Spatial and Temporal Variability in Bioswale Infiltration Rate Observed during Full-Scale Infiltration Tests: Case Study in Riga Latvia
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Site Selection
2.2. Study Site Description
2.3. Full-Scale Infiltration Testing
2.4. Data Processing
3. Results
3.1. Results of Individual Infiltration Tests
3.2. Summary of the Results
3.3. Result Interpretation
3.4. Comparison with Other Full-Scale Test Studies
4. Discussion
4.1. Variability in Infiltration Rates and Factors Contributing to It
4.2. Recommended Infiltration Rates and Emptying Times
4.3. Implications for the Design of Bioretention Systems
4.4. Suggestions for Future Full-Scale Tests and Monitoring
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change (Ipcc). Climate Change 2021—The Physical Science Basis: Working Group I Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 1st ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2023; ISBN 978-1-00-915789-6. [Google Scholar]
- Seleem, O.; Heistermann, M.; Bronstert, A. Efficient Hazard Assessment for Pluvial Floods in Urban Environments: A Benchmarking Case Study for the City of Berlin, Germany. Water 2021, 13, 2476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Di Salvo, C.; Ciotoli, G.; Pennica, F.; Cavinato, G.P. Pluvial Flood Hazard in the City of Rome (Italy). J. Maps 2017, 13, 545–553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, H.; Nielsen, M.; Greatrex, H. Causes, Impacts, and Mitigation Strategies of Urban Pluvial Floods in India: A Systematic Review. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 2023, 93, 103751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sakib, M.S.; Alam, S.; Shampa; Murshed, S.B.; Kirtunia, R.; Mondal, M.S.; Chowdhury, A.I.A. Impact of Urbanization on Pluvial Flooding: Insights from a Fast Growing Megacity, Dhaka. Water 2023, 15, 3834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nuruzzaman, M. Nuruzzaman Urban Heat Island: Causes, Effects and Mitigation Measures—A Review. Int. J. Environ. Monit. Anal. 2015, 3, 67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boogaard, F.; Vojinovic, Z.; Chen, Y.-C.; Kluck, J.; Lin, T.-P. High Resolution Decision Maps for Urban Planning: A Combined Analysis of Urban Flooding and Thermal Stress Potential In Asia and Europe. MATEC Web Conf. 2017, 103, 04012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fletcher, T.D.; Shuster, W.; Hunt, W.F.; Ashley, R.; Butler, D.; Arthur, S.; Trowsdale, S.; Barraud, S.; Semadeni-Davies, A.; Bertrand-Krajewski, J.L.; et al. SUDS, LID, BMPs, WSUD and More—The Evolution and Application of Terminology Surrounding Urban Drainage. Urban Water J. 2015, 12, 525–542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Climate Change 2022—Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability: Working Group II Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2023. [Google Scholar]
- Jiang, Y.; Zevenbergen, C.; Ma, Y. Urban Pluvial Flooding and Stormwater Management: A Contemporary Review of China’s Challenges and “Sponge Cities” Strategy. Environ. Sci. Policy 2018, 80, 132–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, C.; Peng, C.; Chiang, P.C.; Cai, Y.; Wang, X.; Yang, Z. Mechanisms and Applications of Green Infrastructure Practices for Stormwater Control: A Review. J. Hydrol. 2019, 568, 626–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oral, H.V.; Carvalho, P.; Gajewska, M.; Ursino, N.; Masi, F.; Hullebusch, E.D.V.; Kazak, J.K.; Exposito, A.; Cipolletta, G.; Andersen, T.R.; et al. A Review of Nature-Based Solutions for Urban Water Management in European Circular Cities: A Critical Assessment Based on Case Studies and Literature. Blue-Green Syst. 2020, 2, 112–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rentachintala, L.R.N.P.; Reddy, M.G.M.; Mohapatra, P.K. Urban Stormwater Management for Sustainable and Resilient Measures and Practices: A Review. Water Sci. Technol. 