximum depth of water equal to about 1.5 ft. (0.5 m) and flow line slopes on the berms of 1 vertical/20 horizontal are recommended. Along lower-speed highways or in some residential/commercial urban settings, steeper flow line berm slopes (1 on 6) are acceptable.
150 6 E L 100 s .z :! 0 5C
Future condltlon runoff (Inflow to detentron has&n)
Existing cond4tion runoff Outtlow from detcntlon basin
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Fig. 6.9. Typical detention system hydrographs
Fig. 6.10 Commonly used culvert shapes.
Stormwater volume and pollutants in the stonnwater can be controlled by diverting the stormwater to infiltration ponds adjacent to the sewer line. The quantity diverted can be expressed in terms of the depth of runoff over the entire watershed or the diversion of the runoff from the first quantity (depth) of precipitation. Examples of both criteria are to (1) divert the first half-inch of runoff (over the total watershed) and (2) divert the runoff from the first inch of rainfall. If the runoff coefficient for a watershed is 0.5, then the runoff from the first inch of rainfall is the same as the first half-inch of runoff. Thus, the criteria may be consistent with one another. The percolation pond can be built at less depth but occupy greater surface area for a given volume of runoff. However, the less deep pond will infiltrate a depth (amount) of stormwater in less time than a deeper pond because of the lesser depth. An infiltration rate of 1 in./hr can drain a 2Adeep pond in 24 hr, whereas a 4-ftdeep pond will take more than 24 hr.
Therefore, less deep ponds are more likely to recover storage capacity before the next runoff event and the size of the pond to store the first specified amount of runoff from each and every storm will be less.
Evaluation of urban drainage methods
There is a remarkable spatial variation in the frequency of high-intensity storms in arid and semi-arid regions. Although the volume and intensity of individual (high-intensity) storms may not be significantly different and the average discharge for similar sewer systems is comparable, the number of sewer overflows may vary between 80 and 135% of the average depending on rainfall spatial variability. If combined sevvers are used, excessive hydraulic and pollutant loads reach the wastewater treatment plants causing several operational problems. The combination of collection, storage, and transport functions in these combined sewers is suboptimal from the water quality point of view. Some overflow wntrd structures such as water sedimentation tanks may be used to handle combined sewer overflow. On the other hand, use of separate stormwater sewers, although more costly, appear to be highly adequate. The stormwater could be discharged to detention pond systems and reused over the watershed for irrigation. The reuse of stormwater reduces the vdume of discharged stormwater, thereby decreasing the loss of a potential freshwater resource and decreasing the pollutant discharge from the system. Since the majority of drainage facilities are for smaller drainage areas, there is the need to adequately define the spatial and temporal distribution of local storms in arid and semiarid regions. Rainfall induced floods may occur as a result of a severe storm over the contributing watershed. These storms are classified as either local storms or general storms. Local storms are typically short duration, high intensity rainfalls of limited aerial distribution. General storms are large systems that are often associated with frontal activity. They are lower intensity, longer duration storms that cover very large areas. Design of urban drainage systems should, therefore, account for possible induced floods. Stormwater pond systems are among the more adaptable, effective and widely applied in urban drainage in developing areas. Their popularity can be attributed to their proven ability to attenuate flows from design storms, economies of scale compared to other types of urban drainage methods, high urban pollutant removal capability, community acceptance, and effect on adjacent land prices. In recent years, many communities have adopted regional stormwater pond policies to achieve maximum stormwater benefits at the watershed scale at the least cost. A full description of the regional pond approach can be found in Hartigan (1986). However, the environmental impact of stormwater ponds should be evaluated in each case.
vs. modern methods
As indicated in chapter 2, the climate of arid and semi-arid areas is charactetized by rainfall variability in both space and time coupled with high potential evaporation rates. This problem is aggravated by the highly localized nature of wnvectiie rainfall in and lands (UNESCO, 1977). Highly localized and intensive rainfalls produce surface runoff character&d by a high peak discharge and high sediment loads. On the other hand, shortage of water resources is a serious environmental problem faced by all arid lands. It is appropriate then to adopt modem, rather than traditional, methods of urban drainage in order to achieve effective collection and utilization of stormwater runoff. On the other hand, modem rainwater catchment systems include installation of roof systems which have distinct advantages of supplying uncontaminated water directly to homes (i.e. water harvesting). More details are given in chapter 7.
Collection of stormwater
Traditionally, surface runoff is wllected along with domestic wastewater in a combined sewer. This was thought to be a less expensive way of stormwater collection but proved to be troublesome and resulted in costly environmental problems. Use of a separate storm sewer
system to collect surface runoff is more cost-effective and allows for reuse of stormwater as a valuable water resource. The stormwater, as collected in a storm sewer, requires minimal treatment and could be reused in irrigation. Modern materials and construction methods could be used to construct storm sewer lines knowing that stormwater is not corrosive and could be conveyed in sewers at minimal slope. In recent years there has been increasing concern for sewer maintenance and rehabilitation as a long-term strategy. This concern will increase as stormwater systems take on greater roles in water quality. Closed-circuit television (CTV) inspection is conducted to determine the condition of the sewer interior and observe cracks and holes for quick repair.
Storage aid reuse of stormwater
Stormwater detention basins are storage facilities designed to control the peak rate of runoff in urban areas. Such storage facilities are important elements in any comprehensive stormwater management program. Their advantages as modern methods include flood control, water quality improvement, and recreation and aesthetic qualities. Their importance as elements of urban drainage in arid and semi-arid lands become apparent when increased urban runoff associated with high-intensity storms occur in developed areas. In contrast, infiltration ponds have been traditionally used to reduce flooding by soaking of runoff into the ground. This results in environmental pollution problems. Thus, infiltration ponds have not prove themselves to be effective stormwater management facilities in many municipalities (Debo, 1995). A modern alternative to discharge of stormwater from wet detention pond systems is the reuse of the stormwater over the watershed for irrigation (Wanielista et al. 1997). The reuse of stormwater reduces the volume of discharged stormwater, therefore decreasing the loss of a potential freshwater resource and decreasing the pollutant discharge from the system. The stormwater can be used for a number of purposes including (1) irrigating open lands, (2) recharging groundwater, (3) supplementing water used for cooling purposes, (4) supplementing car wash water, (5) enhancing and creating wetlands, and (6) supplying water for agricultural use. The re-use pond differs from the typical detention pond in that instead of the temporary storage being depleted using a discharge device, such as a weir or orifice, it is drawn down using a re-use system. Even though the re-use system can be used to draw down the pond, a discharge structure is still necessary for flood control.
The state-of-the-art of traditional methods of urban drainage in arid and semiarid climates is In small size catchments, the rational method for estimating peak flowrates is reviewed. extensively used, but due to its idealistic assumptions (which can never be available in arid and semiarid catchments) the accuracy of the produced results is unsatisfactory. Unless the catchment size is small and the drainage design is preliminary, the rational method should not be used. In large size catchments, existing computer models - especially the SWMM - are used and thought to be most applicable if the catchment is divided into small subcatchments, and the model is applied to each individual subcatchment. However, due to problems generated as a result of the high variability in infiltration and rainfall, and the long dry period between two successive rainstorms, the accuracy of the produced drainage design is not satisfactory. Further research is needed to realistically consider, for drainage design purposes, the processes of sheet erosion and excessive sediment transportation under the effect of flash floods, and the high variability of infiltration and rainfall.
AGNEW, C. AND ANDERSON, E. (1992). Water Resources in the Arid Realm. Routledge Publishers, London, England. ASCE (1970). Design and Construction of Sanitary Storm Sewers. American Society of Civil Engineers, Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice No. 37, New York, NY.
ASCE (1982). Gravity Sanitary Sewer Design and Construction. American Society of Civil Engineers, Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice No. 60, New York, NY. CEDERGEN, H.R., O’BRIEN, K.H. AND ARMAN, J.A. (1972). Guidelines for the Design of Subsurface Drainage Systems for Highway Structural Sections. Report No. FHWARD-72-30, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C. CHOW, V.T., MAIDMENT, D.R. AND MAYS, L.W. (1988). Applied Hydrology. McGrawHill, Inc., New York, NY. DEBO, T.N. (1995). Urban Channel Systems - The Engineering Issues of Impact Mitigation. In: Stormwater Runoff and Receiving Systems, Henicks, E.E. ed., CRC Lewis Publishers, New York, NY. FHWA (1984). HEC No.12, Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Departement of Transportation. FRENCH, R.H. (1990). Hydraulics/Hydrology of Arid Lands. American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, NY. HARTIGAN (1986). Regional BMP Master Plans. In: Urban Runoff Quality - Impact and Quality Enhancement Technology, B. Urbonas and L.Roesner, ed., American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, NY, 351-365. LINSLEY, R.K., FRANZINI, J.B., FREYBERG, D.L. AND TCHOBANOGLOUS, G. (1992). Water-Resources Engineering. 4th ed., McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, NY. MACAITIS, W.A. (1994). Urban Drainage Rehabilitation Programs and Techniques. American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, NY. METCALF AND EDDY, INC. (1971). Storm Water Management Model. Metcalf and Eddy, Inc., University of Florida, Gainesville, and Water Resources Engineers, Inc. Vol. 1, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. VIESSMAN, W., JR. AND LEWIS, G.L. (1996). Introduction to Hydrology. 4th ed., Harper Collins College Publishers, New York, NY. UNESCO (1977). Development Of Arid And Semi-Arid Lands: Obstacles And Prospects. MAB Technical Note 6, UNESCO, Pans. WANIELISTA, M., KERSTEN, R. AND EAGLIN, R. (1997). Hydrology: Water Quantity and Quality Control. 2”d ed., John Wiley 8 Sons, Inc., New York, NY.
Sustainable solutions for urban drainage in arid and semiarid regions
The previous chapters discussed variety of problems of urban drainage in arid climates. Problems related to data collection, to stormwater prediction, and to maintenance of drainage facilities have been highlighted. It has been clarified that although stormwater runoff is normally of small quantities in arid areas, its flashy nature can cause serious environmental hazards. Proper management of such water can be an effective measure of environment protection and, in the mean time, can provide significant amount of water to be added to sustainable water sources. In this chapter, some sustainable solutions for urban drainage problems would be discussed. These solutions are water harvesting, infiltration potential and natural drainage.
