See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/265850454

Long-term hydraulic performance of stormwater infiltration systems

Article  in  Urban Water Journal · September 2015

DOI: 10.1080/1573062X.2014.949796

CITATIONS READS

13 157

3 authors, including:

Ahmed Al-Rubaei Godecke Blecken

Luleå University of Technology Luleå University of Technology
13 PUBLICATIONS   134 CITATIONS    43 PUBLICATIONS   550 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Ahmed Al-Rubaei on 10 January 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Urban Water Journal, 2015
Vol. 12, No. 8, 660–671, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1573062X.2014.949796

RESEARCH ARTICLE
Long-term hydraulic performance of stormwater infiltration systems
Ahmed Mohammed Al-Rubaeia,b*, Maria Viklandera and Godecke-Tobias Bleckena
a
Urban Water Engineering, Department of Civil, Environmental and Natural Resources Engineering, Luleå University of Technology,
Luleå, Sweden; bDepartment of Building and Construction Engineering, University of Technology, Baghdad, Iraq
(Received 12 September 2013; accepted 19 June 2014)

Despite the common use of stormwater infiltration systems, there is still only limited data available evaluating the long-term
hydraulic function of such systems. The hydraulic performance of twelve stormwater infiltration systems (vegetated and
unvegetated concrete grid pavers, unvegetated interlocking concrete pavers and grassed swales) was therefore investigated
in field and laboratory environments in Växjö, Sweden. The systems investigated had not been subjected to regular
maintenance to sustain infiltration capacity. Due to this, and the fact that, for most systems, an inappropriate joint filling
material was used and (at the swales) there was severe compaction, most systems showed a reduced infiltration capacity.
Despite this, especially the older vegetated systems, were still capable of infiltrating intense design rainfalls. This study
showed the influence of some factors (type and age of the system, the type of joint filling material (grass and macadam) and
the distance from the edge of the pavement) on the long-term behaviour of the infiltration capacity. In conclusion, there is a
significant risk that existing stormwater infiltration systems are not working adequately in praxis. Proper implementation of
construction and regular control by the inspecting authority has to be ensured.
Keywords: hydraulic performance; infiltration system; permeable pavement; particle size distribution; stormwater; urban
runoff

Introduction However, despite their benefits, the implementation of

Reduced permeable surfaces in cities mean that, during
heavy rainfall, there are high peak flows and large volumes
of stormwater. Also, urban stormwater carries contami-
nants (e.g. sediments, nutrients, heavy metals and
hydrocarbons) from a wide range of sources. Thus,
urban stormwater discharges can create issues such as
flooding risks, erosive flows into watercourses and
pollutant discharge into the environment (Walsh, 2000).
One strategy to address these concerns is the implemen-
tation of concepts such as water sensitive urban design
(WSUD). Within WSUD, one option to deal with these
issues is to reduce the area of impermeable surfaces using
stormwater infiltration systems e.g. permeable pavements
and grassed swales (Dietz, 2007). Facilitating in-situ
stormwater infiltration enables the reduction of runoff
volumes and flows and thus the reduction or prevention of
downstream flooding and erosion (Bean, Hunt, &
Bidelspach, 2007a; Scholz & Grabowiecki, 2007; Collins,
Hunt, & Hathaway, 2008). Permeable pavements can
direct as much as 70% to 80% of annual rainfall to
recharge groundwater levels (Yong, Deletic, Fletcher, &
Grace, 2011). Grassed swales have the ability to reduce
50% of the runoff volume if the soil characterized by a
high permeability and a low initial moisture content
(Barrett, 2008).
permeable pavements is often hindered by concerns
regarding their effective life-span, the related maintenance
needs and their winter performance (Lindsey, Roberts,
& Page, 1992; Dietz, 2007; Al-Rubaei, Stenglein, Viklander,
& Blecken, 2013). The main threat to the long-term
hydraulic performance of permeable pavements is their
tendency to become clogged over time due to the deposition
and accumulation of fine sediments in the voids in permeable
pavements and on the systems’ surfaces (Borgwardt, 2006;
Dietz, 2007; Pratt et al., 1995). The process of clogging
worsens with an increasing input of fines retained on the
surface of the pavement, which, over time, reduces the
infiltration capacity of the system (Balades, Legret, &
Madiec, 1995; Teng & Sansalone, 2004). Many studies have
shown that the highest levels of trapped particles were found
within the top several centimeters of the surface structure
(Balades et al., 1995; Pratt, Mantle, & Schofield, 1995;
Borgwardt, 2006; Al-Rubaei et al., 2013). One primary
mechanism of clogging is a demonstrable lack of regular
maintenance (Lindsey et al., 1992; Al-Rubaei et al., 2013).
Balades et al. (1995) showed that to deal effectively with
clogging requires regular maintenance as a preventive
measure to sustain the infiltration capacity of porous
pavements. To analyze the influence of different pavement
types on runoff quality and quantity, Day, Smith, and Bowers