2022, 85, 1120–1140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Raymond, C.M.; Frantzeskaki, N.; Kabisch, N.; Berry, P.; Breil, M.; Nita, M.R.; Geneletti, D.; Calfapietra, C. A Framework for Assessing and Implementing the Co-Benefits of Nature-Based Solutions in Urban Areas. Environ. Sci. Policy 2017, 77, 15–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tsatsou, A.; Frantzeskaki, N.; Malamis, S. Nature-Based Solutions for Circular Urban Water Systems: A Scoping Literature Review and a Proposal for Urban Design and Planning. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 394, 136325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frantzeskaki, N. Seven Lessons for Planning Nature-Based Solutions in Cities. Environ. Sci. Policy 2019, 93, 101–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Castellar, J.A.; Popartan, L.A.; Pueyo-Ros, J.; Atanasova, N.; Langergraber, G.; Säumel, I.; Corominas, L.; Comas, J.; Acuna, V. Nature-Based Solutions in the Urban Context: Terminology, Classification and Scoring for Urban Challenges and Ecosystem Services. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 779, 146237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nazarpour, S.; Gnecco, I.; Palla, A. Evaluating the Effectiveness of Bioretention Cells for Urban Stormwater Management: A Systematic Review. Water 2023, 15, 913. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Graaf-van Dinther, R. (Ed.) Climate Resilient Urban Areas: Governance, Design and Development in Coastal Delta Cities; Palgrave Studies in Climate Resilient Societies; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; ISBN 978-3-030-57536-6. [Google Scholar]
- Koiv-Vainik, M.; Kill, K.; Espenberg, M.; Uuemaa, E.; Teemusk, A.; Maddison, M.; Palta, M.M.; Török, L.; Mander, Ü.; Scholz, M.; et al. Urban Stormwater Retention Capacity of Nature-Based Solutions at Different Climatic Conditions. Nat. -Based Solut. 2022, 2, 100038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spraakman, S.; Rodgers, T.F.M.; Monri-Fung, H.; Nowicki, A.; Diamond, M.L.; Passeport, E.; Thuna, M.; Drake, J. A Need for Standardized Reporting: A Scoping Review of Bioretention Research 2000–2019. Water 2020, 12, 3122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spraakman, S.; Martel, J.-L.; Drake, J. How Much Water Can Bioretention Retain, and Where Does It Go? Blue-Green Syst. 2022, 4, 89–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Venvik, G.; Boogaard, F. Infiltration Capacity of Rain Gardens Using Full-Scale Test Method: Effect of Infiltration System on Groundwater Levels in Bergen, Norway. Land 2020, 9, 520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boogaard, F.C. Spatial and Time Variable Long Term Infiltration Rates of Green Infrastructure under Extreme Climate Conditions, Drought and Highly Intensive Rainfall. Water 2022, 14, 840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Woods Ballard, B.; Wilson, S.; Udale-Clarke, H.; Illman, S.; Scott, T.; Ashley, R.; Kellagher, R. The SuDS Manual (C753); CIRIA: London, UK, 2015; ISBN 978-0-86017-759-3. [Google Scholar]
- Kasprzyk, M.; Szpakowski, W.; Poznańska, E.; Boogaard, F.C.; Bobkowska, K.; Gajewska, M. Technical Solutions and Benefits of Introducing Rain Gardens—Gdańsk Case Study. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 835, 155487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boogaard, F.; Kondratenko, J. Low Impact Development Devices DNA of Cities for Long Term Stormwater Management Strategies. Discov. Water 2024, 4, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kondratenko, J.; Ieviņa, D.; Zemīte, M.; Boogaard, F.; Rukšāne, I.; Verza, A.; Alpa-Šulmane, K. Projektēšanas vadlīnijas ilgtspējīgo lietus ūdeņu apsaimniekošanas risinājumu izmantošanai. In Design Guidelines for the Sustainable Stormwater Management Solutions; Cleantech Latvia: Riga, Latvia, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- ClimateScan. Available online: https://climatescan.org/ (accessed on 22 June 2024).