Water harvesting is an old method used to capture rain water, store it, then make it available for different uses and particularly for drinking and cooking (Appan, 1997). It helps to save money on water bills and reduce the dependence on municipally supplied water. In arid and semi-add areas, where shortage of water supply exists, the harvested water can be a significant addition to available water sources. A rain water harvesting system consists mainly of a collection area, a conveyance system, and a storage area. Figure 7.1 shows schematic presentation for a typical rain water harvesting system. e e
b b b b
b b b d
Figure 7.1. Schematic presentation
for a typical rain water harvesting system
The collection area is a surface, preferabiy impervious, that can capture and/or carry water to where it can be used immediately or stored for later use. It can be either of the followings: . Roofs . Driveways . Parks . Contoured surface . Furrows, Channel, Lakes, Pools . ..etc The size of the collection surface and its physical characteristics (such as absorption, cover, slope, roughness . . .etc.) are important factors affecting its efficiency. The function of the conveyance system is to carry water to the storage site. This can be the drain pipes from the roof or channels on the ground, which may be lined with hard impermeable surface or ordinary local soil material. The conveyance system can be few meters long to hundreds of meters depending on the distance between the collection area and the usage area but the closer both sides the better from the point of view of water losses and cost of construction. The storage area can be as simple as a container such as a drum or a barrel placed under a rain gutter downspot or it can more sophisticated such as a tank (steel, aluminum, concrete or fiber glass . . .etc) on the ground with a shut off system and pumping facilities, also filtration may be added if the water to be used for human usage. The size of the storage system depends on the required amount of water and the expected rainfall and the size of the collection area. The longer the water is kept in storage the greater are the generated problems of stagnate, odorous, breeding of flies and insects, in addition to problems of health hazards. The storage system should be free from in/out leakage to avoid water infection and water losses, respectively. For individual houses, small capacity storage system ( lo-20 m3 ) may be used. Due to the high cost involved in the construction and maintenance of storage systems of harvested water for human usage, two different ways of storage may be adopted; one for human consumption which should be clean, hygienic, and another for gardening, floor washing, toilets . . .etc. Obviously, the more sophisticated the system the higher the cost.
The . . . .
Design of rainwater
quantity of harvested rainwater is mainly affected by the following factors: Intensity and duration of rainfall Size of collection area The physical characteristics of the collection area The rate of water losses by different ways (evaporation, leakage, infiltration, interception . ..etc) . The storage capacity . Water demand Considering zero losses, the amount of harvested rainwater can be identified by simple calculations or from Table 7.1. The losses (such as the absorption of the collection surface, evaporation rate, and losses from the conveyance and storage systems) should be minimized in order to maximize the efficiency of the rainwater harvesting system. The quality of harvested water depends, among others, on the location of the storage system. Collected rainwater from roofs is generally higher in quality than the one received through municipal pipe, especially where the ground and the water are affected by chemicals arid pesticides and many other pollutants. The salt content of the rainwater is in the range of 30 ppm, compared to 360 - 500 ppm for city water and 2400+ppm for some well water. The complexity of the harvested rainwater depends on the purpose of use. In places of high air pollution, the rainwater is not safe for drinking without treatment but it may be used for toilet flushing, agriculture, driveway washing . . .etc.
7. 1. 2 Maintenance
Maintenance of the rainwater harvesting system should be made frequently every 3-4 months and consists of:
. . . .
Keeping gutters, pipes, channels and the storage screen clean from dirt, leaves, entry of mosquitoes.. .etc. Checking the performance of the filters (in some cases the Ultra-violet lamp for water sterilization) and replacing when needed. The storage (tank) should be deaned frequently, especially when it empties in the nonrainy period. Periodic testing of water for the contamination by bacteria Leakage from the conveyance and storage systems should be examined frequently and properly treated.
Table 7.1. Harvested rainwater volume “m3 y for different rainfall depths and different sizes of collection area
RoioWI io mm
Sizeof cokctio surface in m* 100
150 200 250
-ii- --ii- loo -is2.5 7.5010.0 12.5
3.75 5.0 6.25 7.50 8.75 8.75
15.0 17.50 20.0 11.25 15.0 18.75 22.9 26.25 30.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0
43.75 50.0 52.50 60.0 61.25 70.0 30.0 35.0 37.50 45.0 43.75 52s
18.75 25.0 31.25 37.H
22.50 26.25 26.25 30.0 33.75 3730 45.0 52.50
35.0 43.75 40.0 45.0
.2.5C 15.0 17.5
52-H 61.25 70.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0
67.54 78.75 90.0 50.0 62.50 75.0 87.50 100.0
56.25 60.0 70.0 75.0 90.0 B7.50 m5.a 00.0 20.0
105.0 120.0 22.50 140.0 60.0 57.50 80.0 75.0 ,OO.O
800 !wo 1ooo
12.50 35.0 .25.0 50.0
Costs of rainwater
The installation cost of the rainwater harvesting system is low and varies from country to country depending on the materials used and the cost of labor. It is estimated3 (Fok, 1998) that if one constructs his own system the cost will be from US$ 10 to US$250/m , depending on the materials used. In developing countries it may even cost very much less. The only major cost will be the storage. The cost has been found (WHO, 1981) depends on the user per capita annual income, and is also strongly depends on the scarcity of water resources and the cost of other alternatives (desalination, wastewater recycle or import). Table 7.2 shows the average cost according to the affordable income. The following Table 7.2 indicates that per-capita annual income less than US$50, the user has no choice but to use ponds as the water storage tank or fetch water from other sources. Table 7.3 shows a comparison of rainwater harvesting system to other methods. The As in most developing lower range of income is for self constructed or by teamwork.
countries as well as in the and countries of the Middle East is more than US$ 150, thus most of the people in these countries can afford the cost of rainwater harvesting system. Table 7.2. Attributes of rainwater catchment system (WHO, 1981)
Table 7.3. Cost comparison of rainwater harvesting systems against other water supply techniques (Lee et al., 1991) Cooperative Effort Source of Water
in arid and semi-arid
Due to the shortages of water supply, rainwater harvesting have been exercised in many countries of arid climates. It has been reported (US National Academy of Sciences, 1974) that rainwater harvested in Israel with as little as 24 mm rainfall at Negev Desert and this low rainfall yielded significant quantity of water. In Iraq, although there are a number of rivers but the country suffers from fresh water in some regions, so people used to collect rainwater from the roof through gutters and pipes and then to the storage, which is any thing, that can be offered. In Libya, in places of severe salt water intrusion exists and affect the quality of water supply, rainwater harvested from roofs in most cities. In Iran, rainwater harvesting was used in many places to supply water for agriculture and human usage. The water storage, called “Abanbar” is shown in Figure 7.2. “Abanbar” is actually excavated cistern which is also called “Haze”. Stairs in the collection canal can have different types as shown in Figure 7.3. The “abanbar has openings on top to allow inside air circulation (Figure 7.4). Figure 7.5 shows views for the abanbar systems, which received their design long time ago but still in use in some parts of Iran to date. The most common shape of the “abanbar” is cylindrical, covered by stones or bricks in the form of dome. In cases that amount of harvested rainwater is not sufficient to fill the cistern, water from river flow, spring water or “qanat” (long infiltration galleries) is directed into the “abanbar.” Similar systems are employed in many places in the world. Figure 7.6 shows a typical rainwater harvesting system in Srilanka. It can be seen that the rainwater is diverted from the roof to two tanks. Water can be raised manually or by using a pump for utilization. Feasibility study (Zuhair et al., 1999) have shown that rainwater harvesting in the Arabian Gulf States can provide significant amount of fresh water for different usage. For example; In Kuwait: 12 % of water demand for landscape agriculture; 109
Oman (Muscat): 27% of water demand for industry; In Saudi Arabia (Abha):ll% of water demand for industry and landscape irrigation; In UAE (Al-Ain):l6% of water demand for agriculture. Ventilation Cap entilation Shaft Y
-- . r
Figure 7.2. Main components
of the Abanbar
Figure 7.3. Some types of staircases in the Abanbar
Figure 7.4. Air circulation system in the Abanbar
Figure 7.5. Entrance to the Abanbar system
Figure 7.6. A Typical rainwater harvesting system in Srilanks
Types of rainwater
There are a variety of rainwater harvesting systems which can be systematically distinguished according to their hydraulic properties as: l The “total flow type” (Figure 7.7). The total runoff flow is confined to the storage tank, passing a filter or screen before the tank. Overflow to the drainage system only occurs when the storage tank is full. It is important, that in the case of a clogged screen or filter, that there is no overflow before the tank.
Q b b b
Figure 7.7. Total flow type rainwater usage system + The “diverter type” (Figure 7.8) which contains a branch installed in the vertical rainwater pipe after the gutter or in the underground drainage pipe. The collected fraction is separated from the total flow at this branch and a surplus is diverted to the sewerage system; most of these branches contain a fine-meshed sieve diverting most of the particles to the sewer. These devices are a typical invention of the period, when
rainwater usage was only looked on to save drinking water and the diversion of stormwater to a sewer was the usual and accepted habit. The ratio of efficiency of the diverting devices decreases with increasing flow. So, during heavy rain, most of the runoff is diverted to the sewerage system. At low precipitation rates, a minimum flow is diverted to the sewer and the efficiency decreases to zero (Graf, 1995). Utilization Q b b b bbb b
:::::::::............._ ...__ _:*. .. VJmk......: ...... .
Figure 7.8. Diverter type rainwater usage system
The “retention and throttle type” (Figure 7.9); The storage tank here provides an additional retention volume, which is emptied via a throttle to the sewer (Mall-Beton, 1999).
b b b bbAb b
Retention volume Consumption volume ( Sewer Throttled overflow
Figure 7.9. Retention and throttle type rainwater usage system
The “infiltration type” (Figure 7.10). Local infiltration from the surplus tank overflow is a possible alternative to the diversion to the sewer. It has been shown (Herrmann et al., 1999a) that by the combination of rainwater usage and local infiltration, the natural local water balance can be restored and maintained independent of the infiltration capacity of the soil, and independent of available surface for infiltration facilities. It has been found that the most effective cleansing process for roof runoff is natural sedimentation in the storage tank. Therefore, the simplest method of treatment is to avoid turbulent mixing within the tank to prevent the sediment from mixing within the water column. A fine-meshed filter in the pressure pipe after the pump is not necessary and not recommended. Chemical disinfection is absolutely not necessary and would only result in the
formation of carcinogenic chlorinated hydrocarbons if done by chlorine. The only further device to recommend is a sieve of 0.5 - 1.0 mm in the pipe before the pump, to prevent residues of the plumbing from entering the pump and the installation. After first operation, the sieve may be removed to reduce pressure losses in the suction pipe. Utilization 4 n
Figure 7.10. Usage and infiltration type rainwater usage system
A long-term simulation (10 years of precipitation data) has been made (Herrmann et al., 1999b) to identify various hydraulic factors in connection with the rainwater harvesting systems. In the simulation, the following expressions are called: Storaae tank (if situated underwound called cistern): Watertight tank for the collection and storage of roof runoff. Storaae volume or tank volume: Volume of a tank which is emptied only by consumption of rainwater. Retention volume: Volume in a tank which is emptied continuously via a throttle outlet independent of consumption. The retention volume does not serve for consumption purposes but is for buffering and retention of peak flows of the roof runoff. Service water or cistern water: The water taken out from a rainwater storage tank, pumped and distributed by pipes in a building for consumption. When there is a lack of rainwater, the storage tank or a special refill tank before the pump is filled up by drinking water refill from the public network. Rainwater: This is the portion of service water derived from roof runoff, the rest is called drinking water refill (refill). Roof runoff (runoff): Volume of the total runoff from the connected roofs. Overflow: When the storage tank is full, the surplus of roof runoff is diverted as overflow. Drinkina water: The water consumption of a system connected household or unit taken from the public network, including the refill. Svstem efficiencv: The percentage of service water provided by collected rainwater. Collection efficiency: The percentage of the roof runoff which is consumed. Effective area “4:: The horizontal projection of the roof. Based on the assumption that the average water consumption in household is dependent on the age of installation, household appliances and varies between 100 and 145 liter per capita per day, the simulation provided results, which are summarized in Figs 11 to 13. Figure 7.11 shows the relationship between system efficiency for a range of service water consumption rates, storage volumes and roof areas. The results were used to calculate the specific daily consumption rate, in mm/d, defined as the daily service water consumption to the effective roof area. Further, the storage volume is related to the roof area , to give the specific storage volume, which is used for the sizing of centralised stormwater retention tanks. The derived data set is represented in Figure 7.12.
