The Use of Grass Swales for the Control of Stormwater Robert Pitt, P.E., Ph.D., DEE, D. WRE Department of Civil, Construction, and Environmental Engineering The University of Alabama 2011 Fox-Wolf Stormwater Conference Appleton, Wisconsin Photo by Shirley Clark Outline of Presentation Topics • Removal mechanisms in grass swales and research results • Recent research on scour in stormwater controls • Modeling grass swales Pollutant Control in Grass Swales Runoff from Pervious/ impervious area Reducing runoff velocity Trapping sediments and associated pollutants Sediment particles Reduced volume and treated runoff Infiltration Selected Grass Swale Research Results • IJC (1979) found swale drained areas had up to 95% less flows and pollutant yields compared to curb and gutter drained areas. • NURP (1983) found soluble and particulate heavy metals reduced by 50% and COD, nitrate and ammonia nitrogen reduced by about 25%. • Pitt & McLean (1986) found about 50% reductions in pollutants and runoff volume; for small frequent rains very little runoff was observed. • Johnson, et al. (2003) at the Univ. of Alabama identified hydraulic characteristics of stormwater swales under typical flows and plant bioremediation benefits in swales for heavy metal trapping (report available through WERF). • Nara and Pitt (2005) at the Univ. of Alabama identified significant factors affecting particulate transport in grass swales and developed candidate model algorithms. Modeled procedure integrates particle settling with swale hydraulics. WERF Project 97-IRM-2 Innovative Metals Removal Technologies for Urban Stormwater Conducted by the University of Alabama from 1999 to 2003 • Examined the characteristics and treatability of stormwater heavy metals. • Conducted detailed laboratory and field tests for the control of stormwater heavy metals by media filtration and grass swales. • Provide guidelines to enhance the design of filters and swales for metals capture from stormwater. Components of UA innovative metal removal research project for WERF Hydraulic Studies Metals Capture Media Amended Soils Media studies Metal Associations Role of Microorganisms in Sorption Role of Grasses Grass Swale Research Tasks • • • • Measure swale hydraulic characteristics (Manning’s “n” ) for low flow conditions appropriate for typical grass swale drainage systems. Test hydraulic and pollutant removal performance for different flow rates, slopes, and grass types. Examine subsurface water quality for swale having amended soil lining. Develop guidelines to optimize swale design and construction for use as a stormwater control technology. Particles Sizes of Particulates in Runoff Depend on Sampling Location Source Areas Particle median size 1 to 100 µm at source areas Outfalls Particle median size 5 to 15 µm at outfalls Particle size distributions of stormwater pollutants have a great affect on pollutant control. Distributions depend on sampling location. Drainage systems effectively remove the larger particles between the inlets and the outfall as long-term bedload deposition. Low Flow Swale vs. Historical Stillwater, OK, Grass Channel Retardance Curves Swale hydraulic Manning’s n roughness characteristics can be predicted on the basis of flow rate, cross sectional geometry, slope, Jason Kirby MSCE thesis 2005 and vegetation type. Runoff Heavy Metals Retained and Released during Indoor Swale Experiments Metals retained, % Zoysia Centipede Bluegrass Cu 40 39 40 Cr 16 14 37 Pb 65 57 67 Zn 13 20 26 Cd 21 28 25 The removals of these metals are directly correlated to their associations with stormwater particulates. Major ions released, % (these are soil constituents) Fe Na Mg Ca K Zoysia 6 23 17 12 76 Centipede 45 62 87 44 125 Bluegrass 338 77 52 17 23 These are concentration changes only and do not reflect discharge loading reductions associated with concurrent infiltration. Typical mass discharge reductions for grass swales are greater than 80%. Phytoremediation in Grass