Water Science and Engineering 2011, 4(3) 246-257 DOI:   10.3882/j.issn.1674-2370.2011.03.002  ISSN: 1674-2370 CN: 32-1785/TV

Current Issue | Archive | Search                                                            [Print]   [Close]
Information and Service
This Article
Supporting info
PDF(736KB)
Reference
Service and feedback
Email this article to a colleague
Add to Bookshelf
Add to Citation Manager
Cite This Article
Email Alert
Keywords
bioretention
hydrologic performance
global sensitivity analysis
Morris method
Authors
XUN Yan-Wei
WEI Xiao-Mei
CHRISTINE -Pomeroy
PubMed
Article by Xun,Y.W
Article by Wei,X.M
Article by Christine,.P

Global analysis of sensitivity of bioretention cell design elements to hydrologic performance

Yan-wei SUN1, Xiao-mei WEI*1, Christine A. POMEROY2

1. College of Water Resources and Architectural Engineering, Northwest A & F University, Yangling 712100, P. R. China
2. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA

Abstract

Analysis of sensitivity of bioretention cell design elements to their hydrologic performances is meaningful in offering theoretical guidelines for proper design. Hydrologic performance of bioretention cells was facilitated with consideration of four metrics: the overflow ratio, groundwater recharge ratio, ponding time, and runoff coefficients. The storm water management model (SWMM) and the bioretention infiltration model RECARGA were applied to generating runoff and outflow time series for calculation of hydrologic performance metrics. Using a parking lot to build a bioretention cell, as an example, the Morris method was used to conduct global sensitivity analysis for two groups of bioretention samples, one without underdrain and the other with underdrain. Results show that the surface area is the most sensitive element to most of the hydrologic metrics, while the gravel depth is the least sensitive element whether bioretention cells are installed with underdrain or not. The saturated infiltration rate of planting soil and the saturated infiltration rate of native soil are the other two most sensitive elements for bioretention cells without underdrain, while the saturated infiltration rate of native soil and underdrain size are the two most sensitive design elements for bioretention cells with underdrain.

Keywords bioretention   hydrologic performance   global sensitivity analysis   Morris method  
Received 2010-11-24 Revised 2011-04-22 Online: 2011-09-30 
DOI: 10.3882/j.issn.1674-2370.2011.03.002
Fund:
Corresponding Authors: Xiao-mei WEI
Email: weixiaomei57@tom.com
About author:

References:

Asleson, B. C., Nestingen, R. S., Gulliver, J. S., Hozalski, R. M., and Nieber, J. L. 2009. Performance assessment of rain gardens. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 45(4), 1019-1031. [doi:10.1111/j.1752-1688.2009.0 0344.x]
Atchison, D., and Severson, L. 2004. RECARGA User’s Manual. Madison: University of Wisconsi.
Brockmann, D., and Morgenroth, E. 2007. Comparing global sensitivity analysis for a biofilm model for two-step nitrification using the qualitative screening method of Morris or the quantitative variance-based Fourier amplitude sensitivity test (FAST). Water Science and Technology, 56(8), 85-93. [doi: 10.2166/wst.2007.600]
Brown, R. A., and Hunt III, W. F. 2010. Impacts of construction activity on bioretention performance. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 15(6), 386-394. [doi:10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000165]
Cloke, H. L., Pappenberger, F., and Renaud, J. P. 2008. Multi-method global sensitivity analsis (MMGSA) for modeling floodplain hydrologic processes. Hydrologic Processes, 22(11), 1660-1674. [doi:10.1002/ hyp.6734]
Davis, A. P., Hunt, W. F., Traver, R. G., and Clar, M. 2009. Bioretention technology: Overview of current practice and future needs. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 135(3), 109-117. [doi:10.1061/ (ASCE)0733-9372(2009)135:3(109)]
Dietz, M. E. 2005. Rain Garden Design and Function: A Field Monitoring and Computer Modeling Approach. Ph. D. Dissertation. Storrs Mansfield: University of Connecticut.
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. [doi:10.1007/s11270-007-9484-z]
Hsieh, C. H., and Davis, A. P. 2005. Multiple-event study of bioretention for treatment of urban storm water runoff. Water Science and Technology, 51(3-4), 177-181.
McRae, G. J., Tilden, J. W., and Seinfeld, J. H. 1982. Global sensitivity analysis: A computational implementation of the Fourier amplitude sensitivity test (FAST). Computers and Chemical Engineering, 6(1), 15-25. [doi:10.1016/0098-1354(82)80003-3]
Palhegyi, G. E. 2010. Modeling and sizing bioretention using flow duration control. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 15(6), 417-425. [doi:10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000205]
Pomeroy, C. A., Postel, N. A., and O’Neill, P. A. 2008. Development of storm-water management design   criteria to maintain geomorphic stability in Kansas City metropolitan area streams. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering, 134(5), 562-566. [doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(2008)134:5(562)]
Prince George’s County (PGC). 1999. Low Impact Development Design Strategies: An Integrated Approach. Prince George’s County: Programs and Planning Division, Department of Environmental Resources.
Prince George’s County (PGC). 2007. Bioretention Manual. Prince George’s County: Environmental Services Divison, Department of Environmental Resources.
Rossman, L. A. 2009. Storm Water Management Model User’s Manual Version 5.0. Cincinnati: United States Environmental Protection Agency.
Salacinska, K., El Serafy, G. Y., Los, F. J., and Blauw, A. 2010. Sensitivity analysis of the two dimensional application of the generic ecological model (GEM) to algal bloom prediction in the North Sea. Ecological Modeling, 221(2), 178-190. [doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2009.10.001]
Saltelli, A., Chan, K., and Scott, M. 2000. Sensitivity Analysis. New York: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Sobol, I. M. 2001. Global sensitivity indices for nonlinear mathematical models and their Monte Carlo estimates. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 55(1-3), 271-280. [doi:10.1016/S0378-4754(00) 00270-6]

Similar articles

Copyright by Water Science and Engineering