50 012345678 012345678
4 6 8 10 12 0
2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Figure 7.11. Relationship
between system efficiency and storage volume
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Specific rainwater consumption [mm/d]
Figure 7.12. System efficiency and specific consumption for various specific storage volumes (Herrmann et al., 199913) lspection of Figure 7.12 reveals that the system efficiency depends on the specific consumption rate, but does not depend on the roof extent. For a private household, the average drinking water saving will be between 30% and 60% using a 4 - 6 m3 tank, depending on the consumption habits and the available roof area. When the maximum system efficiency is desired, the necessary tank volumes can be taken from Table 7.4. Figure 7.13 gives the measured consumption data of a house, where two adults and two children live in Germany.
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 [n&d]
Figure 7.13. Ovefflow and specific rainwater consumption for various specific storage volumes (Herrmann et al., 1999b)
Table 7.4. Tank volumes for maximum system efficiency
There are three types of rainwater reservoir sizing models. These are the critical period, Moran and behavioral models. Critical period methods identify the use sequences of flows where demand exceeds supply to determine the storage capacity. The sequences of flows or time series used in this method are usually derived from historical data. In Moran method (Moran, 1959) a system of simultaneous equations are used to relate reservoir capacity, Behavioral models demand and supply. The analysis is based upon queuing theory. simulate the operation of the reservoir with respect to time by routing simulated mass flows through an algorithm which describes the operation of the reservoir. The operation of the rainfall collector will usually be simulated over a period of years. The input data which is in time series form are used to simulate the mass flow through the model and will be based upon a time interval of either a minute, hour, day or month. More details of these models can be found elsewhere (McMahon and Mein, 1978). The general wnfigration of a rainwater collection system is illustrated in Figure 7.14. As described by Jenkins et al. (1978) two operation algorithms can be identified; namely, the yield after spilling “YAS” and the yield before spilling “YBS”.
b A ‘1 yt A \ s c Y v I
Figure 7.14. Illustration of rainwater collection operating systems The YAS operating rule is: Dt Yt = min -c- N-1 Vt-, +Qt-Yt Vt = min s - Yt where R1is the rainfall (m) during time interval “t”, Qt , Vt , Y r and D t are the rainwater runoff (m3 ),volume in store (m3 ), yield from store (m 3 ) and demand (m 3), respectively, during the time internal. S, and A are store capacity (m 3, and roof area (m2), respectively. The YAS operating rule assigns the yield as either the volume of rainwater in storage from the preceding time interval or the demand in the current time interval whichever is the smaller. The rainwater runoff in the current time interval is then added to the volume of rainwater in storage from the preceding time interval with any excess spilling via the overflow and then subtracts the yield. The YBS operating rule is: Q Yt = min -=E M-7+ Qt Vt-, + Qt -Yt Vt = min
The YBS operating rule assigns the yield as either the volume of rainwater in storage from the preceding time interval plus the runoff in the current interval or the present demand whichever is the smaller. The rainwater runoff in the current time interval is then added to the volume of the rainwater in storage from the preceding time interval before subtracting the yield and
allowing any excess to spill via the overflow. More details about these operating rules and their applications can be found elsewhere (Jenkins et al., 1978; among others).
As described in the previous chapters, soils of arid catchments are subject to fluctuations in daily temperature and this leads to its disintegration. This increase the infiltration potential of these catchments to the degree that they can be used as sustainable solutions for urban drainage problems. To avoid the hazards of flash floods, water can be directed to basins, ditches, bonds . . . etc in these catchments where it will infiltrate and recharge groundwater reservoirs. This process can be one or more of the following benefiis: . Protect urban facilities from the hazards of flash floods . Conserve and dispose of runoff and flood water . Eliminate the decline in groundwater levels . Reduce (or prevent) salt water intrusion . Allow heat exchange by diffusion through the ground The methods used for the above process are very much the same used for direct groundwater artificial recharge. In these methods, flood is directed to the permeable ground surface where it infiltrates through the unsaturated zone to slowly reach the underground water table. Popular techniques include spreading and ponds. Spreading techniques are by far the most widely used methods in the and areas of the Middle East. They are classically defined as including the following: 1) basin; 2) furrow or ditch; and regulated wadi (or flooding). Basin is the most popular of all spreading methods. It is used in Oman and Saudi Arabia. It requires the building of dikes or small dams (rockfill or earth dams 0.25 to 0.5 m high, depending on the expected vdume of flood) spaced at regular intervals (10 to 15 m). Stormwater is directed to the first basin and then it spills from one basin to the next one. Furrow (or ditch) spreading is suitable in rough or sloping terrain where they can be laid with non-silting slopes. It has been used in south of Oman to divert rural floods. The maintenance cost of this technique is less than that of the basin spreading. Wadi spreading is accomplished by widening a drainage channel to accommodate the flash floods of short duration. It has been reported successfully in many arid places in the world. In case of low vertical permeability of soils, flash stormwater runoff can be directed to where it can be taken by a recharge well to groundwater reservoirs. The recharge well is having similar characteristics to a pumping well. It can be of gravel-pack or non-gravel-pack type depending on the geological formation of the well location. The major problem of such type of well is the clogging caused by air entrainment , presence of suspended material, growth of micro-organisms and chemical reaction between the recharge stormwater and the groundwater. Pits and shafts are other alternatives to recharge wells. They are shallower and relatively larger than wells. They are opening, usually excavated by a dry excavation and terminated some distance above the water table. They may be cased, uncased, or back-filled with gravel, and may be round or rectangular in cross-section. The purpose of the shaft is to transmit the directed stormwater from the surface to groundwater reservoirs by passing slowly permeable layers in the soil or upper geologic strata. The popularity of the pits is mainly due to its low wst. The basic factors for a successful pit are correct shape and high permeability formation. Successful pits are where a thick layer of slowly permeable material exists near the surface. On the other hand, pits and shafts suffer from the same problems restricting well recharge, namely clogging.
The best method is the one that can maintain a high infiltration rate at an economical level and with sustained desirable quality of water. With that definition in mind, it would be difficult to identify a particular method as being the best for all locations and at all times. Though, spreading techniques may be described as the most widely used ones because of the
following advantages: 1) It requires smaller area; 2) Discharges water is of low turbidity and silt content; 3) Ability to recharge confined aquifers; and 4) Undesirable mixing of recharged and pumped waters can be prevented by locating wells at different depths. Spreading through basin is considered by many sources as the most commonly practiced technique. However, such a practice may not be feasible in areas of compacted layer which forms a barrier preventing direct downward percolation. For such a case, well or trench recharge would form two of two possible alternative methods. Trench recharge is favored in the Middle East, being more efficient hydraulically and economically in case of very shallow subsurface barriers. However, wells are more competitive as the thickness of the barrier increases.
To achieve optimum benefits from any of the above techniques, other than engineering factors, economical, social, health, legal, and political factors must be considered. Luckily the literature contains considerable amounts of publications on some of these aspects especially the engineering, economical, and legal factors. Unfortunately, most of the developments in these fields overlooked the interaction between these factors and their influences on the For example, proper location of the water disposal or performance of recharge systems. recharge sites would require the inspection of the following factors: the characteristics of diverted flash stormwater, factors affecting infiltration rates and movement of water within the water table (topographical, hydrogeological, hydraulics . . .etc), operation and management problems, water quality consideration, economic consideration, social constraints, legal aspects, and health hazards. Engineering aspects are meant to inspect the influence of various engineering factors on the selection, design, operation and maintenance of stormwater disposal and water recharge systems. Inspection of engineering aspects by undertaking a pilot project before indulging in an expensive large scale installation could be recommended as a good practice. Pre-construction investigation could also be attained through numerical methods. However, the factors that would mean most, for avoiding the hazards of flash stormwater runoff, can be described as being the physical and chemical characteristics of floods as well as the geological condition of water disposal area. Hydrogeological and groundwater considerations have considerable influence on the selection of a stormwater disposal scheme. The extent of these influences depend on factors such as the relationship between the physical and mechanical properties of the pervious media and desirable infiltration rates, the efficiency of the constituent material to effect or to assist chemical and biological improvement, the ability of the water bearing deposits to store recharge water temporarily and subsequently to permit groundwater movement at acceptable rates and over adequate retention times and the efficiency of abstraction works to recover the recharge water (Ineson, 1970). Economic aspects refer to the economic evaluation of the stormwater disposal system. It is considered as vary important for rational resources management. However, numerous difficulties can be met towards real applications of that aspect. These difficulties are mainly related to the wide variations in estimating the values of damages due to flash stormwater floods, and the water values with respect to its various utilizations. Nevertheless, items contributing towards economic evaluation include: 1) Tangible benefits to consider costs of damages due to flash floods; 2) Intangible benefits, mainly social benefits; 3) Value of water; 4) Direct benefits of recharged water; 5) Institutional and financial arrangements; and 6) Cost components of the water disposal and recharge systems.
To overcome the problem of water shortage and, in the mean time, to avoid the damages due j to flash floods in arid and semiarid areas, some sustainable solutions are offered. The solutions consists of using the techniques of rainwater harvesting in the urbanized areas and adopting the methods of water spreading over the infiltrating surface of catchments.
Aspects of design and maintenance of rainwater harvesting systems are reviewed with Due to the distinguished climate recommendations to ensure proper operations. characteristics (high concentrations of atmospheric dusts together with large variations in temperature, humidity and rainfall amounts) in add climates, periodic testing of harvested water together with periodic cleaning and testing of various parts of the rainwater harvesting system are highly advisable. In addition, a guide to the estimated costs is given. The rainwater harvesting systems, being implemented in many parts of the world, have been found to be a substitute to sign&ant amounts of water in the Middle Eastern and countries. Unpaved surfaces of catchments are of high infiltration rates. This is, as described in chapter 3, due to the destruction of soils and soil cracks generated as a result of seasonal and daily fluctuations in temperature in addition to the long dry period between two successive rainstorms. Such characteristics can be utilized in a useful way. Flash floods can be directed to these infiltrating surfaces, spread over them, and allow floodwater to infiltrate through the soils to the groundwater reservoir. This way, floodwater can be saved underground and damages due to the flood can be prevented to a great extent. Both rainwater harvesting and flood spreading over the infiltrating catchment surfaces can contribute significantly with considerable amounts of water to available water resources in arid climates.