- Restemeyer, B.; Boogaard, F.C. Potentials and Pitfalls of Mapping Nature-Based Solutions with the Online Citizen Science Platform ClimateScan. Land 2021, 10, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boogaard, F.; Cherqui, F.; Clemens-Meyer, F.H.L.R.; Lepot, M.L.; Shepherd, W.; van der Valk, M. Investigate the Condition of an Asset. In Asset Management of Urban Drainage Systems: If Anything Exciting Happens, We′ve Done It Wrong; IWA Publishing: London, UK, 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bahrami, M.; Boogaard, F.; Bosseler, B.; Cherqui, F.; van Duin, B.; Funke, F.; Goerke, M.; Kelly-Hooper, F.; Kleidorfer, M.; Moglia, M.; et al. Operation, Maintenance and Rehabilitation Techniques; IWA Publishing: London, UK, 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- TD-Diver Water Level Data Logger. Available online: https://www.royaleijkelkamp.com/en-us/products/monitoring/sensors-probes/water-level-sensors/td-diver/ (accessed on 22 June 2024).
- CTD Diver Water Level Sensor. Available online: https://www.royaleijkelkamp.com/en-us/products/monitoring/sensors-probes/water-level-sensors/ctd-diver/ (accessed on 22 June 2024).
- Garvin, S.L. Digest 365: Soakaway Design; BRE: Watford, UK, 2016; ISBN 978-1-84806-918-6. [Google Scholar]
- Lennartz, B.; Liu, H. Hydraulic Functions of Peat Soils and Ecosystem Service. Front. Environ. Sci. 2019, 7, 92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boogaard, F.; Rooze, D.; Stuurman, R. The Long-Term Hydraulic Efficiency of Green Infrastructure under Sea Level: Performance of Raingardens, Swales and Permeable Pavement in New Orleans. Land 2023, 12, 171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, F.; Fu, D.; Zevenbergen, C.; Boogaard, F.C.; Singh, R.P. Time-Varying Characteristics of Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity in Grassed Swales Based on the Ensemble Kalman Filter Algorithm—A Case Study of Two Long-Running Swales in Netherlands. J. Environ. Manag. 2024, 351, 119760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yang, F.; Fu, D.; Zevenbergen, C.; Boogaard, F.C.; Singh, R.P. Screening of Representative Rainfall Event Series for Long-Term Hydrological Performance Evaluation of Grassed Swales. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Saraçoğlu, K.E.; Kazezyılmaz-Alhan, C.M. Determination of Grass Swale Hydrological Performance with Rainfall-Watershed-Swale Experimental Setup. J. Hydrol. Eng. 2023, 28, 04022043. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, T.; Wang, M.; Su, J.; Li, J. Unlocking the Positive Impact of Bio-Swales on Hydrology, Water Quality, and Biodiversity: A Bibliometric Review. Sustainability 2023, 15, 8141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fischer, C.; Roscher, C.; Jensen, B.; Eisenhauer, N.; Baade, J.; Attinger, S.; Scheu, S.; Weisser, W.W.; Schumacher, J.; Hildebrandt, A. How Do Earthworms, Soil Texture and Plant Composition Affect Infiltration along an Experimental Plant Diversity Gradient in Grassland? PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e98987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Monrabal-Martinez, C.; Aberle, J.; Muthanna, T.M.; Orts-Zamorano, M. Hydrological Benefits of Filtering Swales for Metal Removal. Water Res. 2018, 145, 509–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jarvis, N.J. A Review of Non-Equilibrium Water Flow and Solute Transport in Soil Macropores: Principles, Controlling Factors and Consequences for Water Quality. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 2007, 58, 523–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Técher, D.; Berthier, E. Supporting Evidences for Vegetation-Enhanced Stormwater Infiltration in Bioretention Systems: A Comprehensive Review. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2023, 30, 19705–19724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Coban, O.; Bebout, B.M.; De Deyn, G.B.; van der Ploeg, M. Soil Microbiota as Game-Changers in Restoration of Degraded Lands. Science 2022, 375, abe0725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hunt, W.F.; Davis, A.P.; Traver, R.G. Meeting Hydrologic and Water Quality Goals through Targeted Bioretention Design. J. Environ. Eng. 2012, 138, 698–707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stewart, R.D.; Lee, J.G.; Shuster, W.D.; Darner, R.A. Modelling Hydrological Response to a Fully-Monitored Urban Bioretention Cell. Hydrol. Process. 2017, 31, 4626–4638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meng, Y.; Wang, H.; Chen, J.; Zhang, S. Modelling Hydrology of a Single Bioretention System with HYDRUS-1D. Sci. World J. 2014, 2014, e521047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Boogaard, F.C.; Bruins, G.; Wentink, R. Wadi’s: Aanbevelingen Voor Ontwerp, Aanleg En Beheer [Wadis: Recommendations for Design, Construction and Management]; Stichting RIONED: Ede, The Netherlands, 2006; ISBN 90-73645-220. [Google Scholar]
- Payne, E.; Hatt, B.; Deletic, A.; Dobbie, M.; McCarthy, D.; Chandrasena, G. Adoption Guidelines for Stormwater Biofiltration Systems (Version 2); Cooperative Research Centre for Water Sensitive Cities: Clayton, CA, USA, 2015; ISBN 978-1-921912-27-6. [Google Scholar]
- Minnesota Stormwater Manual. Available online: https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Main_Page (accessed on 30 July 2024).
- Tu, M.; Caplan, J.S.; Eisenman, S.W.; Wadzuk, B.M. When Green Infrastructure Turns Grey: Plant Water Stress as a Consequence of Overdesign in a Tree Trench System. Water 2020, 12, 573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Swale # | Area, m2 | Catchment Area (Excl. Swale), m2 | Catchment Surfaces | Outflow via | Surrounding Soil Conditions | Groundwater Depth below Swale Bottom, m * | Plants |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Swale 1 | 95 | 604 | Building roof, parking lot, sidewalks | Exfiltration, overflow to Swale 2 | Artificial soil: sand with construction rubble and organics | 1.3 | Perennial plants: Eupatorium fistulosum, Molinia arundincea, Miscanthus sinensis, Physostegia virginiana Trees and shrubs: Salix purpurea, Salix fragilis, Betula utilis var. jacquemontii |
Swale 2 | 88 | 656 | Parking lot, sidewalks | Exfiltration, overflow to Swale 1 | 1.7 | ||
Swale 3 | 140 | 798 | Parking lot, sidewalks | Exfiltration, overflow to Swale 4 | Downstream: Artificial soil: sand with construction rubble and organics, sandy peat with construction rubble Upstream: Artificial soil: sand with construction rubble and organics, degraded peat and sandy peat | 1.1 | |
Swale 4 | 88 | 379 | Parking lot, sidewalks | Exfiltration, overflow to Swale 3 | Artificial soil: sand with construction rubble and organics, degraded peat and sandy peat | 1.3 | |
Swale 5 | 175 | 1241 | Parking lot, sidewalks, playground | Exfiltration, underdrain, overflow to underdrain, located at the edge of the swale | Artificial soil: sand with construction rubble and organics, coarse sand | 0.7 | Perennial plants: Carex elata, Eupatorium fistulosum, Iris pseudacorus, Iris sibirica, Lysimachia punctata, Miscanthus sinensis, Molinia arundincea, Nepeta mussinii Trees and shrubs: Salix fragilis Betula utilis var. jacquemontii |