Swales Outdoor Swale with Amended Soils and Pan Lysimeter to Collect Subsurface Flows Summary - Metals Removal in Swales • Indoor swales were found to reduce heavy metal concentrations by 14 to 67% during controlled tests. • Outdoor swales reduced metal concentrations by about 25% during actual storm events. • Proper swale design was more important than grass species in performance. • Overall data showed that swales can improve or deteriorate the water quality during separate storm events due to scour of previously deposited metals. Research Objectives of Continued Grass Swale Research at UA (funded by the UTCA, Univ. Transportation Center for Alabama, and many unfunded student projects) • To understand the effectiveness of grass swales for trapping different sized particles • To understand the associated effects of different variables on particulate removal • To develop a predictive model for sediment movement in grass swales • Initial series of indoor grass swale experiments 108 samples collected • Second series of indoor grass swale experiments 108 samples collected • Outdoor grass swale monitoring 69 samples collected (during 13 storm events) 100 Indoor controlled environment grass swale setup Sediments -Sand (300-425 um) 70 -Sand (90-250 um) 60 -Silica-#250 50 -Silica-#105 40 Cumulative mass (%) 90 80 10% 25% 50% 15% 30 20 10 0 Mixing chamber 1 10 100 1000 Particle diameter (micro meter)-log scale Head works 2ft 3ft 6ft Synthetic turf Zoysia Bluegrass Variables and analytical methods • Study of variables 1) Grass types 2) Slopes 3) Flow rates 4) Swale lengths • Analytical methods 1) Total particulates (SSC) 2) Turbidity 3) Total Suspended Solids 4) Total Dissolved Solids 5) Particle Size Distribution by Coulter Counter (Beckman® Multi-Sizer III) Total Suspended Solids “Bluegrass” 1000 slope flow rate 1% _10gm 1% _15gm 1% _20gm 3% _10gm 3% _15gm 3% _20gm 5% _10gm 5% _15gm 5% _20gm Total Suspended Solids (mg/L) 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 Head works 1 2 3 Distance (ft) 4 5 6 Box plots of turbidity concentrations at different swale lengths Statistical procedure: Kruskal-Wallis test 120 Turbidity (NTU) 100 p=0.000 (overall) 80 60 p=0.002 p=0.197 p=0.001 40 20 0 0 ft 2 ft 3 ft Swale length 6 ft Solids Removal in Swales: Flow Length Normal Probability Plot for Location Box Plot for Location Head Work 99 2ft 310 End 95 Goodness of Fit 90 260 Percent mg/L (Location) AD* 80 0.549 70 60 50 40 30 0.749 1.001 20 210 10 5 160 1 Head Work 2ft End 150 200 250 300 mg/L (total solid) Solids Removal in Swales: Flow Depth Normal Probability Plot for Flow depth Box Plot for Flow depth Deep 99 Shallow 310 Goodness of Fit 95 AD* 0.506 0.893 80 260 Percent mg/L (Total Solid) 90 70 60 50 40 30 20 210 10 5 160 1 Deep Shallow 160 210 260 mg/L (Total Solid) 310 Box plots of median particle sizes at different swale lengths Median particle size ( micro meter) 22.5 Statistical procedure: Kruskal-Wallis test 20.0 17.5 15.0 p=0.002 12.5 p=0.257 p=0.001 10.0 7.5 p=0.000 (overall) 5.0 0ft 2ft 3ft Swale length 6ft Modeling Sediment Transport 1) First order decay (for sensitivity analyses) Ln(Cout / Cin ) = -kt Cout = Sediment concentration at sampling locations Cin = Initial sediment concentration at the headwork k = First order kinetic constant t = Distance from the headwork 2) “Settling frequency” (for design); similar to Ana Deletic’s (Monash Univ.) method = traveling time / settling duration Traveling time = Swale length / flow velocity Settling duration = flow depth / settling velocity (Stoke’s Law) Different grass types Percent reductions vs Settling frequencies 100 90 Percent reduction (%) 80 70 60 50 40 Bluegrass 30 Zoysia 20 Synthetic turf 10 0 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 Settling frequency 1 10 100 1000 Different flow depth/grass height ratios Flow depth/ Grass height ratio classification 100 Percent reduction (%) 90 80 70 60 50 40 0 - 1.0 30 1.0 - 1.5 20 1.5 - 4 10 0 0.00001 0.00010 