APPAN, A. (1997) “Rainwater-Catchment System Technology: Concept, Classification, Methodologies And Application,” first Brazilian Conference on Rainwater Catchment, November. FOK, Y. S. (1998) “Rainwater Catchment Systems Development Guidelines,” Proc. The 25rh Annual Conference on Water Resources Planning and Management, June, Chicago, Illinois. GRAF, 0.(1995), “Regenwasserfiltereinrichtung, Gebraauchsmuster, Rollennr. 295 02 895.5 Vol. 24, Deutsches Patentamt. HERRMANN, T., KAUP, J. AND HESSE, TH.(1999a), “Innovative Water Concept Applied At An Urban Multi-Story Building,” Proceedings, 8’” International Conference on Urban Storm Drainage, Vol. 3, Sydney, 30 August - 3 September, pp. 1296-1303. HERRMANN, T. AND SCHMIDA, U.(1999b), “Rainwater Utilisation In Germany: Efficiency, Dimensioning, Hydraulic And Environmental Aspects,” Urban Water, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 307-316. INESON, J. (1970) “Hydrogeological And Groundwater Aspects Of Artificial Recharge,” Conference on Groundwater, University of Reading, September. JENKINS, D., PEARSON, F., MOORE, E., SUN, J. AND VALENTINE, R. (1978) “Feasibility Of Rainwater Collection Systems In California,” Contribution no. 173, California Water Resources Center, University of California. LEE, D. J., LEUNG, P. P., FOK, Y. S., AND CHU, S. C (199l),“Opportunity For Rainwater Cistern System In Rural Economic Development,” Proc. 5’h International Conference on Rainwater Cistern, Keeling, Taiwan, China, August. MALL-BETON (1999) “Personal Message On November Fifth,” Mall-Beton GmbH, Hufinger Str. 3945, D-78166 Donaueschingen. MCMAHON, T. A. AND MEIN, R. G. (1978) “Reservoir Capacity And Yield, “ Development in Water Science, Amsterdam: Elsevier. MORAN, P. A.(1959), “The Theory Of Storage,” London: Methuen. UNITED STATES NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES (1974) “More Water For And Lands,” National Academy of Sciences, Washington D. C., Library of Congress Catalog No. 10058. WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION (1981) “The International Drinking Water Supply And Sanitation Decade Directory,” Thomas Telford Ltd., London. ZUHAIR, A., NOUH, M., EL-SAYED, M. (1999) “Flood Harvesting In Selected Arab States, “ Final Report No. M31/99, Institute of Water Resources, 217~.
in arid and semiarid
The efficacy of urban stormwater management systems is fundamental to sustainable operation both as a stormwater drainage system as well as an ecologically-based stormwater system. The maintenance and management practices thus need to be carefully considered when formulating a stormwater management strategy for a given urban catchment. The key to sustainable operation of a stormwater management system lies in the proper selection and design of the various components of the system. Discussion on design considerations are thus included in this chapter on urban drainage maintenance and management issues. Traditional approaches to stormwater management have been based on a single management objective that considers stormwater as a source of potential hazard to public safety. Stormwater management was essentially that of stormwater drainage using two general methods, ie. (i) conveyance of stormwater to receiving waters in an hydraulically efficient manner; and (ii) detention and retardation of stormwater. Maintenance and management practices are thus traditionally directed at ensuring that the various components of a drainage system retain their respective design discharge capacities. Typical maintenance activities include channel bank protection, channel and basin desilting and removal of debris following flood events. In arid and semi-arid areas, the most prominent issue in the maintenance of stormwater drainage systems is that of sediment and gross pollutant control, often involving a higher frequency of stormwater drain inlet clean-outs and scouring of stower pipes. A stronger emphasis on the managing urban stormwater for multiple objectives, including stormwater quality improvement and ecosystem protection, has led to the development of ewlogicalbased stormwater systems. These systems are significantly different from conventional systems and require different maintenance and management practices. For example, constructed wetlands and infiltration systems have been shown to be effective in removing stormwater pollutants. The efficacy of constructed wetlands is reliant on the sustainable role of aquatic macrophytes for stormwater cleansing. The efficacy of stonnwater infiltration systems is directly related to the maintenance of the hydraulic conductivity of the infiltration media. There are also many maintenance and management issues that are not related to the operation of these systems as stormwater management measures but are necessary to ensure that they remain an integral part of the urban landscape and continue to enhance the amenity of the surrounding urban environment. Fundamental to the sustainable operation of these system is,their appropriate selection. In arid and semi-arid areas, the provision of adequate catchment runoff to sustain vegetated systems such as wetlands and grass swales or wet detention systems requires careful consideration. And and semi-and regions are characterised by low rainfall and high evaporation, with many regions having a distinct dry and wet season with the majority of the mean annual rainfall occurring in a small number of high rainfall events. These conditions are thus less conducive to stormwater systems with large permanent pools and dense vegetation. In selecting the most appropriate stormwater management practices for individual catchments, it is not enough to just consider the mean annual rainfall of the region but also the seasonal variation of rainfall.
Vegetated systems can often be sustained in semi-and areas where the seasonal variation of rainfall is not excessive. In most cases, the catchment area to individual stormwater treatment elements would tend to be larger than in tropical or temperate regions. This may result in less emphasis on near source control systems and stormwater management systems may involve a combination of convention stormwater drainage elements (eg. pipes and pits) reticulating into stomnnrater quality improvement elements in the vicinity of the receiving waters or aquifer recharge zone. In arid areas, there would be a tendency to adopt infiltration systems with an emphasis on water conservation through aquifer storage and recovery schemes (see chapter 7).
The provision of detention and retention basins is one technique available to manage stormwater runoff. A distinction is made here regarding stormwater detention and stormwater retention from a surface stormwater drainage context. Stormwater detention is defined as the temporary storage of stormwater (ie. detention) for subsequent discharge, at a lower rate, to the receiving waters. Stormwater retention is the removal, by infiltration to groundwater or by evapotranspiration, of stormwater and thereby preventing their discharge to the receiving waters. The key operating mechanism of these systems is the temporary storage of stormwater. Their efficacy is affected by the storage capacity and discharge capacity of the outlets. Solids, ranging from gross pollutants to fine particulates, are transported in stormwater and a prominent maintenance issue in detention and retention systems is the management of the long-term effects of accumulated sediment and gross pollutant loads on the stormwater detention or retention system. Stormwater retention systems can indude Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) schemes practised in arid and semiarid areas where stormwater is either injected, or allowed to percolate, into groundwater aquifers for subsequent recovery by pumping during the drier periods. These systems are designed to operate for frequent storm events and have little effects on peak discharges of large events unless they form part of a flood retarding basin. Stormwater retention systems are perhaps best suited for such source areas as roofs and car parks with pre-treatment of runoff from these surfaces for removal of gross pollutants and sediment providing a means of reducing the maintenance requirements of the retention system.
Stormwater detention system for flood management commonly adopted in stormwater management practices range from small on-site detention systems (discussed in Section 8.2.3) to large regional stormwater retarding basins. The use of regional stormwater retarding basins is wmmon in urban catchment management and these basins can either have a permanent water storage component (ie. a wet detention basin) or are completely dry during non-flood periods (ie. a dry detention basin), with dry retarding basins being more appropriate in arid areas. Both types of basins have the potential to serve multiple objectives in addition to their primary flood mitigation function. Flood retarding basins are often designed to operate optimally under large storm events with a wrnmon design criterion being the attenuation of the 100 year Average Recurrence Interval (ARI) post-urbanisation peak discharge to a level comparable to the 100 year ARI pm-urbanisation peak discharge. In catchments with sandy soils, infiltration basins have been utilised as flood retarding basins owing to the high infiltration rates of the in-situ soils. From a hydrologic and hydraulic petfomance perspective, the maintenance and management issue for these systems is principally one of maintaining the hydraulic characteristics of the basin outlet by preventing blockage of the outlet structure by flood debris or the clogging of the infiltration basin. The use of trash racks for prevention of blockage of outlet structures by flood debris is standard practice in retarding basin design and regular inspection of the outlet structure should form part of the management plan for the basin. For infiltration systems, the planting of vegetation on the floor of the basin can often reduce the risk of clogging of the infiltration media with the root systems of the vegetation continually maintaining the porosity of the underlying soil. Maintenance considerations under such circumstances would include the need to sustain the vegetation over
extended dry periods. Other maintenance issues include regular inspection of the embankment and spillway for indication of piping failure. Dry detention basins often serve as playing fields and recreation parks in addition to its flood mitigation function as illustrated in Figure 8.1. A traditional design practice in dry detention systems is the provision of a low flow channel/pipe to by-pass dry weather flows and runoff from frequent events thus avoiding the frequent inundation of the storage area. Management of sediment deposition in the retarding basin in the vicinity of the inlet to the retarding basin is also a wmmon maintenance requirement. Associated with the conjunctive use of the basin is the need to maintain suitable grass cover of the basin.
Wet detention basins are wmmonly~utilised for water pollution control, to satisfy ewlogical and conservation objectives, and provide public passive recreational amenities. Common wet detention basins in urban catchments are ponds and wetlands build within retarding basins as illustrated in Figure 8.2. In the design of these systems, it is imperative that consideration be given to ensuring a right balance between the volume of catchment runoff and that of the permanent pool to ensure that the pool would not dry up frequently. Maintenance and management issues of these systems are more complex than conventional retarding basins owing to the need to ensure a minimum water quality standard in the permanent waterbody. In addition to the requirements to ensure the hydrologic and hydraulic functions of the system, common water quality management objectives for wet detention basins include maintaining a high dissolved oxygen level in the water and reducing gross pollutant (particularly anthropogenic litter), organic loads (eg. leaf litter, sewage etc) and hydrocarbon inflow to the permanent water-body. Maintaining a regular inflow to the permanent water-body of a wet detention pond is an important management technique to ensure regular flushed and well mixed water-body. In some cases, it may be necessary to artificially mix and aerate the water-body. A wmmon design over-sight is the incompatibility of the catchment area to pond area, with the pond area being too large for a sustained permanent waterbody both in terms of water quality and hydrology. The consequence of this over-sight is the tendency for stagnant water-body, low dissolved oxygen and algal blooms. Managing wildlife in the waterbody is sometimes necessary to avoid excessive organic loading of the system which may lead to depleted dissolved oxygen and anaerobic conditions at the water/bed sediment interface leading to contamination of the waterbody by metals and nutrient released from the sediment.
An urban pond within a retarding basin (Wet Detention Basin) can satisfy a number of other stormwater management and landscape objectives.