Swale 6 | 53 | 600 | Parking lot, sidewalks | Exfiltration, underdrain, overflow to underdrain, located for the entire length of the swale | |||
Swale 7 | 358 | 2355 | Parking lot | Exfiltration, overflow to municipal sewer | Greenfield: sand, dusty, dense, saturated with water, yellow and pale yellow | 0.6 | Perennial plants: Miscanthus sinensis, Miscanthus purpurascens, Iris sibirica Trees and shrubs: Coloneaster dammer, Salix purpurea, Salix repens, Quercus robur, Physocarpus opulifolius |
Swale 8 | 352 | 2659 | Parking lot | Exfiltration, overflow to municipal sewer |
Swale and Date | Number of Tests | Sensors Used | Sensor Accuracy | Logging Frequency | Measurement Verification | Presence during the Test | Environmental Conditions before and during the Test |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Swale 1—13 July 2023 | 2 | 2 TD-diver loggers | ±0.5 cm H2O | 5 s | 2 sensors | Two people supervised the test for the entire duration of test 1 and halfway through test 2, sensors were extracted in the evening | Abnormally dry months of April–June 2023 in Riga: cumulative precipitation 37.9 mm compared to the climatic norm of 150.7 mm over the three months, in the first 10 days of July the precipitation amount was lower by 28% compared to the norm, the average temperature in April was higher by 1.4 °C, in May by 0.2 °C, in June by 1.6 °C compared to the climatic norm. Last rainfall 7 days before the test with a depth of 3.8 mm |
Swale 2—13 July 2023 | 3 | 1 CTD-diver logger for tests 1–3 and 1 TD-diver logger for tests 1–2 | ±0.5 cm H2O | 5 s | 2 sensors, time-lapse photos | Two people supervised the test for the entire duration of tests 1 and 2 and 75% of test 3, sensors were extracted in the evening | |
Swale 3—13 July 2023 | 1 | CTD-diver logger in the downstream part, TD-diver logger in the upstream part | CTD-diver: ±2.5 cm H2O TD-diver: ±0.5 cm H2O | 1 s in the downstream part 0.5 s in the upstream part | 2 sensors | Two people supervised the test for 58% of the test duration, the sensors were extracted in the evening | |
Swale 4—13–14 July 2023 | 1 | TD-diver logger | ±0.5 cm H2O | 5 s | Visual inspection with a ruler | Two people supervised the test for 15% of the test duration, the site was inspected in the evening, and the sensor was extracted the next morning | |
Swale 5—14 July 2023 | 2 | 2 TD-diver loggers | ±0.5 cm H2O | 5 s | 2 sensors, time-lapse photos | Two people supervised the test for the entire duration of test 1 and 75% of test 2, the sensors were extracted the next morning | Same conditions as Swales 1–4. Rainfall of 3 mm during test 2 |
Swale 6—14 July 2023 | 4 | 2 TD-diver loggers | ±0.5 cm H2O | 5 s | 2 sensors | Two people supervised the test for the entire duration of all tests | Same conditions as Swales 1–4 |
Swale 1—16 October | 2 | TD-diver logger | ±0.5 cm H2O | 5 s | Visual inspection with a ruler | Two people supervised the test for the entire duration of test 1 and halfway through test 2, sensors extracted in the evening | Abnormally wet months of July and August: 264.6 mm of rainfall compared to the norm of 158.2 mm. Abnormally dry September: 36.2 mm of rainfall compared to the norm of 66 mm. In the first 10 days of October, the precipitation amount exceeded the norm by 100% and in the second 10 days by 50%. Last rainfall: 5.8 mm the previous day. Rainfall of 1.2 mm during the test day |