*Corresponding author. Email: ahmed@ltu.se

q 2014 Taylor & Francis
2 Urban Water Journal 661

(1981) examined three types of concrete grid pavers in the Table 1. Characteristics of the sampling sites.
laboratory and found that the type of pavement is one of the
Operational
key factors that contributes to a 50% to 80% reduction of Infiltration Joint age at
runoff volumes. Using pilot field sites, Booth and Leavitt system filling Year of sampling Width
(1999) examined the short-term hydrologic performance of Label type type construction (years) (m)
four types of vegetated and unvegetated permeable
SV14 Swale Vegetated 1998 14 3.0
pavements. All the pavements showed no surface runoff; SV9 Swale Vegetated 2003 9 1.5
the authors found that the vegetated pavements were less GV14 CGP Vegetated 1998 14 2.0
susceptible to clogging over time. Another factor was studied GV13 CGP Vegetated 1999 13 2.4
by Borgwardt (2006) who found that the type of joint filling GV11 CGP Vegetated 2001 11 2.4
material influenced the infiltration capacity. Vegetation can GV10 CGP Vegetated 2002 10 2.4
GM10 CGP Macadam 2002 10 2.0
reduce or slow down clogging of infiltration systems where GM8 CGP Macadam 2004 8 2.0
vegetation growth has an ability to make macropores through GM7 CGP Macadam 2005 7 2.5
the topsoil; these macropores can increase the hydraulic IM6 ICP Macadam 2006 6 0.7
conductivity of soil, allowing water to infiltrate more easily IM1 ICP Macadam 2011 1 0.85
(Gonzalez-Merchana, Barraud, Le Coustumer, & Fletcher, IMRef ICP Macadam 2011/12 New 0.85
2012), especially species with thick roots reduce clogging
(Le Coustumer, Fletcher, Deletic, Barraud, & Poelsma, the age of the system (SV14 is thus a vegetated 14 years-
2012). Although several studies have investigated the old swale). The labeling of the construction material
function of permeable pavements and problems related to aggregate sizes is according to the Swedish guideline
clogging, there is still little data available regarding the long- Anläggnings AMA (1999) throughout the whole text.
term function (. 10 years) of these systems (Drake,
Bradford, & Marsalek, 2013).
The objectives of this study are to evaluate and Site description
compare the hydraulic performance of different types of The two infiltration grass swales (Figure 2a) were
permeable pavements and grassed infiltration swales of constructed in 1998 and 2003 (i.e. 14 and 9 years old at
different ages (1 to 14 years) and designs in Växjö, the sampling event. In the following, they are labeled SV14
Sweden. We evaluated whether vegetated systems perform and SV9, respectively). Both swales have a V-shaped cross
better than unvegetated systems. The comparative impact section, are 8 cm deep on average and have widths of
of clogging on the hydraulic performance of these systems approx. 3 m and 1.5 m. According to the planning rules, the
was investigated by quantifying the degree of fine topsoil used for construction of both swales was supposed
sediments trapped in the joint filling material of the to be clean sand which was placed on top of a macadam
systems. The objective of this study also is to determine (crushed stone) layer (8 – 16 mm). However, during
the factors influencing the long-term hydraulic perform- construction, a material containing significant quantities
ance of these systems. of fines was presumably used instead for the top layer. The
layers are separated by a non-woven geotextile layer.
Under the macadam layer, a drain pipe is placed
Materials and methods surrounded by a macadam layer (8 –16 mm).
Since 1998, a variety of permeable surfaces, designed to The four sites paved with vegetated concrete grid
infiltrate stormwater, have been built along the residential pavers CGP (600 £ 400 £ 100 mm) (Figures 2b, 3a)
streets in new housing areas in Växjö, Sweden. Surface were constructed in 1998, 1999, 2001 and 2002 (i.e. 14,
infiltration capacity field measurements and particle size 13, 11 and 10 years old at the sampling event). In the
distribution analyses were carried out on twelve of these following, these sites are labeled GV14, GV13, GV11 and
stormwater infiltration systems aged 1 –14 years. The GV10. The CGP system consists of concrete blocks and
evaluated systems were two grassed swales, four vegetated internal voids and joints between the blocks. The internal
and three unvegetated CGP, two ICP filled with macadam voids were filled with a clean sandy soil containing , 5%
and one newly constructed ICP filled with macadam as a fines (passing through a #200 (0.063 mm) sieve) and
reference site (Table 1). The measurements were carried planted with grass. The CGP were placed on a 150 mm
out at two distances from the paved road edge as illustrated deep base course (gravel 0– 30 mm) which covered a
in Figure 1. 400 mm deep sub-base (0 – 120 mm). Under this layer, a
In the following, the sites are abbreviated according drain pipe was placed surrounded by macadam (8 – 16 mm)
the following system: S, G, and I indicate swale, concrete over a non-woven geotextile; the pavements’ widths are
grid paver and interlocking concrete paver, respectively, approximately 2 m for the oldest site and 2.4 m for the
V and M indicate vegetated systems and macadam-filled other sites. The permeable portion of each facility is
unvegetated systems, respectively, and a number indicates composed of 40% of the system surface area.
662 A.M. Al-Rubaei et al. 3

Figure 1. Schematic representation of samplings for all sites: IE at a distance of 20 cm from the edge of the pavement; OE at a distance
of 100 cm from the edge of the pavement.

In 2002, Växjö municipality decided to change the approx. 0.7 m and 0.85 m. The joints represent the
design of its CGP infiltration systems. From that time, the permeable portion and constitute 27% of the system
systems were unvegetated to reduce maintenance costs surface area.
(grass mowing). Of this type, we evaluated the function of We also evaluated one relatively newly-established
three sites constructed in 2002, 2004 and 2005. These (reference site) paved with ICP (similar to the sites IM6
systems are labeled as GM10, GM8 and GM7 and consist and IM1, Figure 3c), labeled as IMRef. The measurements
of the same concrete blocks as the vegetated CGP (see were carried out a few months after construction. The ICP
above). However, the internal voids were filled with joints were filled with macadam (4 –8 mm) over 50 mm of
macadam (0 – 8 mm) and were unvegetated (Figures 2c, macadam (4 – 8 mm) which in turn covered 300 mm of a
3b). The system was placed on a 150 mm deep macadam
(2 – 4 mm) layer which in turn covered a 400 mm deep sub-
base aggregate (0 – 120 mm). The pavements’ widths are
approx. 2 m, 2 m and 2.5 m, respectively. The use of
macadam 0 – 8 mm does not conform to the usual
requirements for infiltration systems where a material
without fines is specified (4 – 8 mm).
The two evaluated sites paved with unvegetated
interlocking concrete pavers ICP (170 £ 170 £ 100 mm)
were constructed in 2006 and 2011 (i.e. 6 years and 1 year
old, labeled as IM6 and IM1). The ICP system consists of
concrete blocks with wide joints (Figure 2d, 3c). The joints
of IM6 and IM1 were filled with macadam 4– 8 mm and
0 –8 mm, respectively. Again, the latter does not conform
to requirements for IM1, where a material containing more
fines was used. They were placed on a 50 mm deep
macadam layer (4 –8 mm) which in turn covered a 400 mm
deep sub-base (8 – 16 mm). The pavements’ widths are Figure 2. (a) SV9; (b) GV10; (c) GM8; (d) IM6.
4 Urban Water Journal 663

Figure 3. (a) CGP planted with grass; (b) CGP filled with macadam; (c) ICP filled with macadam.