The need to address the quality of urban stormwater runoff in recent times have led to the adoption of stormwater quality best management practices involving the use of constructed wetlands and infiltration systems as integral part of the stormwater management system. Constructed wetlands are less suited to arid regions but are widely used in semi-arid regions for stormwater quality control.
wetlands are systems designed to detain stormwater for an extended period to enable removal of pollutants, particularly those associated with fine suspended particulates. These systems are typically most appropriate for higher rainfall regions but have been extensively used in semi-and regions for stormwater quality improvement in Australia. In semi-arid regions, these systems are designed as predominantly ephemeral wetlands which fills during storm events and drains completely (except for a small permanent pool area) a few days after the storm event. Wetland systems are often designed to operate effectively for frequent storm events and large events are often allowed to by-pass the vegetated zone of the wetland to prevent resuspension of deposited material and scouring of the system (Wang et al., 1998). Figure 8.3 shows the impact of sediment load on a constructed wetland without a high flow by-pass flowpath. Wetland systems are low maintenance systems and not no maintenance systems. Careful design of these system can significantly reduce maintenance requirements and cost. Partitioning of treatment components in a wetland system allows for maintenance of individual components to be targeted, eg. gross pollutant trap followed by the inlet zone/sedimentation basin, and then the macrophyte zone. Constructed trap - designed for the removal of natural and anthropogenic gross litter. Gross pollutant loading in urban catchments can be high and maintenance frequency of gross pollutant traps is often in terms of months. Figure 8.4 shows a typical gross pollutant load generated from an urban catchment following a storm event, with the expected gross pollutant load generated from a typical urban area is of the order of 0.4 m3/ha/yr (Allison et al., 1998). The maintenance operation is dependent on the type of trap and the pollutants removed can normally be safely disposed of in municipal landfills. Gross pollutant traps with a permanent pool can cause odour problems and maintenance frequency may need to be increased. Easy access for frequent and efficient maintenance operation is an important design consideration in siting gross pollutant traps. gross pollutant
txcesswe slltatton ana scounng of a constructeo wetlana owrng IO lnaoequare prowsron for high flow management.
)m Gross pollutants generated from a typical urban catchment during a stc event.
in/et zone/sedimentation basin - designed for sedimentation of coarse to medium size particles. Typical sediment load from an urban catchment is of the order of 0.5 m3/haQr, but can be as high as 1.5 m3/ha/yr, with the majority of the sediment being in the coarse to medium size fraction.
Catchments in and and semi-and regions have been known to produce higher sediment loads owing to inadequate vegetative cover of open spaces and bank erosion of ephemeral waterways. The removal of the coarse to medium-sized fraction of sediment exported from the catchment is an important pm-treatment of stormwater prior to its discharge into the vegetated zone of the wetland system. This prevents excessive smothering of the wetland and allows the finer particulates to be removed by the vegetation in the wetland through the mechanisms of enhanced sedimentation, filtration and surface adhesion promoted by the wetland macrophytes. It is well established that the majority of urban stormwater contaminants are associated with The expected maintenance frequency of the inlet the finer fraction of suspended solids. zone/sedimentation basin of a wetland system is between 5 to 10 years, depending on the geology and level and maturity of development in the catchment. The maintenance operation involves the use of mechanical excavation of deposited sediment and vehicle access is an important design consideration of the inlet zone. Deposited coarse to medium-sized sediment can be disposed of in municipal landfill. Care needs to be taken to ensure that the sedimentation basin is not overdesigned, resulting in longer than required detention period. Longer than desired detention period promotes settling of finer material and associated contaminants (eg. metals) as well as the deposition of excessive organic material leading to possible reduced redox potential in the sediment and subsequent release of sediment bound contaminants. Excessive deposition of fine particulates may result in higher than acceptable metal concentrations in the deposited material and consequently required special disposal conditions. 2
macrophyte zone - designed for trapping and settling of fine particulates using wetland vegetation to promote enhanced sedimentation processe s (Wang et al., 1999) and typical maintenance operation of this zone includes weed control and removal of dominant macrophyte species which may alter the hydrodynamic flow characteristics of the wetland. The removal of deposited material and vegetation biomass is expected to be at a frequency of between 15 to 25 years and deposited sediment can be expected to have elevated metal and nutrient concentrations and may need to be disposed of as prescribed waste. Water level manipulations may be necessa ry as a means of controlling excessive dominance of macrophyte species as well as promoting the rapid degradation of organic matter.
In constructed wetlands, the major long term management strategy for vegetation is to ensure that the different vegetation zones receive a hydrologic regime that will allow the target specie(s) for a particular zone to survive naturally and have a competitive advantage over potentially invasive species. A major element of vegetation management is to ensure as natural a hydrologic regime as possible. Plants selected for the wetland should be predominantly native species. Most natural hydrologic regimes are variable and result in water level fluctuations and wetting and drying cycles. The normal water level of a system has to be able to vary up, but particularly down, in a relatively seasonal way to ensure good vegetation wver and stability. In constructed wetland system the design of the outlet structure is critical to achieving variable hydrologic regimes that are well matched to the requirements of vegetation. Weir outlets tend to miminise water level variation, whereas perforated riser outlets and siphons maximise variation and allow some wntroi of the hydrologic regime and the wetland vegetation. Harvesting of emergent aquatic macrophytes in stormwater treatment systems is not required as a pollutant removal mechanism. The major role of vegetation in pollutant removal during event flows is its role in enhancing sedimentation processes and providing surface area for the trapping and filtering of fine particles. During low flows vegetation provides a surface for the growth of biofrlms. Pollutant uptake and transformation by bioflms is an important stormwater treatment process during low flows. Consequently the harvesting of vegetation could potentially decrease the treatment performance of systems. However some large, deepwater species, may over time develop a canopy that can contain a substantial amount of senescent, standing biomass that may limit new growth and result in a patchy vegetation distribution. Consequently harvesting may occasionally be required to ensure vigorous and even growth across the flow path. Elecause of the vital role of vegetation in stormwater treatment systems it is not advisable to harvest the whole system at one time, should harvesting be required. The system should be progressively harvested over time to ensure uniform hydraulic resistance across the flow path and to encourage vegetation diversity.
Infiltration systems have been used as detention systems where stormwater is infiltrated through a filter media (eg. gravel trench) but subsequently collected by perforated pipes beneath the filter media for discharge to the receiving waters. Like constructed wetlands, such systems are designed to operate effectively for frequent storm events with design standards often being in the 0.5 year to 2 year ARI range, treating up to 90% of the mean annual stormwater runoff volume. Best practices in stormwater management could include the linking of these detention systems in series to promote both water quality improvement and flood mitigation outcomes. Infiltration systems are the most commonly adopted stormwater best management practice in arid regions and are often incorporated into groundwater aquifer storage and recover schemes to optimise water conservation and stormwater recycling. Maintenance requirements of infiltration systems can be significantly reduced with proper pretreatment of stormwater runoff prior to their discharge into these systems. The key management issue is that of sediment loads and the consequential clogging of the infiltration medium. Sediment load generated during land development is significantly higher than from a matured urban catchments and infiltration system should ideally no be exposed to sediment load generated during the wnstruction phase of land development. This requires implementation of environmental management plans for construction sites which aim to retain sediment on-site using sedimentation basins, geotextile filters and grassed buffer strips. The maintenance of infiltration basin operating in a matured urban catchment would involve periodic (eg. annual) tilling of the top 5 cm of the infiltration bed to break up the organic crust formed on the surface (see Figure 8.5). Often, the introduction of surface vegetation (either grass or native plants) can help maintain the permeability of the infiltration bed. Infiltration systems for road and car-park runoff management have often been designed with landscape functions as shown in Figure 8.6. The watering of grass wver to maintain aesthetic values will also yield beneficial stormwater quality outcomes.
Organic crust formed on the bed surface of an on-site infiltration system bed can lead to clogging of the system. 127
On-site detention basins are localised systems built within individual properties and are often Often the existing associated with urban consolidation of an already urbanised catchment. stormwater drainage infrastructure cannot be upgraded without significant expense and urban catchment managers have to resort to source control of increased peak discharge at the individual building lot level. These systems often deteriorate in their effectiveness over time owing to poor maintenance with the most common contributing factor being the siltation of the system and clogging of the outlet. Typical sediment load from roof areas is of the order of 0.1 to 0.2 m3/ha/yr. One of the key management practice associated with maintaining the efficacy of on-site detention system is regular inspection by local government officers. As these systems are installed within individual lots of private ownership, the efficacy of these system are affected by change in property ownership. The function (and even the presence) of these facilities are not necessarily made aware to new owners and thus their maintenance requirements are overlooked. One mechanism by which this can be managed is the keeping of a register of on-site detention basins by the local municipalities and the mandatory clean-out of these units as property ownership changes. Storm runoff from roofs should be cleared of leaves and any other roof-litter prior to discharge into on-site detention tanks. Storm runoff from paved areas including courtyards, walkways, driveways, carriageways, car parks, etc., should under no circumstances be passed directly to onsite detention tanks but instead should be pm-treated by passing it across a grassed buffer strip (as illustrated in Figure 8.6) or through a sand/loam filter at least 200 mm thick and covered with grass.
The use of porous pavements in hard standing surfaces such as car parks can significantly reduce the runoff rate and sediment load generated from an urban catchment. A typical section of a porous pavement and illustration of a car park build with porous pavement is shown in Figure 8.7.
Figure 8.7a Schematic illustration of a stormwater infiltration system beneath a car park
Figure 8.7b Porous concrete used to manage the quantii runoff.
and quality of car park stormwater
Maintenance practices to ensure the efficacy of this system is the annual dislodgement of deposited particles by high pressured hosing of the porous pavement It should. be noted that not all catchments are suited to on-site retention systems and the key to sustainable operation of these systems lie in the appropriate utilisation of this technology. Thus discussion herein on appropriate maintenance and management practices is more to do with design considerations. Soils with low hydraulic wnductivities do not necessarily preclude them from being suitable for on-site retention system even though the required infiltration area may bewme uneconomical.
However, these soils are likely to render them more susceptible to clogging if the stonnwater inflow has not undergone some degree of pm-treatment to remove litter and sediment. On-site retention systems should not be placed near building footings to avoid any likely influence of continually wet subsurface on the structural integrity of these structures. Identification of suitable sites for on-site retention systems should also include avoidance of steep terrain and area of shallow soil cover over rock. An understanding of the seasonal variation of the groundwater table is also an essential element in the design of these systems.
Stormwater conveyance systems in urban areas include the conventional underground pipe network and constructed open channels (often either grass-lined, rock-lined or concrete line or a combination of these features) to the use of grass swales and hybrid channels involving a natural and vegetated low flow channel with a grassed bench to increase the discharge capacity of the channel as illustrated in Figures 8.8 and 8.9.
p-- ‘T ’ .‘,?$ -.&j+ p3
,k Figure 8.8 Concrete-lined open channels have been a conventional approach to urban storrnwater drainage.
Figure 8.9 Grass swales are alternative drainage systems which provides both stormwater quantity and quality management. 130
Maintenance and manageme nt issues related to the effii of stormwater conveyance systems are associated with desiting and removal of gross pollutants deposited in the underground stormwater pipes and pits, and in the channel and adjoining benches. There is generally a need for frequent cleanout stormwater pits of deposited sediment and storm debris to maintain the discharge capacity of the stmer drainage network. In grass swales, maintenance will involve regular mowing of the grass and w?ed control. There are water quality benefits in maintaining a lush grass wver over the swale but this will need to be balanced against cost implications in the provision of water during extended dry periods to sustain the vegetation.
