Runoff infiltration, a desktop case study

Nicolas Bastien, S. Arthur, S. G. Wallis, M. Scholz

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    The use of sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) or best management practice is becoming increasingly common. However, rather than adopting the preferred 'treatment train' implementation, many developments opt for end-of-pipe control ponds. This paper discusses the use of SuDS in series to form treatment trains and compares their potential performance and effectiveness with end-of-pipe solutions. Land-use, site and catchment characteristics have been used alongside up-todate guidance, Infoworks CS and MUSIC to determine whole-life-costs, land-take, water quality and quantity for different SuDS combinations. The results presented show that the use of a treatment train allows approaches differing from the traditional use of single SuDS, either source or 'end-of-pipe', to be proposed to treat and attenuate runoff. The outcome is a more flexible solution where the footprint allocated to SuDS, costs and water quality can be managed differently to fully meet stakeholder objectives.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)2300-2308
    Number of pages9
    JournalWater Science and Technology
    Volume63
    Issue number10
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2011

    Keywords

    • BMP
    • runoff quality
    • SuDS
    • treatment train
    • Management

    Cite this

    Bastien, Nicolas ; Arthur, S. ; Wallis, S. G. ; Scholz, M. / Runoff infiltration, a desktop case study. In: Water Science and Technology. 2011 ; Vol. 63, No. 10. pp. 2300-2308.
    @article{267a2a22e0bf439bb7f8ad003f02ea27,
    title = "Runoff infiltration, a desktop case study",
    abstract = "The use of sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) or best management practice is becoming increasingly common. However, rather than adopting the preferred 'treatment train' implementation, many developments opt for end-of-pipe control ponds. This paper discusses the use of SuDS in series to form treatment trains and compares their potential performance and effectiveness with end-of-pipe solutions. Land-use, site and catchment characteristics have been used alongside up-todate guidance, Infoworks CS and MUSIC to determine whole-life-costs, land-take, water quality and quantity for different SuDS combinations. The results presented show that the use of a treatment train allows approaches differing from the traditional use of single SuDS, either source or 'end-of-pipe', to be proposed to treat and attenuate runoff. The outcome is a more flexible solution where the footprint allocated to SuDS, costs and water quality can be managed differently to fully meet stakeholder objectives.",
    keywords = "BMP, runoff quality, SuDS, treatment train, Management",
    author = "Nicolas Bastien and S. Arthur and Wallis, {S. G.} and M. Scholz",
    year = "2011",
    doi = "10.2166/wst.2011.181",
    language = "English",
    volume = "63",
    pages = "2300--2308",
    journal = "Water Science and Technology",
    issn = "0273-1223",
    publisher = "IWA Publishing",
    number = "10",

    }

    Bastien, N, Arthur, S, Wallis, SG & Scholz, M 2011, 'Runoff infiltration, a desktop case study', Water Science and Technology, vol. 63, no. 10, pp. 2300-2308. https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2011.181

    Runoff infiltration, a desktop case study. / Bastien, Nicolas; Arthur, S.; Wallis, S. G.; Scholz, M.

    In: Water Science and Technology, Vol. 63, No. 10, 2011, p. 2300-2308.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Runoff infiltration, a desktop case study

    AU - Bastien, Nicolas

    AU - Arthur, S.

    AU - Wallis, S. G.

    AU - Scholz, M.

    PY - 2011

    Y1 - 2011

    N2 - The use of sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) or best management practice is becoming increasingly common. However, rather than adopting the preferred 'treatment train' implementation, many developments opt for end-of-pipe control ponds. This paper discusses the use of SuDS in series to form treatment trains and compares their potential performance and effectiveness with end-of-pipe solutions. Land-use, site and catchment characteristics have been used alongside up-todate guidance, Infoworks CS and MUSIC to determine whole-life-costs, land-take, water quality and quantity for different SuDS combinations. The results presented show that the use of a treatment train allows approaches differing from the traditional use of single SuDS, either source or 'end-of-pipe', to be proposed to treat and attenuate runoff. The outcome is a more flexible solution where the footprint allocated to SuDS, costs and water quality can be managed differently to fully meet stakeholder objectives.

    AB - The use of sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) or best management practice is becoming increasingly common. However, rather than adopting the preferred 'treatment train' implementation, many developments opt for end-of-pipe control ponds. This paper discusses the use of SuDS in series to form treatment trains and compares their potential performance and effectiveness with end-of-pipe solutions. Land-use, site and catchment characteristics have been used alongside up-todate guidance, Infoworks CS and MUSIC to determine whole-life-costs, land-take, water quality and quantity for different SuDS combinations. The results presented show that the use of a treatment train allows approaches differing from the traditional use of single SuDS, either source or 'end-of-pipe', to be proposed to treat and attenuate runoff. The outcome is a more flexible solution where the footprint allocated to SuDS, costs and water quality can be managed differently to fully meet stakeholder objectives.

    KW - BMP

    KW - runoff quality

    KW - SuDS

    KW - treatment train

    KW - Management

    U2 - 10.2166/wst.2011.181

    DO - 10.2166/wst.2011.181

    M3 - Article

    VL - 63

    SP - 2300

    EP - 2308

    JO - Water Science and Technology

    JF - Water Science and Technology

    SN - 0273-1223

    IS - 10

    ER -