Figure 4. A schematic cross-section of the design components of each infiltration system (Grass swale, Vegetated CGPs, Unvegetated
CGPs, and ICPs).
664 A.M. Al-Rubaei et al.
sub-base aggregate (0 – 120 mm); under the crushed rock
layer, a drain pipe was placed surrounded by a 50 mm
macadam layer (8 – 16 mm) covering a non-woven
geotextile; the pavement’s width is approx. 0.85 m; 27%
of the system surface area is the permeable portion. Due to
inaccurate implementation of the construction (ascending
slope from the road surface and a curbstone), the system
had not received any stormwater inflow at all. A schematic
cross-section of the design components of all infiltration
systems described above is shown in Figure 4.
Figure 6m shows the particle size distribution of
macadam 4 –8 mm which is the required joint filling
material for the permeable pavements (CGP and ICP) in
accordance with Swedish standard method SS-EN 13242
(SIS, 2007).
All residential streets (approx. width: 5 m) drained
using the infiltration systems were constructed using
conventional asphalts, cambered towards the infiltration
systems; thus, all stormwater from the streets was
discharged into the infiltration systems (Figure 1). All
streets had relatively little residential traffic except the
street with the infiltration swale SV9 which is a through
road connecting a larger residential area.
During winter, as an anti-slipping and de-icing agent,
fine macadam (0 –8 mm) mixed with road salt (50 gm/m3)
is applied to the streets regularly (depending on weather
conditions) and then removed in spring using a mechanical
sweeper. Parts of this anti-slipping agent are washed off
into the infiltration system. During their operation time of
between 1 and 14 years, no special maintenance (e.g.
vacuum cleaning) has been carried out to sustain adequate
infiltration capacity; maintenance was limited to infre-
quent mechanical sweeping.
Infiltration capacity measurements
Double ring infiltrometers were used to measure the
surface infiltration capacity (Double ring infiltrometer set
09.04, Eijkelkamp Agrisearch Equipment, The Nether-
lands). The diameters of the inner rings were 280, 300 and
320 mm. Since we hypothesized that the adjacent area to
the asphalt is more susceptible to clogging due to sediment
wash off from the street (Figure 1), at each site, two rounds
of measurement were carried out: one measurement close
to the inner edge (IE) of the infiltration system (at a
distance of 20 cm from the asphalt pavement) and the other
sampling at the outer edge (OE) of the infiltration system,
a distance of 100 cm from the pavement edge (Figure 1).
At four sites (IM6, IM1, IMRef and SV9), the second
sampling (OE) could not be carried out due to the
narrowness of the systems (i.e. the width of the infiltration
system was ,100 cm). Each test included simultaneous
measurements with three replicate infiltrometer sets (i.e.
three replicate measurements at IE and OE, each) that
5
were placed on the infiltration system surface close to each
other (distance , 1 m).
The infiltrometer sets were sealed to the pavement
surface using plumber’s putty, with the exception of the
swales where the infiltrometers were driven into the
surface with a rubber mallet. The outer ring was then
partially filled with water to check the seal; any leaks were
sealed completely. Then both rings were filled with
approximately 7– 10 cm water. The initial water level in
the inner ring was recorded at time zero and then the water
level was logged regularly. The time interval between
recording events was between 2 and 10 minutes,
depending on the infiltration rate. The water level drop
within the inner ring represents the infiltration (mm).
Dividing the water level drop by the time interval gives the
infiltration capacity (mm min21). The tests were
completed when the infiltration rate stayed constant or
zero. During the measurements, the water level in both
rings was maintained at a near constant level (^ 0.5 cm).
The method could not be utilized at the reference site
IMRef, since its infiltration capacity was far too high to
sustain the required level of standing water in the rings.
To collect data at that site, 10 L of water were poured into
the inner ring and the time for the water to completely
infiltrate the system recorded (cf. Bean, Hunt, &
Bidelspach, 2007b).
Particle size distribution
A particle size distribution (PSD) analysis was carried out on
40 grab samples (400–800 g each) of the joint filling
materials taken from all sites to compare the measured PSD
with the intended PSD according to the construction
specifications (Figure 6m). This enables to determine the
compliance of the pavements with the specifications and to
measure the percentage of fine sediments trapped in the
upper and lower portions of the jointing materials. Four
samples were taken from each system; at both the IE and OE,
one sample was collected from the upper layer of the joint
filling material (0–2 cm depth) and another at a depth of
10 cm below the infiltration system surface. As with the
infiltration measurements, at the narrower sites no samples
were taken from the OE (IMRef, IM1, IM6 and SV9). Sieve
analyses following the ASTM D422-63 (ASTM, 2007)
standard test methods for particle size analysis of soils and
using standardized sieves in accordance with ISO 3310-1,
were carried out. Before the sieve analyses, the samples were
placed in trays to dry, first in air and then in an oven at 1058C
for 24 hours. After pouring each sample into the top sieve, all
sieves were placed in a mechanical shaker for 10 minutes.
The percentage of soil retained on each sieve was calculated
by dividing the weight of soil retained by the original mass.
The percentage of soil passing through each sieve was
calculated by subtracting the percentage of soil retained by
6 Urban Water Journal 665