The practice of maintenance and management of urban stormwater drainage is reviewed with emphasis on applications in arid and semiarid climates. Because of the low rainfall and vegetation, and high evaporation in arid and semiarid areas, the most prominent issue in the maintenance is that of sediment and gross pollutant control. Consideration should be given to flash floods. In selecting the most appropriate stonnwater managemen t practices for individual catchments, it is not enough to just consider the mean annual rainfall of the region but also the seasonal variation of rainfall. In sandy soils, infiltration systems are suitable as stormwater best management practice in and regions and can be incorporated into groundwater aquifer storage and recover schemes to optimise water conservation and stormwater recyding. Constructed wetlands systems, designed to enable removal of pollutants particularly those associated with fine suspended particulates, are most .appropriate for higher rainfall regions but may be used in semiarid areas. In these areas, the systems could be designed as predorninantiy ephemeral v&lands which fills during storm events and drains completely (except for a small permanent pool area) a few days after the storm event.
ALLISON, R.A, WALKER, T.A, CHIEW, F.H.S., O’NEILL, I.C. AND MCMAHON, T.A. (1998) “From Roads to Rivers: Gross Pdlutant Removal from Urban Watervvays”, Report 986 Cooperatiie Research Centre for Catchment Hydrology, May 1998,97p. CAMP DRESSER AND MCKEE (1993). “California Ston-nwater Best Practice handbooks: Municipal”, Prepared for California Stonnwater Quality Task Force. STORMWATER COMMITTEE OF VICTORIA “Urban Stormwater - Best Practice ww Environmental Management Guidelines”, CSIRO Publishing, 288~. WONG, T.H.F., BREEN, P.F., SOMES, N.L.G. AND LLOYD, SD. (1998) Managing Urban Stonnwater using Constructed Wetlands, Industry Report 98/7, Cooperative Research Centre for Catchment Hydrology, November 1998,4Op.
Chapter 9 Case studies
Many models, varying in complexity, are used by professional engineers for design of urban facilities. Not only are there many models, there are many versions of the same model. Moreover, the several comparative tests that have been conducted to determine the relative accuracy of the better known models, while informative, were inconclusive. The fact is that all of the major models are useful. Each is based on well-known and acceptable flow relationships. Their water quality sections are much less well defined than their hydrologic and hydraulic sections; but even so, they are valuable tools. It should be obvious that no single model is uniquely suited for all types of problems, or even for a specific problem, nor is there a universal model. Table 9.1 shows the relative suitability of five different models to a variety of typical problems. A review of these models is given elsewhere (Yen et al., 1976). Table 9.1. Model Application
Application Rational Method Unit Hydrograph
to Urban Drainage Problems
STORM SWMM ILLUDAS
Selection of Unsuitable Unsuitable critical rainfall events Preliminary Fair analysis of urban areas Detailed Poor Poor analysis of urban areas Analysis of Unsuitable Unsuitable detention Design of Unsuitable Unsuitable detention Analysis of 1 Unsuitable j Unsuitable surcharged sewer systems Prediction of Good Fair peak flows in small systems Fair Design of sewer (for Fair systems (open small pipe flow) areas)
Poor Very good
Fair Very good Good 1 Unsuitable Poor Poor
Very good Good
GOOd Good GOOd Unsuitable
Verv mod - 1 Good
It has to be mentioned here that the model selected in Table 9.1 were for example purposes, and other models could have been equally well included in the table. The selection does not imply that these models are better but rather that they are among the relative few which receive wide use. Tomo (1979) has identified some of these models and has postulated reasons for their selection. The applications can be one or more of the following general categories: . Planning, the evaluation of future alternatives. Such applications usually start with the use of a simple model and get progressively more complex, as necessary. . Analysis, the evaluation of existing systems or the detailed study of a planned alternative.
Design, the final sizing or configuring of a system for which planning or analysis is complete. The dividing lines between these categories are by no means clear, and many applications could fall into more than one category, depending on the point of view of the model user. However, from Table 9.1, the EPA SWMM model suits a wide range of applications. This conclusion is reached by other investigators (Marsalek et al., 1975; Sueichi et al., 1984; among others). In and climates, this particular model is also proved to be as one of the best applicable models (Nouh, 1991, 1997). So, the SWMM model is used in this chapter to present the results of case studies in arid climates. The main emphasis of the chapter will be in providing examples of the range of problems, which have been addressed in chapter 3. The intention is neither to describe the models nor to provide comparative evaluations. The main categories of problems considered in this chapter are problems due to: n Duststorm effects on runoff water quality 3 Catchment size d High infiltration rates J High temporal and spatial variations of rainfall Lli High concentrations of transported suspended sediments Real data from three residential catchments in Saudi Arabia were used. The data included rainwater and runoff samples collected during duststorms events. Brief characteristics of the data are shown in Table 9.2.
Table 9.2. Characteristics
Name of catchment Rabia Siteen
Size (IO’ ml) Perviousness ratio (%) Land use Initial infiltration (mmlhr) Constant infiltration (mmlhr) Infiltration decay rate (min-‘) Depression storage (mm) on: pervious area impervious area Manning’ n Number of rainstorms Average depth (mm) Average duration (min) Average dry period between two successive rainstoms (days) Average spatial coefficient of variation Average temporal coefficient of kurtosis
110.45 117.50 39.18 40.40 Residential 48 86 5.3 17.6 0.05 0.17
917.00 43.28 83 18.5 0.15
3.80 10.80 10.56 2.70 2.90 3.05 Varied from 0.017 to 0.37 64 54.95 30.10 49.70 1.06 -1.14 317 428 96 2780 73 51.82 21.60 48.16 1.11 -1.03 306 432 96 2310 54 49.46 31.50 51.45 1.23 -1.17 326 408 96 2460
Number of collected
Number of investigated duststorms Average concentration of TSP (&m3)
Rainfall was measured with automatic gages to the nearest 0.25 mm. Discharges were determined by means of current meters (Curley, type 622) and water level recorders (SIAP, type ID 5755). It has been reported (McLaren Ltd., 1979) that the minimum speed of response of the current meters is generally of the order of about 0.03 mls. At this speed the uncertainty of the reading is about + or - 15%. At higher speeds the uncertainty improves and reaches a value of + or - 2% at speeds of 0.25 m/s or higher. Wflhin the range of flow
velocity in the investigated catchments, the average uncertainty in current meter measurements is or the order of + or - 4%, and that in the evaluated discharges is in the order of + or - 7%. More information regarding the errors of measurements in the investigated catchments are reported elsewhere (Nouh and El-Laithy, 1988a). Size and slope of the catchments were determined by means of 1:25,000 topographic survey maps. The infiltration capacity rates were determined using the available rainfall-runoff records and a procedure proposed by Whelan et al. (1952). The total suspended particulate “TSP” were evaluated during each of the investigated 98 duststorms at the selected sites in the considered catchments. This was made by using calibrated high volume air samplers located outdoors at the third floor level in the sites. The samplers were operated simultaneously during each duststorm for a period of about 38 hrs (depending on the duration of the measured duststorm). The air samples were wllected on pm-weighted glass fiber filters. The glass fiber filters were preconditioned prior to weighing, both before and after sampling in a desiccator. The high volume filters were weighted on a standard analytical balance and the particle sizing filters were weighted on an ultra microbalance with a readability of 0.1 pg. More information about the sampling techniques are reported elsewhere (Nouh et al., 1988b; Rowe et al., 1985). The average spatial coefficient of variation and the average temporal coefficient of kurtosis were used to measure the spatial and temporal variations of rainstorms over catchment, respectively. These coefficients were computed as follows: (1) For each rainstorm over a catchment, the recorded rainfall depths at each rain gage were used to determine the mean and the coefficient of kurtosis “K” for rainfall intensities at the gage site; (2) The means computed from all gage sites were used to determine the coefficient of variation for the means “SCV” (e.g. standard deviation of the means/ mean of the means). This coefficient, which describes the dispersion of the storm, is taken as a measure of the spatial distribution of the rainstorm over the catchment; (3). The coefficients of variation from all rainstorms were averaged and named “average spatial coefficient of variation - ASCV.” Similarly, coefficient of kurtosis computed in (I), which describes the peakedness of the storm, is taken as a measure of the temporal variation of a rainstorm at the gage site, and the average of the computed coefficients of kurtosis from all sites, called the storm temporal coefficient of kurtosis “SK, is a measure of the temporal variation of the rainstorm over the catchment. The coefficients of kurtosis from all rainstorms were averaged and called the average temporal coefficient of kurtosis “ASK’. This coefficient (ASK) is used as a measure of the temporal variation of the rainstorms over the catchment. The stormwater runoff samples from every rainstorm were collected every 15 minutes at the basin outlet. The collected samples were then analyzed for selected nutrients, ions, and trace metals following the standard procedures that are documented in many of reference texts (Quinby-Hunt et al., 1988; Straub, 1989). The average of the concentrations of each constituent is taken as a representative of the concentration of the constituent in the collected runoff samples. The selection of the type constituents was based on the results of previous studies [Black, 1980; Ellis et al., 1987; Marsalek and Ng, 1989; Nouh, 1991; Straub, 1989) that such constituents normally exist in urban stormwater runoff. The stormwater samples, produced from rainstorms of almost the same depth, and spatial and temporal distribution over catchment, were divided into groups according to their SK values (measure of temporal variability) of duststorms. The samples within each group were further subdivided according to their SCV values (measure of spatial variability) of the duststorms. The temporal and spatial distributions of duststorms over catchment were determined as follow: 1. During each duststorm and at each site of every catchment, the TSP was evaluated every hour (about 31-42 evaluations were made, depending on the duration of the duststonn), from which the mean value of TSP “pg/m3” and the coefficient of kurtosis “K” were computed. The coefficient of kurtosis was computed by the method of moments, and is taken as a measure of temporal variation of the duststorm at the site. 2. The means of TSP from all sites were used to compute the coefficient of variation “SCV of the duststorm over the catchment (standard deviation of the means/ mean of the means). This coefficient, which describes the dispersion of the duststorm, is taken as a measure for the spatial distribution of the duststorm over the catchment. 3. The coefficients of kurtosis, determined from the individual sites were averaged to give SK, and is taken as a measure of temporal distribution of the duststorm over the catchment.
The SCV and SK values computed from all duststorms were averaged as ASCV and ASK, and are used to measure the average spatial and temporal variability, respectively, of all duststorms over the catchment.
9.1 Effect of duststorms 9.1.1. Average TSP level
To show the general influence of duststorm, represented by the concentration of TSP, on the quality of stormwater runoff, the mean concentration of TSP in duststorms having almost the same spatial and temporal variability over the Siteen catchment (i.e. similar SCV and SK values) was determined. This was plotted vs the corresponding average concenbation of pollutants; namely Nitrate Nitrite N02IN03, Dissolved Carbon DC, Calcium Ca, Total Phosphorus TP, Sodium Na, Chloride Cl, Cadmium Cd, Lead Pb, Zinc Ze, and Iron Fe, and is shown as a typical example in Figure 9.1 using the Steen catchment data. Similar results were obtained using the data from the other two catchments. Inspection of Figure 9.1 indicates that the increase in the concentration of dusts leads to an increase in the concentration of the investigated pollutants. The concentration of some pollutants is almost doubled with the increase in the wncentration of TSP. It may be also observed that the rate of the increase in the concentration of ions (“Ca, Na, and Cl”), followed by that of metals (“Cd, Pb, Ze, and Fe”), is larger than that of nutrients (“N02IN03, DC, and TP”). Because the dynamic etfects of rainstorms on the concentration of pollutants in runoff is negligible (the runoff were produced from rainstorms of almost the same depth, ASCV, and ASK values) it may be concluded that dusts play an important rule in transporting pollutants from one place to another.
