| Literature DB >> 23935444 |
Zhang Wei1, Li Simin, Tang Fengbing.
Abstract
To develop urban stormwater management effectively, characterization of urban runoff pollution between dissolved and particulate phases was studied by 12 rainfall events monitored for five typical urban catchments. The average event mean concentration (AEMC) of runoff pollutants in different phases was evaluated. The AEMC values of runoff pollutants in different phases from urban roads were higher than the ones from urban roofs. The proportions of total dissolved solids, total dissolved nitrogen, and total dissolved phosphorus in total ones for all the catchments were 26.19%-30.91%, 83.29%-90.51%, and 61.54-68.09%, respectively. During rainfall events, the pollutant concentration at the initial stage of rainfall was high and then sharply decreased to a low value. Affected by catchments characterization and rainfall distribution, the highest concentration of road pollutants might appear in the later period of rainfall. Strong correlations were also found among runoffs pollutants in different phases. Total suspended solid could be considered as a surrogate for particulate matters in both road and roof runoff, while dissolved chemical oxygen demand could be regarded as a surrogate for dissolved matters in roof runoff.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23935444 PMCID: PMC3727121 DOI: 10.1155/2013/964737
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ScientificWorldJournal ISSN: 1537-744X
Characteristics of urban typical catchments.
| Study site | Area (m2) | Cover material | Gradient (%) | Traffic flow (vehicles/h) | Cleaning frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Road 1, RD1 | 900 | Asphalt | 2.0 | 1440 | Once a day |
| Road 2, RD2 | 240 | Asphalt | 1.5–2.0 | 400 | Once a day |
| Roof 1, RF1 | 90 | Asphalt | 2.5 | — | — |
| Roof 2, RF2 | 140 | Concrete | 3.0 | — | — |
| Roof 3, RF3 | 120 | Tile | 100 | — | — |
—: no person activity and no cleaning.
Rainfall dates and related parameters of monitoring events in this study.
| No. | Event date | Total rainfall | Rainfall duration | Average rainfall intensity | Antecedent dry day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 05/20 | 5.5 | 162 | 2.0 | 11 |
| 2 | 06/07 | 2.5 | 86 | 1.7 | 17 |
| 3 | 06/24 | 10.3 | 460 | 1.3 | 16 |
| 4 | 07/02 | 17.9 | 295 | 3.6 | 7 |
| 5 | 07/20 | 22.2 | 65 | 20.5 | 16 |
| 6 | 07/29 | 58.2 | 270 | 12.9 | 8 |
| 7 | 08/01 | 26.4 | 660 | 2.4 | 1 |
| 8 | 08/16 | 10.7 | 60 | 10.7 | 5 |
| 9 | 09/11 | 32.7 | 1140 | 1.7 | 1 |
| 10 | 09/14 | 7.0 | 420 | 1.0 | 2 |
| 11 | 09/16 | 32.9 | 630 | 3.1 | 2 |
| 12 | 10/10 | 3.1 | 140 | 1.3 | 2 |
AEMC values and proportion of runoff pollutants in different phases.
| Parameters* | Study sites | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RD1** | RD2** | RF1** | RF2** | RF3** | |
| TS | 220 | 185 | 168 | 172 | 138 |
| TDS | 68 | 49 | 44 | 51 | 40 |
| %*** | 30.91 | 26.49 | 26.19 | 29.65 | 28.99 |
| TCOD | 119.98 | 113.80 | 90.15 | 75.56 | 53.72 |
| DCOD | 86.23 | 75.01 | 71.76 | 34.99 | 26.42 |
| %*** | 71.87 | 65.91 | 79.60 | 46.31 | 49.18 |
| TN | 4.27 | 4.11 | 3.89 | 3.15 | 3.21 |
| DTN | 3.86 | 3.72 | 3.24 | 2.68 | 2.79 |
| %*** | 90.40 | 90.51 | 83.29 | 85.08 | 86.92 |
| TP | 0.67 | 0.58 | 0.47 | 0.32 | 0.26 |
| DTP | 0.45 | 0.38 | 0.32 | 0.21 | 0.16 |
| %*** | 67.16 | 65.52 | 68.09 | 65.63 | 61.54 |
*All the parameters units are mg/L except for “%.”
**RD1: road 1; RD2: road 2; RF1: roof 1; RF2: roof 2; RF3: roof 3.
***Proportion of dissolved ones in total ones.
Figure 1Distribution of typical rainfall (July 20, 2011).
Figure 2Runoff pollutograph from RD1 and RF1 during rainfall event of July 20, 2011.
Correlation between runoff pollutants in different phases.
| Correlation matrix | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TS | TDS | TSS | TCOD | DCOD | PCOD | TN | DTN | PTN | TP | DTP | PTP | |
| TS |
|
|
| 0.651 |
| 0.425 | 0.414 | 0.331 |
| 0.489 |
| |
| TDS |
| 0.689 |
| 0.583 | 0.721 | 0.242 | 0.239 | 0.181 |
| 0.565 |
| |
| TSS |
| 0.644 |
| 0.565 |
| 0.504 | 0.584 | 0.478 |
| 0.469 |
| |
| TCOD | 0.761 | 0.668 | 0.629 |
|
| 0.394 | 0.369 | 0.338 | 0.679 | 0.639 | 0.723 | |
| DCOD | 0.711 |
| 0.691 |
| 0.781 | 0.257 | 0.260 | 0.183 | 0.584 | 0.522 | 0.714 | |
| PCOD | 0.720 | 0.549 | 0.894 |
|
| 0.528 | 0.472 | 0.496 | 0.616 | 0.703 | 0.610 | |
| TN | 0.514 | 0.463 | 0.421 | 0.625 |
| 0.716 |
|
| 0.332 | 0.301 | 0.349 | |
| DTN | 0.431 | 0.540 | 0.367 | 0.569 |
| 0.677 |
|
| 0.372 | 0.339 | 0.390 | |
| PTN | 0.557 | 0.783 | 0.309 | 0.624 | 0.576 | 0.775 |
|
| 0.161 | 0.143 | 0.171 | |
| TP | 0.725 | 0.637 | 0.511 | 0.640 | 0.726 | 0.695 | 0.704 | 0.668 | 0.759 |
|
| |
| DTP | 0.674 | 0.639 | 0.425 | 0.635 |
| 0.593 | 0.698 | 0.654 | 0.770 |
|
| |
| PTP |
| 0.704 |
| 0.416 | 0.424 |
| 0.618 | 0.620 | 0.599 |
|
| |
The data in the table are all the correlation coefficient “r.”
The data of correlation coefficient between road runoff pollutants is above the diagonal; in contrast, that between roof runoff pollutants is below the diagonal.
High correlation coefficients (r ≥ 0.8) are shown in bold.