each sieve as a cumulative percentage starting at 100 percent.
No PSD analysis was conducted on particles finer than
63 mm in diameter since the intended joint filling material
(Figure 6m) at the sites does practically not include such fine
particles and thus, assumingly, nearly all particles finer than
63 mm present in macadam originated from stormwater
runoff or were present in the filling material since a wrong
jointing material was used during construction.
Data analysis
To investigate the effects of the factors type of system
(CGP, ICP and grass swale), age, type of joint filling
(macadam and grass) and distance from the edge of the
pavement (20 and 100 cm) on the hydraulic performance
of the stormwater infiltration systems, a Univariate
General Linear Model (GLM) was used. The variances
were not homogeneous and there was a lack of normality,
as a result, a square-root transformation was performed on
the data so that the residuals were normally distributed and
exhibited variance. The statistical tests and plots were
computed using SPSSw 20 and the significance level was
a ¼ 0.05.
To investigate the practical function of the infiltration
systems, we determined which Swedish design rainfall (cf.
SWWA, 2011) could be infiltrated. The stormwater inflow
to each system was calculated using the rational Equation
(Q ¼ CiA where Q ¼ peak flow, A ¼ contributing area
(m 2), i ¼ rainfall intensity, C ¼ runoff coefficient;
CSwale ¼ 0.1; CCGP ¼ 0.4; CICP ¼ 0.3; CAsphalt ¼ 0.8)
and compared to the maximum infiltration capacity of the
system. Since the infiltration systems are sited adjacent to
impervious catchments (asphalt covered streets, Figure 1,
2), they receive both surface runoff from the street as well
as direct rainfall onto the infiltration system. Thus, the
Table 2. Mean infiltration capacity ^ standard deviation (n ¼ 3) for all sampling sites and the measured percentage passing of fines
(passing through a #200 (0.063 mm) sieve).
inflow to the infiltration system is the sum of these two
inputs (Figure 1).
Results and discussion
Infiltration capacity
All sampling sites are located in residential streets with the
exception of site IM1, located along a road with small
volumes of traffic, next to a forest. The factors age (1 – 14
years), jointing type (vegetation, unvegetated) and
permeable pavement type (CGP, ICP, and Swale) differed.
The effect of these three factors and the distance from the
pavement (IE: 20 cm, OE: 100 cm) on the long-term
hydraulic performance of infiltration systems was
investigated. The results from the infiltration capacity
measurements at the eleven sites are summarized in
Table 2 and shown in Figure 5.
The Univariate GLM revealed that all main effects
(type of system, age, type of joint filling (grass, macadam)
and distance from pavement (IE, OE)) had a statistically
significant impact on the long-term hydraulic performance
of infiltration systems at a confidence level of 95% (GLM:
p-value ¼ 0.000, R2 (adjusted) ¼ 0.951). Mean infiltra-
tion capacities were affected by the type of system
(infiltration capacities decreased in the following order:
CGPs . ICPs . swales), by the type of joint filling factor
(grass › macadam) and the distance from the pavement
(IE , OE). Also, the age of the system affected the
infiltration capacity. A significant one-way interaction
between the type of system (CGP, Swale) and the distance
from pavement (IE, OE) was detected (p-value ¼ 0.033).
Thus, for CGPs, the distance from the pavement (IE, OE)
had a greater effect than for the swales).
In general, for all sampling sites, the mean infiltration
capacities measured at the IE close to the asphalt pavement

Infiltration capacity (mm

min21) Percentage of fines (%)
Label IE OE IE top layer IE bottom layer OE top layer OE bottom layer
SV14 0.1 ^ 0.0 1.3 ^ 0.1 10 14 10 11
SV9 0.1 ^ 0.0 – 10 16 – –
GV14 2.5 ^ 0.3 3.5 ^ 0.1 10 12 9 14
GV13 1.7 ^ 0.2 2.7 ^ 0.3 8 7 8 8
GV11 4.8 ^ 2.5 9.8 ^ 0.3 13 18 7 15
GV10 1.8 ^ 0.7 11.8 ^ 3.5 4 5 3 5
GM10 0.1 ^ 0.0 4.2 ^ 0.7 7 2 4 2
GM8 1.5 ^ 0.2 7.3 ^ 1.5 4 2 4 2
GM7 0.3 ^ 0.0 5.8 ^ 0.0 9 4 4 4
IM6 4.0 ^ 0.0 – 3 2 – –
IM1 1.8 ^ 0.0 – 4 6 – –
IMRef 313 ^ 61 1
Notes: IE at a distance of 20 cm from the edge of the pavement; OE at a distance of 100 cm from the edge of the pavement. The vegetated joint fillings were
planted with grass.
666 A.M. Al-Rubaei et al.
Figure 5. Interval plots of mean infiltration capacity ^ standard deviation (n ¼ 3) for all sampling sites at the IE and the OE with a 95%
confidence interval (grey line: vegetated; black line: macadam).
(between practically zero and 4.8 ^ 2.5 mm min21
standard deviation, Figure 5) were significantly lower
than those at the OE further away from the pavement
(between 1.3 ^ 0.1 and 11.8 ^ 3.5 mm min21). This,
along with the fact that the reference site (IMRef) had a far
higher infiltration capacity (313 ^ 61 mm min21), indi-
cates that sediment from the pavement had caused
substantial clogging at all sites. This difference of
infiltration capacities between IE and OE may be
attributed to the lack of traffic at OE leading to less
compaction and less sediment input from winter
maintenance and/or pavement wear. It is evident from
Figure 2b and c that the area close to the edge of the
pavement (approximately the first 20 cm) is more affected
by sediment input than the remaining area. Thus, if
sediment capture is provided at the inner edge, wider
systems may provide a more efficient long-term infiltration
capacity due to les clogging towards the outer edge.
However, if the systems would have been steeper, the
sediment capture distance would possibly have been larger
thus possibly reducing the infiltration capacity over the
whole system.
No clear correlation between age and infiltration
capacity was detected although age was a significant
factor. In general, the hydraulic performance of storm-
water infiltration systems tend to decrease with increasing
age (Teng & Sansalone, 2004; Le Coustumer et al., 2012).
However, in our study the operation ages of the different
system types did only overlap a little (unvegetated ICP: 0 –
6 years; unvegetated CGP: 7– 10 years and vegetated
CGP: 10 –14 years; swales: 9– 14 years). Thus, it is likely
7
that the effect of age differences between the different
types masked the general effect of age. We observed that
some of the older pavements worked better than the new
ones e.g. the highest infiltration capacity was measured at
the rather old GV11 and GV10. Also, IM6 had a much
higher infiltration capacity than IM1. The findings clearly
revealed the significance of vegetation on the hydraulic
performance. For instance, the infiltration capacities at
both the IE and the OE of GV10 were significantly higher
than those at GM10, despite both pavements being the
same age (10 years) and GV10 having an even higher
percentage of fines in the joint filling substrate. This
clearly illustrates the fact that the vegetated CGPs
performed better than the unvegetated CGPs despite the
latter’s younger age.
The findings of this study show the benefit of using the
appropriate aggregate material in the joints of pavements
on the infiltration capacity of the systems. A general
problem observed at most sites was incorrect construction.
At both swales, several CGPs and at IM1, a joint filling
material containing fines (0 – 8 mm) was used instead of
macadam 4 – 8 mm as requested in the drawings. Given
that Växjö municipality is regarded as being one of the
leading Swedish municipalities for implementing, and
having experience of, WSUD, this result is somewhat
surprising and underlines that monitoring during the
construction is necessary to avoid future problems. The
influence of the filling material on the hydraulic
performance was shown by Borgwardt (2006), who tested
four types of aggregates used in joint fillings (crushed
gravel 2 –5 mm, crushed gravel 1 – 3 mm, mixed gravel
8 Urban Water Journal 667