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
lSP CONCENlRAllON (ug/cu.m)
Figure 9.1. Influence of mean concentration of TSP (pg/m3) on mean concentration of pollutants (mg/l) in stormwater runoff (duststorms
Spatial variation of duststorm
As mentioned earlier, the spatial variation of a dust storm over a catchment is measured by the duststorm coefficient of variation SCV. A trial was made to plot SCV for duststonns of
similar temporal variability “SK” and similar mean TSP wncent-ration vs the concentrations of pollutants in the stormwater produced from rainstorms of similar characteristics. Figure 9.2 shows one of these plots for the Siteen catchment. Data from the other catchments produced very similar results. Inspection of Figure 9.2 reveals that the concentration of pollutants increases, with a decreasing rate, as the SCV value increases. The large spread of TSP concentrations about its mean value (reflected by the large SCV value) allows in general for larger amounts of dusts over the catchment, resulting in larger amounts of pollutants to be carried with the dusts, and then transported with the stormwater runoff to the drainage facility. The decreasing rate of the increase in the concentration of pollutants is due to the decreasing rate of dust concentration increase relative to the mean concentration of TSP over the catchment. It also can be generally noticed that the increase in the concentration of ions, followed by that of trace metals, is larger than that of nutrients.
-=-N02/N03 *Na/lOO +Ze*lO
+DC +Cl/lOO +Fe
I 0.5 1.5
Figure 9.2. Influence of duststorm coefficient of variation on concentration of pollutants (mg/l) in stormwater runoff
(dust&on-w Mean TSP = 1700 p9/m3, SK = 0.8 to 0.9; and rainstorms: ASCV = 1.2 to 1.40, ASK = 1 .O to 1.20 ).
9.1.3 Temporal variation of duststorm
The concentration of the pollutants in stormwater runoff samples, produced by rainstorms of simi!ar spatial and temporal variability over catchment and under the effect of duststorms of similar spatial variability over the catchment, was plotted against the duststorm coefficient of kurtosis. Typical plot is presented in Figure 9.3 for the Siteen catchment. The data from the other catchments produced similar results. The figures indicates that there is a considerable influence of the duststorm coefficient- of kurtosis, which describes the peakedness of the duststorm, on the concentration of the pollutants. The concentration of the pollutants increases, with an increasing rate, as the coefficient of kurtosis “SK increases. The increase in the wncentration of pollutants can be related to the increase in the concentration of TSP as the peakedness of the dust storm increases. Comparing the results of Figure 9.2 with those of Figure 9.3, it can be seen that the influence on the concentration of pollutants of the temporal variation of duststorms is more significant than that of the spatial variation of the
duststorms. This may be explained by the fact that the dynamic effect, on carrying atmospheric pollutants at a site, of a duststorm of rapidly increasing concentration of TSP is larger than that of a duststorm of slowly increasing concentration of TSP. As Figure 9.3 indicates the wncent-ration of a pollutant increased about two times (on average) as the coefficient of kurtosis increased from 0.80 to 1.43. The concentration of the ions, followed by that of the metals, was noticeably increased more than that of the nutrients. 3 10 -N02fN03 *TP *Na/lOO +Cd*lOO +DC -+Ca/lO -.-cl/100 ++Pb*lO 87
Figure 9.3. Influence of duststorm coefficient of Kurtosis on concentration of pollutants (mg/l) in stormwater runoff
(duststonns: Mean TSP = 1700 p4/m3, SCV = 0.8 to 0.9; and rainstorms: ASCV = I .2 to 1.40, ASK = I .O to 1.20 ).
Stormwater runoff samples, produced from rainstorms of similar spatial and temporal distributions and under the effect of duststorms of similar spatial and temporal distributions, were analyzed for the selected pollutants. The general pattern of the changes in the concentration of all pollutants with the catchment size was almost the same. To show this a typical example of such general pattern, the mean concentrations of one nutrient “N02/N03”, one metal “Ze”, and one ion “Na” in each of the three considered catchments were evaluated, and are plotted in Figure 9.4. It can be seen that the concentration of all pollutants increases as catchment size increases. In addition, the increase, and also the rate of such increase, in the concentration of Sodium “Na”, followed by that of Zinc “Zen, is larger than that of Nitrate/Nitrite “NOZ/N03”. This can be explained by the fact that the amount of solid particles (which acts as a carrying agent for the pollutants) generated by a duststorm over a large size catchment is greater than that generated by the duststorm over a small size catchment. So, the rule of catchment size in the changes of pollutants in stom-rwatermff is its relation with by rainfall and the amount of solid particles that are generated&y ~&s&erred then stormwater to drainage facilities.
I (N02M03)* 10 m&*10 =Na/lO
Rabia NAME OF CAXXMENT
Figure 9.4. Variation of concentration of pollutants with catchment size
(duststomw mean TSP = 2100 pg/m3, ASCV = l.lOto 1.20, ASK = 1.10 to 1.20; and rainstorms: ASCV= 1.40,ASK=l.Oto1.20). 1.2 to
of SWMM model
For each catchment (Table 9.2) an equal number of rainstorm events was split into two halves. The first half was used to calibrate the model, whereas the second half was used to examine the model performance. Several hydraulic variables; namely, peak discharge Q, time to peak discharge T, and total runoff volume VM, were considered. The following measures were used to asses the performance: 0 The ratio “RAT” between the calculated and observed values of the variable. This is expressed for single storm events as the mean of all the storms on a catchment, to indicate the average performance of the model in the catchment. 0 The standard deviation DEV of the individual values about the overall mean, to describe the scatter in the RAT ratio. 0 The absolute error ABS between the calculated and observed values, expressed as a percentage of the observed value. As in RAT, the ABS is expressed for single storm events as the mean of all the storms on a catchment.
of the model -i _
The accuracy of the model in predicting the hydraulic variables was evaluated using 59 storm events, and the result obtained are shown in Table 9.3. The variation of the accuracy with various catchment and climate characteristics is described below. Table 9.3. Summary of the Accuracy of Performance of the Model
Name of Catchment Hydraulic Variable Number of storms RAT n nr DW ABS
Effect of catchment size
A typical example on the effect of catchment size on the accuracy is shown in Figure 9.5. It can be seen from the figure as well as from Table 9.3 that the accuracy decreases as size of catchment increases. This is reflected not only by the values of BAT but also by the DEV and ABS values. With the increase of catchment size the spatial variability of rainstorms and infiltration increases sharply to the degree that the model components can not explain (see chapter 3). Table 9.3 also shows that the accuracy of predicting time to peak flowrates and total runoff volumes is better and less sensitive to variation in catchment size than that of predicting peak flowrates.
1 1 I I I I 1 I I
Totai rainfall depth = 86 mm Dly period= IO days
Total rainfall depth = 86 am Dry periob 1Q4 days
Figure 9.5. Calibrated and Observed Hydrographs Size Catchments
in Small (up) and Large (down)
9. 2. 2 Effect of infiltration
The accuracy of the model was evaluated in catchments of different rates of infiltration, and a typical result is shown in Figure 9.6. It can be seen that there is a considerable effect of infiltration on the accuracy of the model. As the infiltration rate increases the accuracy of the model decreases. This fact is also apparent in Table 9.3. The level of accuracy for peak flowrates and time to peaks is higher than that for total runoff volumes. The low accuracy for total runoff volumes may be due to the large amount of infiltrated water, which is underestimated by the model. Obviously, the accuracy of the model decreases as the perviousness ratio of the catchment increases.
Total rainfall depth = 84 mm
Total rainfall depth = 82 mm Dry period = 12.8 days \
o z 6
1 \ \
o--i) CALIBRATED ~OBsERvEn
0 40 a0 I20 TIMF, 160 min 200 240 280
Figure 9.6. Calibrated and Observed Hydrographs in Catchments of Low (up) and High (down) Rates of Infiltration
9. 2. 3 Effect of rainfall characteristics
In this chapter, fwe characteristics of rainfall over catchment were considered and their effects on the model accuracy were evaluated. These characteristics are the spatial variability of rainfall, the temporal variability of the rainfall, the total rainfall depth, the duration of rainfall, and the dry period between two successive rainstorms over catchment. The results of the evaluated accuracy are discussed in the following.
9. 2.3.1 Spatial variation of rainfall
As it is mentioned earlier that the coefficient of variation of a rainstonn is taken as a measure of the spatial variability of the rainstorm over the catchment. Figure 9.7 shows the results of prediction with two rainstorms of different spatial variation. It is apparent that the accuracy decreases as the spatial variability of rainstorm increases. In large size catchments, where the spatial variation is expected to be large, the accuracy of the model may reach unacceptable level.
I I I I I I 1
Coefficient of Rainstorm Variation = - 1 58 A
1 0 30
I 180 210
Figure 9.7. Calibrated and Observed Hydrographs from Rainstorms of Low (up) and High (down) Spatial Variations on Rabia Catchment
(Coefficient of Kurtosis = - 0.86; Total rainfall depth = 62 mm; Dry period = 18 days)
9.2. 3. 2. Temporal variation of rainfall
The effect of the temporal variation of rainstorm on the accuracy of the model was evaluated using rainstroms of almost the same depth, duration, and spatial variation, and a typical results are shown in Figure 9.8. As it has been mentioned earlier, the coefficient of kurtosis of rainstorm over catchment is taken as a measure of the spatial variation. It can be seen clearly that the model accuracy decreases as the temporal variation of rainstorm increases. The high temporal variation means rapid rise of hyetograph, and in such a case the models become inaccurate in estimating hydrograph components.
iCoefficient of Kurtosis = - 1.42
of Kurtosis = - 0.53
Figure 9.8. Calibrated and Observed Hydrographs from Rainstorms of High (up) and Low (down) temporal variations on Rabia Catchment
(Coefficient of rainstorm variation = 1.12; Total rainfall depth = 55 mm; Dry period = 15 days)
Dry period between two successive
Chapter 3 describes the effect of dry periods between two successive rainstorms on soil moisture and infiltration. To demonstrate the effect of the dry period on the accuracy of the model, rainstorms of almost the same, depth, duration, coefficients of variation and kurtosis were used in the SWMM model to predict hydrographs, which were compared with the observed ones on the Homadi catchment. A typical result is shown in Figure 9.9. Inspection of the figure indicates that the accuracy decreases as the dry period between two successive rainstorms increases. As explained earlier in chapter 3, as the dry period increases the soil moisture decreases rapidly with much of soils disintegration. This results in sharp increase in infiltration. Such increase with its high spatial variability (characteristics in arid areas) is not taken realistically by the SWMM model.
