Effect of low-impact development practices on the treatment of urban runof

Effect of low-impact development practices on the treatment of urban runof

The impact of a bioretention cell on the urban runoff (ur) quality was evaluated. The cell was constructed with the following stratification of materials (from the base): 20% coarse gravel, 40% gravel, hydrogel, 40% clinoptilolite, and succulent plants as cover. It was fed with real UR for 24 hours...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Vázquez Rodríguez, Gabriela Alejandra, Ortiz Hernández, Joyce Edith, Lizárraga Mendiola, Liliana Guadalupe
Format: Online
Language:spa
Published: Centro Universitario de Arte, Arquitectura y Diseño 2020
Online Access:https://www.revistavivienda.cuaad.udg.mx/index.php/rv/article/view/151
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id ojs-article-151
record_format ojs
spelling ojs-article-1512021-05-11T22:42:27Z Effect of low-impact development practices on the treatment of urban runof Efecto de las tecnologías de bajo impacto en el tratamiento del agua de escorrentía urbana Vázquez Rodríguez, Gabriela Alejandra Ortiz Hernández, Joyce Edith Lizárraga Mendiola, Liliana Guadalupe The impact of a bioretention cell on the urban runoff (ur) quality was evaluated. The cell was constructed with the following stratification of materials (from the base): 20% coarse gravel, 40% gravel, hydrogel, 40% clinoptilolite, and succulent plants as cover. It was fed with real UR for 24 hours at constant speed to simulate 3.9 mm of precipitation. Samples were taken at the inlet and outlet of the cell, which were analyzed in terms of COD, N-NH4+, N-NO2-, N-NO3-, PO43- (total and dissolved), Escherichia coli density and various metals (Al, Fe, Cu, Mn, Pb, Zn, Cr, Cd and Ni) according to standard methods. To assess the effect of the cell on water quality, we proposed an index that we calculated for the aeu before and after receiving the treatment. The system removed several of the pollutants evaluated: COD (28.5%), N-NH4+ (84.3%), N-NO3- (49.4%), total PO43- (94.8%), and dissolved PO43- (86.2%). The metals were removed with efficiencies between 90 and 99%, with the exception of Ni (58.7%), while E. coli was completely removed. The index calculated for the water treated in the cell was considerably lower than the index calculated for the inlet aeu, which shows the bioretention effect on water quality.  Se evaluó el impacto de una celda de biorretención en el tratamiento de agua de escorrentía urbana (aeu). La celda se construyó con la siguiente estratificación de materiales (desde la base): 20% de grava, 40% de gravilla, hidrogel, 40% clinoptilolita, y plantas suculentas como cobertura. Se alimentó con aeu real durante 24 horas a velocidad constante para simular 3.9 mm de precipitación. Se tomaron muestras a la entrada y a la salida de la celda, para analizar dqo, N-NH4+, N-NO2-, N-NO3-, PO43- (totales y disueltos), cuenta de Escherichia coli y diversos metales (Al, Fe, Cu, Mn, Pb, Zn, Cr, Cd y Ni). Para evaluar el efecto de la celda en la calidad del agua, se propuso un índice que se calculó para el aeu antes y después de recibir el tratamiento. El sistema removió varios de los contaminantes evaluados: dqo (28.5%), N-NH4+ (84.3%), N-NO3- (49.4%), PO43- totales (94.8%), y PO43- disueltos (86.2%). Los metales se eliminaron con eficiencias comprendidas entre 90% y 99%, a excepción del Ni (58.7%), mientras que E. coli se removió al 100%. El índice de calidad calculado para el agua tratada fue considerablemente menor al índice del aeu de entrada, lo que muestra que la celda mejoró la calidad del agua. Centro Universitario de Arte, Arquitectura y Diseño 2020-07-31 info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Peer-reviewed article Artículo evaluado por pares application/pdf https://www.revistavivienda.cuaad.udg.mx/index.php/rv/article/view/151 10.32870/rvcs.v0i8.151 Vivienda y Comunidades Sustentables; No 8 (2020): Vivienda y Comunidades Sustentables; 103-115 Vivienda y Comunidades Sustentables; Núm. 8 (2020): Vivienda y Comunidades Sustentables; 103-115 2594-0198 10.32870/rvcs.v0i8 spa https://www.revistavivienda.cuaad.udg.mx/index.php/rv/article/view/151/168
institution Universidad de Guadalajara
collection OJS
language spa
format Online
author Vázquez Rodríguez, Gabriela Alejandra
Ortiz Hernández, Joyce Edith
Lizárraga Mendiola, Liliana Guadalupe
spellingShingle Vázquez Rodríguez, Gabriela Alejandra
Ortiz Hernández, Joyce Edith
Lizárraga Mendiola, Liliana Guadalupe
Effect of low-impact development practices on the treatment of urban runof
author_facet Vázquez Rodríguez, Gabriela Alejandra
Ortiz Hernández, Joyce Edith
Lizárraga Mendiola, Liliana Guadalupe
author_sort Vázquez Rodríguez, Gabriela Alejandra
title Effect of low-impact development practices on the treatment of urban runof
title_short Effect of low-impact development practices on the treatment of urban runof
title_full Effect of low-impact development practices on the treatment of urban runof
title_fullStr Effect of low-impact development practices on the treatment of urban runof
title_full_unstemmed Effect of low-impact development practices on the treatment of urban runof
title_sort effect of low-impact development practices on the treatment of urban runof
description The impact of a bioretention cell on the urban runoff (ur) quality was evaluated. The cell was constructed with the following stratification of materials (from the base): 20% coarse gravel, 40% gravel, hydrogel, 40% clinoptilolite, and succulent plants as cover. It was fed with real UR for 24 hours at constant speed to simulate 3.9 mm of precipitation. Samples were taken at the inlet and outlet of the cell, which were analyzed in terms of COD, N-NH4+, N-NO2-, N-NO3-, PO43- (total and dissolved), Escherichia coli density and various metals (Al, Fe, Cu, Mn, Pb, Zn, Cr, Cd and Ni) according to standard methods. To assess the effect of the cell on water quality, we proposed an index that we calculated for the aeu before and after receiving the treatment. The system removed several of the pollutants evaluated: COD (28.5%), N-NH4+ (84.3%), N-NO3- (49.4%), total PO43- (94.8%), and dissolved PO43- (86.2%). The metals were removed with efficiencies between 90 and 99%, with the exception of Ni (58.7%), while E. coli was completely removed. The index calculated for the water treated in the cell was considerably lower than the index calculated for the inlet aeu, which shows the bioretention effect on water quality. 
publisher Centro Universitario de Arte, Arquitectura y Diseño
publishDate 2020
url https://www.revistavivienda.cuaad.udg.mx/index.php/rv/article/view/151
work_keys_str_mv AT vazquezrodriguezgabrielaalejandra effectoflowimpactdevelopmentpracticesonthetreatmentofurbanrunof
AT ortizhernandezjoyceedith effectoflowimpactdevelopmentpracticesonthetreatmentofurbanrunof
AT lizarragamendiolalilianaguadalupe effectoflowimpactdevelopmentpracticesonthetreatmentofurbanrunof
AT vazquezrodriguezgabrielaalejandra efectodelastecnologiasdebajoimpactoeneltratamientodelaguadeescorrentiaurbana
AT ortizhernandezjoyceedith efectodelastecnologiasdebajoimpactoeneltratamientodelaguadeescorrentiaurbana
AT lizarragamendiolalilianaguadalupe efectodelastecnologiasdebajoimpactoeneltratamientodelaguadeescorrentiaurbana
_version_ 1709649616076537856

Similar Items