Figure 6. Particle size distribution for the joint filling materials. (a) SV14, (b) SV9, (c) GV14, (d) GV13, (e) GV11, (f) GV10, (g) GM10,
(h) GM8, (i) GM7, (j) IM6, (k) IM1, (l) IMRef, (m) Typical gradation.
668 A.M. Al-Rubaei et al.
and sand 0– 5 mm, sand 0 –2 mm). The author observed a
correlation between the hydraulic performance and the
aggregate material used in the joint filling where the
coarser materials with less fines predictably exhibited a
higher infiltration, clogging was accelerated by the
presence of fines.
Another possible explanation for the reduced infiltra-
tion capacities of all systems, which have been in
operation for between 1 and 14 years, may be the lack of
adequate maintenance (e.g. vacuum cleaning) to sustain
the infiltration capacity of the systems over the life cycle.
Furthermore, during winter, fine macadam (0 – 8 mm)
mixed with road salt is regularly applied on the streets
which, due to wash off from the street, may have entered
the systems and further reduced the hydraulic perform-
ance, especially at the IE. The combination of all these
factors has contributed to the lower infiltration capacity.
Clogging is a particular problem for infiltration systems in
cold climates because of the use of fine granular materials
during winter maintenance (Al-Rubaei et al., 2013). This
problem has been addressed with vacuum cleaning of the
surface (Balades et al., 1995).
The lowest mean infiltration capacity was measured for
both swales (0.1 ^ 0.0 mm min21) at the IE. Despite the fact
that these were intended to be infiltration swales, at least at
the IE, they did not provide significant runoff infiltration
(infiltration capacity 0.1 ^ 0.0 mm min21). This was likely
due to a combination of several factors including soil
compaction, incorrect construction and a lack of mainten-
ance, which, when combined, reduced the soil permeability
and thus the runoff volume that could be infiltrated by the
swales (Barrett, 2008). In this particular case, when the
infiltrometers were placed and pounded with the rubber
mallet, it was observed that the soil was very compacted in
both the swales. This was possibly due to the usage of the
swale for temporary roadside parking; there were no traffic
control measures (e.g. traffic bollards) (Figure 2a) to prevent
this. This soil compaction within the swales has a significant
negative effect on the infiltration rates of soils; compaction
treatments can reduce the infiltration capacity by 70–99%
(Gregory, Dukes, Jones, & Miller, 2006). Furthermore,
contrary to their intended design (percentage of fines
,0.063 mm less than 5%), the swales were constructed
using material that was too fine, preventing sufficient
infiltration. Additional fines have been accumulated in the
swales due to winter maintenance. Fine particles are
transported from the street surface to the swales with the
runoff, most probably further reducing the infiltration
capacity (e.g. as observed by Balades et al., 1995). While for
the CGPs, vegetation was found to be beneficial for
stormwater infiltration (see below), for the swales, the
vegetation did not enhance the infiltration capacity. Since a
similar percentage of fines in the filling material was found in
both the CGPs and the swales, this is likely due to the
compaction (Figure 6).
9
The measured infiltration capacities for the vegetated
CGPs (Table 2) were significantly higher than for the
macadam-filled CGPs, despite the latters’ younger ages
and lower percentages of fines in the filling material
(Figure 6). The overall highest infiltration capacities were
observed at the 10 and 11 year old CGPs with grass
(Table 2). The vegetation in the CGPs significantly
increased the infiltration capacity compared to the
unvegetated systems (GLM: p-value ¼ 0.000). This may
be due to the effect of root growth (Le Coustumer et al.,
2012). Similar to the swales, the CGPs are not protected
against traffic; however, the concrete grid stabilizes the
system and protects the filling material from compaction.
These results are in line with the findings of Booth and
Leavitt (1999) who examined the short-term hydrologic
performance of four types of vegetated and unvegetated
permeable pavements (interlocking concrete pavement
(ICP) filled with gravel, concrete grid pavers (CGP) filled
with sand and planted with grass, plastic grid pavers filled
with sand and planted with grass and plastic grid pavers
filled with gravel) after their first year in service. The
authors found that the vegetated pavements were less
susceptible to clogging over time.
The results for the two macadam-filled ICPs evaluated
were inconsistent. Despite its greater age, the 6 year old
system had a significantly higher infiltration capacity
(4.0 ^ 0.0 mm min21) than the 1 year old system (only
1.8 ^ 0.0 mm min21). One reason for this finding may be
the different locations of the two pavements: the older one
(IM6) is located along a residential street whilst the newer
pavement (IM1) is along a street passing through a forest.
Visual inspection revealed large amounts of organic
material (leaves, litter etc.) on the system which may have
caused surface clogging. This may partly also have caused
the higher percentage of fines in the joint fillings of IM1.
However, presumably more severe was the fact that the
older ICP was filled with macadam 4– 8 mm (as required
in the construction drawings) while the newer pavement
was filled with macadam 0– 8 mm i.e. containing fines.
Accordingly, the sieve analysis showed that the newer
pavement had more fine particles in the joint filling
material than the older pavement. Figure 6j, k shows that
there was a greater percentage of particles between 0.063
and 2 mm in diameter retained at the IE both in the top and
bottom layers of newer pavement IM1 (55%) than the
older one IM6 (18%) while, according to the requirements
(Figure 6m), 95% of the filling material should be coarser
than 2 mm. As mentioned above, obviously an unsuitable
material was used during construction which prevented the