I I 1 I I . I 1 I
Dry period = 2.70 days
200 TIME, min
Figure 9.9. Predicted and Observed Hydrographs from Rainstorms of Short (up) and Long (down) Dry Periods on Homadi Catchment
(Coefficient of variation = 0.92; Coefficient of kurtosis = -0.85; Total rainfall depth = 65 mm)
9. 2. 3.4 Total depth of rainfall
In case of small depth of rainfall, especially received after a long dry period, most of the rainwater infiltrate to the soils and produce insignificant storm runoff. To investigate the effect of the rainfall depth on the accuracy of the model, rainstorms of similar duration, dry period, and spatial and temporal variations over the Homadi catchments were used. The generated hydrographs from the calibrated model were compared with the observed ones, and a typical example is shown in Figure 9.10. It can be seen that the accuracy of the model increases as the depth of rainfall increases.
* 12 mm
0.3 )I c \ E 0 i IL < e! 0 0 p! c b x
Total rainfall depth = 68 mm
20 / 1.5
t, Ii 0 z 3 oi
o--* -0EsERvED -
Figure 9.10. Predicted and Observed Hydrographs from Rainstorms of Small (up) and Large (down) Total Rainfall Depths on Homadi Catchment
(Coefficient of variation = 0.92; Ccefticient of kurtceis = - 0.6; Dry period = 16 days)
9. 2. 3. 5 Duration of rainfall
It has been found (Hino et al., 1988) that rainstorm duration has significant effects on hydrographs predicted by models. These effects can be magnified in and climates due to their particular soils and rainfall characteristics (see chapter 3). In the following, the effect of rainstrom duration on the accuracy of the SWMM model in and climates was evaluated. Similar rainstons on the Homadi catchments were used to calibrate the model and to examine its accuracy. A typical results of predicted and observed hydrographs on the catchment is shown in Figure 9.11. It is apparent that the rainstorm duration has significant effects on the hydrograph components predicted by the model. Wiih the decrease in rainstorm duration, the accuracy of the model decreases. This may be explained by the infiltration process of the small amount of rainwater through dry soils, which has not considered realistically by the model.
Rainstorm Duration = 55 min
Raingtorm Duration = 20 min o--* 3 ry 2
0 0 20 40 60 80
100 llME$ min
Figure 9.11. Predicted and Observed Hydrographs from Rainstorms of Long (up) and Short (down) Duration on Homadi Catchment
(Coefficient of variation = 0.95; Coefficient of kurtceis = -0.9; Dry period = 12 days)
Effect of duststorms
It is mentioned earlier that heavy duststorms is an important climate characteristics in the majority of arid catchments (see chapter 2) and that these storms have significant effects on the runoff and sewer flow properties (see chapter 3). Earlier evaluations in this chapter (see section 9. 1) confirm the significant impacts of duststorm properties on stormwater quality. It is anticipated, therefore, that duststorms might have significant effects on the accuracy of the hydrograph components predicted by the SWMM. This anticipation was confirmed by observing hydrographs during duststorms of different characteristics, and these hydrographs were compared with the corresponding ones predicted by the model. A typical comparison is shown in Figure 9.12.
TSP = 2360 fig/m3
H PREDICTED OBSECRVED
3 L .c .2 E u 2 = u a! 0 0 c cl r = IL Lr. 0 z 3 c 2 3
h\ d”\ I
I P .
TSP = 830 ug/m3
\ \ 4 OBSERVED
. v /I
0 40 a0 120 160 200 240 280
Figure 9.12. Predicted and Observed Hydrographs from Rainstorms of High (up) and Low (down) Duststorm Concentrations in the Homadi Catchment
(Total rainfall depth = 72 mm; Dry period = 63 days)
9. 3 Effect of urbanization
As chapters 4 and 5 indicate, urbanization has significant effects on stormwater. The increase in urbanization increases the runoff volume and peak discharge, but decreases the Such effects are mainly due to the time of concentration of the produced hydrograph. decrease in the infiltration capacity, surface detention, and roughness of catchments. Since stormwater quality is affected by the produced hydrographs, and urbanization is playing a significant role in shaping these hydrographs, it is anticipated that stormwater .quality is affected to great extent by urbanization. Nouh (1995) was able to evaluate the stormwater quality, before and after urbanization, of catchments in Saudi Arabia. The changes in the concentrations of selected chemical constituents (mg/l) were expressed in dimensionless format relative to the measured concentrations of the same in the unurbanized catchments, and the following regression equation was developed:
where h is the percentage change in the concentration of a constituent, change in urbanization, IX and 3 are regression parameters. Mean and maximum concentrations of a constituent were considered. becomes for the mean and maximum concentrations, respectively, as: cp is the percentage
= amean $0 pmean
The mean and maximum concentrations of a constituent in the stormwater runoff is denoted The results are given in Table 9.4. Inspection of by him as E,,,==” and E,,,~~ , respectively. Table 9.3 reveals that the increase in urbanization generally increases the concentrations of The nutrients, ions, and trace metals in the stormwater runoff of the arid catchments. coefficient of multiple determination for the mean, R2 mean , and that for the maximum, R2 maX, indicate that there is strong association between the changes in urbanization and those in the concentrations of the constituents in the stormwater runoff. However, such association with the mean concentrations; with the exception of Barium “Ba”, is stronger than that with the maximum concentrations of the constituents. The increase in the concentrations of the constituents is due to the human activities which increase with the increase of urbanization. Another set of data was used (Nouh, 1995) to verify the developed regression model (Eq.9.1). The absolute maximum difference between the observed concentration of a constituent and the corresponding one estimated by Eq.9.1 was evaluated at different urbanization levels, and the results are given in Table 9.5. Inspection of the table indicates that the regression model may be used with reasonable accuracy in arid catchments.
The accuracy of stormwater prediction in arid catchments by using the SWMM was evaluated. Several catchment and rainstorm characteristics were considered. It has been found that the accuracy of the model decreases as catchment size increases. However, the accuracy of predicting time to peak flowrates and total runoff volumes is better and much less sensitive to variation in catchment size than that of predicting peak flowrates. The model provides unsatisfactory results in large-size arid catchments.
Table 9.4. Variation of regression parameters with urbanization
Table 9.5. Absolute maximum error (%)
Rate of infiltration is found the model. As the infiltration rate properties have significant effects and/or the temporal variation of
to be another factor affecting the hydrograph prediction by increases the accuracy of the model decreases. All rainfall on the accuracy of prediction. The increase in the spatial rainstorm over catchment decreases the accuracy of the
model. The larger the depth of rainfall and/or the duration of rainfall the higher the accuracy of the model is produced. The dry period between two successive rainstorms also has significant effect on the model accuracy. The longer the dry period the lower the accuracy of the model is produced. The existence of duststorm affects the accuracy; the higher the concentrations of dust in atmosphere the lower is the accuracy of the model. The increase in the spatial and/or temporal variability of the duststorm also decreases the accuracy of the model. On the water quality side, duststorms affect the stormwater quality to a great extent, Not only the mean concentration of total suspended particulate “TSP” but also the spatial as well as the temporal variations of the duststorm over catchment have significant effects on the storrnwater quality. The high the concentrations and/or the spatial or the temporal variations of the dust the higher are the concentrations of chemical constituents in the stormvvater. Such effects increase with the increase in catchment size. Urbanization has significant effects not only on the produced hydrograph components but also on the runoff water quality. With the increase in urbanization, the concentrations of the chemical constituents in the stormwater increase. A regression type model has been proposed to estimate the effects of urbanization on the stormwater quality in arid catchments.
BLACK, P. E. (1980) ‘Water Quality Patterns During A Storm On A Small Parking Lot,” Water Resources Bulletin, Vol. 16, No. 4, pp. 615-620. ELLIS, J. B, REVITT, D. M, HARROP, D. 0, AND BECKWITH, P. R. (1987) “The Contribution Of Highway Surfaces To Urban Stormwater Sediments And Metal Loadings,” The Science of the Total Environment, Vol. 59, pp. 339349. HINO, M., ODAKA, Y., NADAOKA, K., AND SATO, A. (1988) “Effect Of Initial Soil Moisture Content On The Vertical Infiltration Process - A Guide To The Problem Of RunoffRatio And Loss,” Journal of Hydrdogy, Vol. 102, pp. 267-284. MARSALEK, J., DICK, T., WISNER, P., AND CLARKE, W. (1975) “Comparative Evaluation Of Three Urban Runoff Models,” Water Resources Bulletin, Vd. 11, No. 2, pp. 366328. MCLAREN INTERNATIONAL LIMITED (1979) Water and Agricultural Development Studies,” Technical Report Prepared for the Ministry of Agriculture and Water, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. MARSALEK, J, AND NG, H. F. (1989) “Evaluation Of Pollution Loadings From Urban Nonpoint Sources: Methodology And Application,” Journal of Great Lakes Research, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 444-451. NOUH, M., AND EL-LAITHY, A. (1986a), “Construction Damages Due To Floods In Wadi Addilah,” Technical Report Prepared on the Saudi Arabian National Project Number AR-562 for the King AbdulAziz City for Science and Technology, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. NOUH, M, ROWE, D, AL-DOWALIA, K, AND MANSOUR, K. (1986b), “Indoor-Outdoor Suspended Particulate Matter Concentrations At Four Sites In Riyadh, Saudi Arabia,” International Journal of Environmental Studies, Vol. 28, pp. 163-168. NOUH, M. (1991) “Urban Stormwater Quality In Arid Catchment,” Invited Lecture, Proceedings of the International Conference on Urban Drainage and New Technologies, UNESCO/IAHR, Dubbrovnik, Former Yugoslavia, June, pp. 355364. NOUH, M. (1995), “Effect Of Urbanization On Runoff Quality In Arid Catchments,” 2nd International Conference on Innovative Technologies in Urban Storm Drainage NOVATECH 95, Lyon, France, June, pp. 623626. NOUH, M. (1997) “Urban Stormwater Prediction In And Climates,” Water Resources Engineering, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 2642. SUEICHI, T., MORIOKA, T., AND KAWAMOTO, S. (1984) Comparison Among Models For Stormwater And Pdlutants Runoff In View Of Their Reliability, Sensitivity, And Applicability,” Proceedings, 3ti International Conference on Urban Drainage, Goteborg, Sweden. TORNO, H. C. (1979) “Model Application In EPA Planning Programs,” ASCE National Convention, Boston, Mass., April.
QUINBY-HUNT, M. S, MCLAUGHLIN, R. D, AND QUINTANILHA, A. (1986), Instrumentation for Environmental Monitoring, Vol. 2: Water, 2nd Edition, John Wiley & Sons, New York. ROWE, D., NOUH, M., AL-DOWALIA, K., AND MANSOUR, M. (1985),“lndoor-Outdoor Relationship Of Suspended Particulate Matter In Riyadh, Saudi Arabia,” Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association - JAPCA, Vol. 35, 24-26. STRAUB, C. (1989) Practical Handbook of Environmental Control, CRC Press Inc., Florida. WHELAN, D., MILLER, L., AND CAVALLERO, J. (1952) “A Method For Determining Surface Runoff By Rooting Infiltrated Water Through The Soil Profiles,” US Forest Service Northeast, Paper 54, USA. YEN, B. C., WENZEL, H. G., MAYS, L., AND TANG, W. (1976) “Advanced Methodologies for Design of Storm Sewer Systems,” Water Resources Center Research Report Number 112, NTIS.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?