Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
IDEAL Stormwater BMP Modeling Framework May 8, 2007 Brian T. Bates, PE Integrated Design and Evaluation Assessment of Loadings Model History/Background of IDEAL Modeling Approach State of the model Demo Discussion Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration An OCRM Dilemma 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Compliance with Antidegradation & TMDLs Needed an explicit BMP model − Model Hydrology & Hydrualics and pollutant yield from urban areas. − Estimate BMP performance. − Base predictions on accepted predictive procedures. Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration 2004 IDEAL Initiated 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Woolpert hired by OCRM Scope of Model Literature review Watershed Framework Post Construction BMP Design Aid Manual and IDEAL Spreadsheet Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration IDEAL Development Primary Researchers Dr Bill Barfield – Oklahoma State University Dr. John Hayes – Clemson University Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration IDEAL OCRM version BMP Trapping Sedimentology and soil isotherms Hydrology Single storm and Total annual runoff 4 pollutants 3 BMPs Pond routing Single watershed Post-construction Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration Watershed Modeling Framework Pervious and Unconnected Impervious Imp BMP Directly Connected Impervious Impervious BMP Pervious Outflow From Watershed Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration Dry/Wet Detention Basin Rainfall Statistics 12 Storms 0.25’’ to 10.5’’ Precip Amount Prob P Values for Greenville, SC Dormant Season P=0.336 Growing Season P=0.664 AMC 1 AMC 2 AMC 3 P=0.797 P=0.104 P=0.100 Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration AMC 1 AMC 2 AMC 3 P=0.543 P=0.231 P=0.226 Sediment Yield Pervious Areas - MUSLE Impervious Areas - EMC Approach − EMC varies with type of impervious area − Modeling dependability improves as local data is collected Model Sediment Size Distribution − Used to determine sediment trapping in Vegetated Filter Strip and in ponds − Nutrients and bacteria are sorbed on the exchange phase of the clay particles, hence need to know concentration of clay size particles − Pervious areas based on CREAMS equations − Impervious areas based on NURP data Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration Nutrient and Bacteria Loading Modeling Nutrients − Yield based on event mean concentrations (EMCs) for each chemical − EMCs vary based on land use Modeling Indicator Bacteria − Yield based on event mean concentrations (EMCs) for bacteria − EMCs highly variable • National average ~ 15,000 number/100ml • Depends a great deal on presence of pets, wildlife, leaky sewers, etc Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration BMP Trapping Predicts trapping of sediments in ponds through overflow rate calculations for 5 particle classes. Predicts nutrient trapping by settling of particulate matter and sorbed portion on trapped active clay content of the sediment by isotherms. Predicts bacteria trapping using isotherms and mortality VFS trapping uses the KY VFS model Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration IDEAL OCRM Model Limitations Only for use on the SC coast Limited outlet configurations Numerous spreadsheet constraints Untested BMP algorithms No resuspension, denitrification, direct loading on BMP, or bacteria growth. Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration Greenville County 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Woolpert hired by County Isotherms and Rainfall Analysis Continue to use spreadsheet Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration Greenville County 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Dry pond verification study Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration Greenville County 2001 2002 2003 2004 VB GUI developed Bioretention cell research begun Multiple watersheds Literature review − Swales & Engr. Devices Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration 2005 Greenville County 2001 2002 2003 2004 Sept EPA BMP Design Manual EPA/600/R-04/121 Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration 2005 Greenville County 2002 2003 2004 2005 Bioretention cell added and revised − Greenhouse study − Greenville Co. study Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration 2006 Greenville County Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration Greenville County 2002 2003 2004 2005 Bioretention cell added and revised − Greenhouse study − Greenville Co. study FC loading function Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration 2006 Greenville County Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration Greenville County 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Sand filter and bioswale added Conceptual algorithms developed for engr. devices Conveyance routing algorithms − Pipe, Channel, Simple translation Model presented to EPA Region 4 VB GUI revised to current layout − Distributed Jan 2007 to GC engineers Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration Greenville County Object oriented VB.net “Drag n Drop” version Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration Ongoing Improvements Technical Advisory Group − − − − − − Barfield and Hayes Dr. John Sansalone –University of Florida Dr. Bob Pitt –University of Alabama Mike Borst – EPA-Office of Research & Development Mark Schlautman – Clemson University Khaled Gasem – Oklahoma State University Enhanced Bioswale research with EPA-ORD, Edison, NJ User’s Manual Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration Summary of versions OCRM Spreadsheet Pollutants VB.Net Sediments, Nutrients, Bacteria Watersheds 1 200+ BMPs Wet/Dry Ponds, VFS Wet/Dry Ponds, VFS, Bioretention cells, Sand filter Conveyances None Pipes, channels, and translation only Isotherms & Rainfall Analysis SC Coast Greenville Co. Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration IDEAL DEMONSTRATION Uses BMP design for small to large development projects TMDL compliance Antidegradation restrictions Watershed master planning LID design Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration Future Enhancements Expansion of Isotherms Bacteria growth function Rainfall statistics Engineered device algorithms development Bioswale algorithm revision Conveyance design functionality GIS/CAD interface Optimization Large scale watershed considerations Performance enhancement and user support Continue to use best science available Woolpert IDEAL Demonstration Questions?