0.00100 0.01000 0.10000 1.00000 Settling frequency 10.00000 100.00000 1000.0000 0 Modeling Equations Ratio: 0 - 1.0 Y 2.101 * [log( X )]2 6.498 * log( X ) 76.82 Ratio: 1.0 – 1.5 Y 8.692 * log( X ) 80.94 Ratio: 1.5 – 4.0 Y 2.382 *[log( X )]2 15.47 * log( X ) 67.46 100 90 Percent reduction (%) 80 Ratio: 0 - 1.0 70 60 Ratio: 1.0 - 1.5 50 40 Ratio: 1.5 - 4 30 Total Dissolved Solids (<0.45 µm) 20 10 0 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 Settling frequency 1 10 100 Outdoor Grass Swale Observations Description of the test site Length of swale: 116 ft Type of grass: Zoysia 116 ft 75 ft 6 ft 25 ft Approx. watershed area: 4200 ft2 = 0.1 acres Events: 13 storm events from 8/22 to 12/08/04 3 ft 2 ft Soil texture: compacted loamy sand Head (0ft) Indicates sampling locations Infiltration rate: < 1 in/hr Date: 10/11/2004 116 ft TSS: 10 mg/L 75 ft TSS: 20 mg/L 25 ft TSS: 30 mg/L 6 ft 3 ft 2 ft TSS: 35 mg/L TSS: 63 mg/L Head (0ft) TSS: 84 mg/L TSS: 102 mg/L Box plots of TSS at different swale lengths Statistical procedure: Kruskal-Wallis test 160 P=0.563 Total Suspended Solids (mg/L) 140 P=0.019 High sediment reduction region Scouring region P=0.045 Slight sediment reduction region 120 100 73 mg/L 80 60 30 mg/L 40 10 mg/L 20 0 0 2 3 6 25 Swale length (ft) 75 116 Particle size distributions: 12/06/2004 100 Typical single event showing obvious particle size trend with distance 90 70 60 28.4 µm 30 Median particle size (µm) Cumulative vomule (%) 80 50 40 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 20 0 ft 2 ft 3 ft 6 ft 25 ft 116 ft 0 7.5 µm 50 100 Swale length (ft) 10 0 0.1 1 10 Particle diameter (micro meter) 100 1000 150 Particulate Transport in Outdoor Swale (6 rain events) Percent reductions between 3ft and 25 ft vs. settling frequencies 100 90 Percent reduction (%) 80 70 60 50 40 30 Rapid drop-off for smaller settling frequencies (deeper water and/or smaller particles) Generally 60 to 80% reductions when settling frequency is 1, or larger) 20 10 0 0.0001 0.0010 0.0100 0.1000 1.0000 10.0000 Settling frequency 100.0000 1000.000 10000.00 0 00 Comparison of regression line with 95% CI from indoor experiments and outdoor observations 100 90 Percent reduction (%) 80 High initial concetration 200 mg/L- 1000 mg/L (TSS) Ratio: 0 - 1.0 70 60 50 40 30 20 Low initial concetration 40 mg/L - 160 mg/ L (TSS) Ratio: 0 - 1.0 10 0 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 Settling frequency 1 10 100 1000 • Outdoor swale observations * Significant reductions were observed in TSS and turbidity. * Three distinct swale regions: 1) 0 ft – 3 ft: Scouring region (equilibrium concentrations) 2) 3 ft – 25 ft: High sediment reduction region 3) 25 ft – 116 ft: Slight sediment reduction region (relatively constant concentrations) • Model verifications * Initial sediment concentrations were found to be an important variable in sediment transport in grass swales. * The predictive model for low TSS concentrations was only available for <1 (flow depth / grass height) ratio conditions. Initial Motion and Initial Suspension Criteria Sediment bed shifting will not necessarily represent migration out of the system because the sediment does not necessarily reach the outlet. Only suspended sediment is assumed to leave the system, and only if the critical flow rates are long enough to transport the sediment thru the system. The Cheng-Chiew criterion (1999), which involves both initial motion and initial suspension, was evaluated. This criterion relates the critical shear stress with the probability that sediment with a particular specific gravity, diameter, and settling velocity, becomes part of the sediment bed load or gets suspended and moves. This shear stress was compared to initial-motion and initialsuspension critical shear stresses associated with a specific particle size. A total of 30 different scenarios were evaluated using calibrated computational fluid dynamic (CFD) simulations and pilotscale tests. Initial Motion and