system from functioning correctly shortly after construc-
tion. These results are in line with the findings of Bean
et al. (2004) who reported that permeable pavements are
not recommended to be close to areas with loose fine
particles as this has a negative effect on hydraulic
performance.
10 Urban Water Journal
Although the macadam-filled ICP has a lower open
surface area than the macadam-filled CGP, the infiltration
capacity of IM6 at the IE was higher than at all the
macadam-filled CGPs, possibly as a result of their
different ages or since the CGPs were filled with material
containing a significant percentage of fines. However,
based on the data set in this study, we cannot conclusively
compare ICP and CGP performance. However, a similar
trend was shown by Bean, Hunt, and Bidelspach (2004),
who compared the performance of 16 CGPs and 11 ICPs,
ranging in age from six months to 20 years and found that
the ICP had a higher infiltration capacity than the CGP.
Particle size distribution
A visual inspection of all infiltration systems revealed that
there was a significant variation in the amount of fines in
the top 2 cm layer. In order to quantify this observation, a
PSD analysis of the joint filling material was carried out on
all infiltration systems (Figure 6) to measure the
percentage of fine sediments trapped in the upper and
lower portions of the jointing materials and to compare
these results with the intended particle size distribution
(Figure 6m) to determine the compliance of the CGPs and
ICPs.
Comparing the results of the PSD (Figure 6a –l) with
the intended filling material (macadam 4– 8 mm; particle
size distribution: Figure 6m) to determine compliance, this
comparison shows that there was a significant change in
the PSD of the jointing materials. At all sites, the
percentage of fines was clearly greater than as defined by
the requirements (Figure 6m) except for the reference site
IMRef. The lower percentage at the reference site was
either due to fines from the street and/or due to use of the
wrong jointing material during construction. At IM6, these
construction requirements had been largely followed;
however, fines had accumulated in the material during
operation. Still, the percentage of fines in this system is
clearly lower than in all the other systems (except IMRef).
Given that a large quantity of fines was also discovered in
the deeper layers and (besides GM7 and GM10) there was
no significant difference in the quantity of fines in the top
and bottom layers, it can be assumed that most of the fines
were already built into the systems due to incorrect
construction.
Soil material less than 0.063 mm (passing through a
#200 sieve) are of particular interest when examining the
clogging process of infiltration systems (Gerritts & James,
2002; Siriwardene, Deletic, & Fletcher, 2007; Lucke &
Beecham, 2011). A small increase in fines can have a
significant impact on the infiltration rate (Borgwardt,
2006). Table 2 shows a comparison of the measured
percentage of fines passing through a #200 sieve for all
infiltration system types. The percentage of fines close to
669
the road at the IE was slightly higher than at the OE at a
distance of 100 cm. This is clearly correlated to the
increased infiltration capacity at the OE.
The only site lacking a significant percentage of fines
in the joint fillings was the newly constructed ICP (IMRef)
and, to some extent, IM6. At IMRef, the PSDs of the
particles in the upper and lower layers were identical
(Figure 6l), containing 77% gravel (retained on a #4
(5 mm) sieve), 22% sand (passing through a #4 sieve) and
1% fines (passing through a #200 (0.063 mm) sieve). This
extremely low percentage of fines explains the highest
infiltration capacity for this site (313 ^ 61 mm min21).
Comparing IM6, which had very few fines in the joint
filling material, with the nearly new IM1 illustrates the
importance of correct construction. IM1, the one year old
system, contains a large quantity of fines and, conse-
quently, its infiltration capacity was the lowest, being
1.8 ^ 0.0 mm min21, compared to 4.0 ^ 0.0 mm min21
for IM6. The fact that, for both IM1 and IM6, the
percentage of particles passing through the #200 sieve
accounted for 2 –6% of the total number of particles
passing through that sieve (no difference between the
sites) and the difference was detected in the range of 0.125
and 5 mm, illustrates that particle sizes less than 0.063 mm
(passing through a #200 sieve) are not the only drivers of
clogging.
A comparison of the PSDs of IM1, IM6 and IMRef
(Figures 6j, k and l) illustrates the reason behind the
extremely high infiltration capacity (313 ^ 61 mm min21)
for IMRef. The use of coarse jointing material lacking
fines has a dramatic impact on infiltration capacity. At IM6
and IM1, infiltration capacities have decreased with
increasing fines at these two sites; already, the relatively
small increase in the quantity of fines at IM6 (80% of the
filling material is still coarser than 2 mm, while according
to the requirements (Figure 6m), 95% of the filling
material should be coarser than 2 mm) has reduced the
infiltration capacity substantially.
At the vegetated CGPs (GV14, GV13, GV11 and
GV10), the PSDs at all four sampling points were nearly
identical (Figure 6c – f). Although the percentage of fines
passing through the #200 sieve at these sites was higher
than at the unvegetated CGPs, the measured infiltration
capacity was comparably high at these sites (possibly due
to the positive effect of the vegetation, as discussed
above).
At the unvegetated CGPs (GM10, GM8 and GM7),
there was a greater percentage of particles between
0.063 mm and 2 mm in the top layers at both the IE and the
OE than in the bottom layer (Figure 6g– i). This is in line
with the low infiltration capacities at these sites. This again
shows that it is not only particles less than 0.063 mm that
are the main driver of clogging. Of the unvegetated CGPs,
at GM8 (Figure 6h) a relatively low percentage of fines
670 A.M. Al-Rubaei et al. 11

passing through the #200 sieve was measured, explaining It can be concluded that the infiltration capacities of
the relatively good infiltration capacity of GM8 compared both swales and the two ICPs, that are 1 year and 6 years
to GM10 and GM7. old, have performance levels that have been reduced to an
unacceptable level. Therefore, these systems probably
need to be reconstructed to safely operate.
Practical flow retention of intense storms
In general, the design of infiltration systems is dependent
on a specific average return interval (ARI), duration and Conclusion
intensity of rainfall. To evaluate the practical function of This study investigated the hydraulic performance of two
the infiltration systems, the measured infiltration grass swales and ten permeable pavement sites through
capacities were compared with intense design rainfall field (surface infiltration capacity) and laboratory
intensities recommended for the design of stormwater (particle size distribution) experiments. The pavers
facilities in Sweden (SWWA, 2011). A 100 year ARI and investigated were concrete grid pavers (CGP) and
5 minutes duration storm with a rainfall intensity of interlocking concrete pavers (ICP) aged between 1 and
4.0 mm min21 (SWWA, 2011) has been adopted as the 14 years. The older CGP were vegetated with grass; the
largest storm event (Table 3). Obviously, the peak runoff joints of newer systems were filled with unvegetated
rate should not exceed the infiltration capacity of the macadam. The objectives of this study were to examine
systems if surface runoff is to be avoided. The comparison the infiltration capacity of these systems and to determine
revealed the percentage of precipitation of a 100-year the factors influencing the long-term hydraulic perform-
storm event that the infiltration systems, despite their ance of these systems. All infiltration systems showed
decreased performance, can still infiltrate and the reduced infiltration capacities compared to the reference
maximum ARI of a storm event they can completely site (IMRef) which had not received any runoff when the
infiltrate (Table 3). infiltration capacity was measured. The hydraulic
Besides IMRef (which theoretically could infiltrate the performance of infiltration systems was found to be
annual rainfall in approximately 2 minutes), only two highly dependent on the type and age of the systems, type
pavements (GV11 and GV10) can still infiltrate the 100 of jointing material and the distance from the edge of the
year, 5 minutes rainfall event completely. The infiltration pavement (IE and OE). The infiltration capacities were
capacity of the other systems would allow for 1– 70% of found to be highest in the vegetated CGPs, while the (also
the peak runoff rate to infiltrate, implying a risk of vegetated) swales exhibited a lower infiltration capacity
overflow. than other types and were completely clogged (inter alia
The maximum ARI of storms with 5 minutes duration due to compaction). Major problems were the complete
which can be infiltrated completely is 25 years for GM8 lack of adequate maintenance (e.g. combined high
and GM7. The remaining systems can only completely pressure washing/ vacuum cleaning or removing the
infiltrate rainfall events with an ARI less than 5 years. SV9 first 15– 20 mm of the joint filling material) and the use of
and IM1 failed to accommodate any rainfall event. unsuitable material, containing significant percentages of
fine particles that are not permitted, in the joint fillings
Table 3. Flow rates for a 100 year average return interval (ARI) during construction. The PSD results of the jointing
and 5 minutes duration; average return intervals (years) of a materials showed that there was a large percentage of
maximum rainfall in 5 minutes for 100% reduction. particles with diameters between 0.063 mm to 2 mm
Infiltration Peak Percentage ARI (yr) which, in combination with particles less than 0.063 mm,
capacity runoff* reduction* for 100% caused clogging. However, despite these problems, the
Label (l/min) (l/min) (%) reduction** vegetated CGPs with operational times exceeding 10
years could still infiltrate intense design rainfalls,
SV14 3.5 17.4 20 1
SV9 0.2 16.7 1 Failure illustrating the potential of permeable pavements and
GV14 6.8 19.4 35 5 the importance of vegetation to maintain the infiltration
GV13 6.3 20.0 32 2.5 capacity. This study confirms that there is a significant
GV11 22.6 20.0 . 100 .100 risk that existing stormwater infiltration systems in the
GV10 26.3 20.0 . 100 .100 field are working inadequately; the majority of the
GM10 7.5 19.4 39 5
GM8 13.5 19.4 70 25 systems could not infiltrate significant amounts of
GM7 13.4 20.2 66 25 stormwater. Thus, we recommend that the responsible
IM6 2.8 17.0 17 0.5 authorities monitor and maintain the function of such
IM1 1.5 17.2 9 Failure systems. Proper construction (e.g. the use of the correct
Notes: * for a 5 min duration, 100 yr ARI event; ** for a 5 min duration joint filling material) has to be ensured. The choice of an
event. appropriate material, the positive effect of vegetation and
 12 Urban Water Journal
the need for maintenance are crucial for the correct
functioning of stormwater infiltration systems.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank all staff at the Växjö municipality who have
helped with sample collection and analysis.
Funding
This study was conducted as part of the research cluster
Dag&Nät; the support of Dag&Nät by the Swedish Water and
Wastewater Association (Svenskt Vatten) and, furthermore, the
financial support of the Nordic Road Association (NVF) are
gratefully acknowledged.
References