Initial Suspension Criteria Critical Shear Stress Criteria Cheng-Chiew (1999) Initial Motion Cheng-Chiew P=10% Xie (1981) Cheng-Chiew P=1% Initial Suspension Van Rijn (1984) Shields (Vanoni, 1975) 1 Suspended Load t* Bed Load 0.1 No motion 0.01 0 1 10 Re* 100 1000 Initial Motion and Initial Suspension Criteria Initial Motion and Initial Suspension Shear Stress Cheng-Chiew Criterion (1999) Initial Motion Initial Suspension (Lb/ft2) 100 2.09 0.209 Shear Stress (Pa) 10 0.0209 1 0.1 0.01 1 10 100 1000 Diam eter (mm ) 10000 100000 Shear Stress: 0.8 m-wide Rectangular Inlet Shear stress on the sediment layer at different water depths with a rectangular inlet of 0.8-m wide, and initial suspension threshold for different particle sizes. Series of graph classified by flow rate: 40, 20, 10, 5, and 2 LPS Scour Tests Results: Turbidity Time Series – Sequential Flow Rate and Bed Armoring A decreasing exponential pattern was found in the turbidity time series for each flow rate at steady conditions. The impacting zone is stabilized by dispersion, and buoyancy (air entrainment). Steady state is reached. 1200 0.3 LPS The large particles create an armoring on the sediment surface bed which protects the small particles below from being scoured. 3.0 LPS 6.3 LPS 10 LPS 800 600 ` 400 200 0 0 Small particles are suspended and washed out creating a hole and leaving the large particles on the sediment bed surface. 1.3 LPS 1000 Turbidity (NTU) The initial impact of the plunging water jet disturbs the sediment bed exposing all the particle sizes. Turbidity Time Series at the Outlet Elevation: 10 cm below outlet 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Time (min) This Turbulent Time Series shows that armoring is created exponentially over time. Scour Tests Results: Turbidity Time Series – Sequential Flow Rate and Bed Armoring for Different Water Depths Turbidity Time Series at the Outlet Elevation: 25 cm below outlet Turbidity Time Series at the Outlet Elevation: 10 cm below outlet 1200 0.3 LPS 1.3 LPS 3.0 LPS 6.3 LPS 10 LPS 120 0.3 LPS 800 600 ` 400 3.0 LPS 6.3 LPS 10 LPS 80 ` 60 40 20 200 0 0 0 20 40 60 80 Time (min) 100 120 0 140 20 25 0.3 LPS 1.3 LPS 3.0 LPS 6.3 LPS 40 6 10 LPS Turbidity (NTU) 20 15 ` 10 0.3 LPS 1.3 LPS 3 0 0 60 80 Time (min) 120 140 100 120 140 3.0 LPS 6.3 LPS 10 LPS ` 2 1 40 100 No evident pattern at low flow rates and deep water 4 5 20 80 Turbidity Time Series at the Outlet Elevation: 106 cm below outlet 5 0 60 Time (min) Turbidity Time Series at the Outlet Elevation: 46 cm below outlet Turbidity (NTU) 1.3 LPS 100 Turbidity (NTU) Turbidity (NTU) 1000 0 20 40 60 80 Time (min) 100 120 140 Five Components to Modeling Grass Swales • • • • • Swale Density Swale Infiltration Rate Swale Geometry Grass Characteristics Runoff Particle Size Distribution and Flow Hydrograph Particulate Removal Calculations 100 90 80 Percent reduction (%) For each time step Calculate flow velocity, settling velocity and flow depth • Determine flow depth to grass height, for particulate reduction for each particle size increment using Nara & Pitt reference Check particle size group limits Not exceed irreducible concentration value No filtering for particles less than 50 microns Ratio: 0 - 1.0 70 60 Ratio: 1.0 - 1.5 50 40 Ratio: 1.5 - 4 30 Total Dissolved Solids (<0.45 µm) 20 10 0 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 Settling frequency 1 10 100 Percentage Suspended Solids Reduction in a Typical Residential Area Grass Swale, as a Function of Swale Density (ft/acre) 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Acknowledgements • WERF supported initial grass swale research that investigated swale hydraulics and metal removals, including the role of vegetation. • AL DOT/UTCA helped us expand this research to develop relationships between particle capture and size, swale hydraulics, and grass characteristics. • Numerous graduate students assisted with this research, especially Jason Kirby, Yukio Nara, and Humberto Avila.