Al-Rubaei, A.M., Stenglein, A.L., Viklander, M., and Blecken,
G-T., 2013. Long-term hydraulic performance of porous
asphalt pavements in northern Sweden. Journal of Irrigation
and Drainage Engineering, 139 (6), 499– 505.
Anläggnings AMA 98, 1998. General materials and work
description for construction work. [in Swedish]. Anläggnings
AMA 98. Stockholm: AB Svensk Byggtjänst.
American Society for Testing and Materials, 2007. Standard Test
Method for Particle Size Analysis of Soil, ASTM D422-63.
West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
Balades, J.D., Legret, M., and Madiec, H., 1995. Permeable
pavements: Pollution management tools. Water Science
Technology, 32 (1), 49– 56.
Barrett, M.E., 2008. Comparison of BMP performance using the
International BMP Database. Journal of Irrigation and
Drainage Engineering, 134 (5), 556– 561.
Bean, E.Z., Hunt, W.F., and Bidelspach, D.A., 2004. Study on the
surface infiltration rate of permeable pavements. In:
Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers
and EWRI 2004 World Water and Environmental Resources
Congress. Vol. 27. Salt Lake City, UT. Reston: ASCE
Environmental and Water Resources Institute (EWRI).
Bean, E.Z., Hunt, W.F., and Bidelspach, D.A., 2007a. Evaluation
of four permeable pavement sites in eastern North Carolina
for runoff reduction and water quality impacts. Journal of
Irrigation and Drainage Engineering, 133 (6), 583 – 592.
Bean, E.Z., Hunt, W.F., and Bidelspach, D.A., 2007b. Field
survey of permeable pavement surface infiltration rates.
Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering, 133 (3),
249 – 255.
Booth, D.B. and Leavitt, J., 1999. Field evaluation of permeable
pavement systems for improved stormwater management.
Journal of the American Planning Association, 65 (3),
314 – 325.
Borgwardt, S., 2006. Long-term in-situ infiltration performance
of permeable concrete block pavement. In: Proceedings of
the 8th International Conference on Concrete Block Paving.
San Francisco, CA. Herndon, VA: Interlocking Concrete
Pavement Institute, Foundation for Education & Research.
Collins, K.A., Hunt, W.F., and Hathaway, J.M., 2008.
Hydrologic comparison of four types of permeable pavement
and standard asphalt in eastern North Carolina. Journal of
Hydrologic Engineering, 13 (12), 1146– 1157.
Day, G.E., Smith, D.R., and Bowers, J., 1981. Runoff and
pollution abatement characteristics of concrete grid pave-
View publication stats
671
ments. Bulletin 135. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Water
Resources Research Centre.
Dietz, M.E., 2007. Low Impact Development Practices: A review
of current research and recommendations for future
directions. Water Air and Soil Pollution, 186 (1 – 4),
351 – 363.
Drake, J.A.P., Bradford, A., and Marsalek, J., 2013. Review of
environmental performance of permeable pavement systems:
state of the knowledge. Water Quality Research Journal of
Canada, 48 (3), 203 – 222.
Gerritts, C. and James, W., 2002. Restoration of infiltration
capacity of permeable pavers. In: Proceedings of 9th
International Conference on Urban Drainage. Portland,
OR:, 1– 16. Reston, VA: ASCE.
Gonzalez-Merchana, C., Barraud, S., Le Coustumer, S., and
Fletcher, T., 2012. Monitoring of clogging evolution in the
stormwater infiltration system and determinant factors
European. Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering,
16 (suppl. 1), S34– S47.
Gregory, J.H., Dukes, M.D., Jones, P.H., and Miller, G.L., 2006.
Effect of urban soil compaction on infiltration rate. Journal
of Soil and Water Conservation, 61 (3), 117 – 124.
Le Coustumer, S., Fletcher, T.D., Deletic, A., Barraud, S., and
Poelsma, P., 2012. The influence of design parameters on
clogging of stormwater biofilters: A large-scale column
study. Water Research, 46 (20), 6743– 6752.
Lindsey, G., Roberts, L., and Page, W., 1992. Inspection and
maintenance of infiltration facilities. Journal of Soil and
Water Conservation, 47 (6), 481 – 486.
Lucke, T. and Beecham, S., 2011. Field investigation of clogging
in a permeable pavement system. Building Research and
Information, 39 (6), 603 – 615.
Pratt, C.J., Mantle, J.D.G., and Schofield, P.A., 1995. UK
research into the performance of permeable pavement,
reservoir structures in controlling stormwater discharge
quantity and quality. Water Science Technology, 32 (1),
63 – 69.
Scholz, M. and Grabowiecki, P., 2007. Review of permeable
pavement systems. Building and Environment, 42 (11),
3830– 3836.
Siriwardene, N., Deletic, A., and Fletcher, T.D., 2007. Clogging
of stormwater gravel infiltration systems and filters: insights
from a laboratory study. Journal of Water Research, 41 (7),
1433– 1440.
SIS (Swedish Standards Institute), 2007. Aggregates for unbound
and hydraulically bound materials for use in civil
engineering work and road construction. SS-EN 13242.
Stockholm, Sweden: SIS.
SWWA (The Swedish Water and Wastewater Association),
2011. Precipitation data for dimensioning and analysis of
waste water systems [in Swedish: Nederbördsdata vid
dimensionering och analys av avloppssystem]. Publication
P104. Stockholm: Svenskt Vatten.
Teng, Z. and Sansalone, J., 2004. In situ partial exfiltration of
rainfall runoff. II: Particle separation. Journal of Environ-
mental Engineering, 130 (9), 1008– 1020.
Walsh, C.J., 2000. Urban impacts on the ecology of receiving
waters: a framework for assessment, conservation and
restoration. Hydrobiologia, 431 (2), 107 – 114.
Yong, C.F., Deletic, A., Fletcher, T.D., and Grace, M.D., 2011.
Hydraulic and treatment performance of pervious pavements
under variable drying and wetting regimes. Water Science
and Technology, 64 (8), 1692– 1699.