Swale 2—16 October | 3 | TD-diver logger | ±0.5 cm H2O | 5 s | Time-lapse photos | Two people supervised the test for the entire duration of test 1 and 2 and 75% of test 3, the sensor extracted in the evening | |
Swale 3—16 October | 1 | TD-diver logger | ±0.5 cm H2O | 5 s | Visual inspection with a ruler | Two people supervised the test for 75% of the test duration, the sensor was extracted in the evening | |
Swale 4—16–18 October | 1 | TD-diver logger | ±0.5 cm H2O | 5 s | Visual inspection with a ruler | Two people supervised the test for 25% of the test duration, the sensor was extracted in the evening | |
Swale 7—17–18 October | 2 | TD-diver logger | ±0.5 cm H2O | 5 s | Visual inspection with a ruler | Two people supervised the test for the first 2 h, the site was inspected in the evening, and on October 18, the sensor was extracted in the morning of October 19 | Same conditions as Swales 1–4. Rainfall of 13.2 mm between the tests |
Swale 8—17–18 October | 2 | 2 TD-diver loggers | ±0.5 cm H2O | 5 s | 2 sensors |
13–14 July 2023 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Test # | Swale1 | Swale2 | Swale3 | Swale4 | Swale5 | Swale6 |
Test 1 | 1.28 | 5.48 | 1.33 | 0.29 | 3.26 | 7.65 |
Test 2 | 0.92 | 2.55 | 1.84 | 5.20 | ||
Test 3 | 1.78 | 4.66 | ||||
Test 4 | 4.20 | |||||
16–19 October 2023 | ||||||
Test # | Swale1 | Swale2 | Swale3 | Swale4 | Swale7 | Swale8 |
Test 1 | 1.03 | 2.54 | 0.67 | 0.14 | 0.16 | 0.18 |
Test 2 | 0.69 | 1.35 | 0.09 | 0.11 | ||
Test 3 | 0.99 |
Parameter | All Swales and All Tests | All swales, Test 1 Only | July 2023 | October 2023 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
All Swales, All Tests | All Swales, Test 1 Only | Swales 1–4, All Tests | Swales 1–4, Test 1 Only | All Swales, All Tests | All Swales, Test 1 Only | Swales 1–4, All Tests | Swales 1–4, Test 1 Only | |||
n | 24 | 12 | 13 | 6 | 7 | 4 | 11 | 6 | 7 | 4 |
Minimum (m/d) | 0.09 | 0.14 | 0.29 | 0.29 | 0.29 | 0.29 | 0.09 | 0.14 | 0.14 | 0.14 |
Maximum (m/d) | 7.65 | 7.65 | 7.65 | 7.65 | 5.48 | 5.48 | 2.54 | 2.54 | 2.54 | 2.54 |
Mean (m/d) | 2.02 | 2.00 | 3.12 | 3.22 | 1.95 | 2.10 | 0.72 | 0.78 | 1.06 | 1.09 |
Median (m/d) | 1.31 | 1.16 | 2.55 | 2.29 | 1.33 | 1.31 | 0.67 | 0.43 | 0.99 | 0.85 |
Standard deviation (m/d) | 2.02 | 2.29 | 2.10 | 2.60 | 1.58 | 2.00 | 0.71 | 0.85 | 0.70 | 0.89 |
Coefficient of variation | 1.00 | 1.14 | 0.67 | 0.81 | 0.81 | 0.95 | 0.99 | 1.08 | 0.66 | 0.82 |
13–14 July 2023 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Test # | Swale1 | Swale2 | Swale3 | Swale4 |
Test 2 | −29% | −53% | −44% | −32% |
Test 3 | −30% | −8% | ||
Test 4 | −12% | |||
16–19 October 2023 | ||||
Test # | Swale1 | Swale2 | Swale7 | Swale8 |
Test 2 | −33% | −47% | −44% | −39% |
Test 3 | −27% |
Test # | Swale1 | Swale2 | Swale3 | Swale4 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Test 1 | −19% | −55% | −58% | −53% |
Test 2 | −25% | −46% | ||
Test 3 | −45% |
Study | n | Minimum (m/d) | Maximum (m/d) | Mean (m/d) | Median (m/d) | Standard Deviation (m/d) | Coefficient of Variation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Present study—July (dry period) | 6 | 0.29 | 7.65 | 3.22 | 2.29 | 2.60 | 0.81 |
Present study—October (wet period) * | 6 | 0.14 | 2.54 | 0.78 | 0.43 | 0.85 | 1.08 |
Dalfsen, NL—drought [24] | 3 | 3.10 | 8.20 | 5.17 | 4.20 | 2.19 | 0.42 |
Dalfsen, NL—normal conditions [24] | 3 | 1.70 | 12.00 | 5.90 | 4.00 | 4.41 | 0.75 |
Bergen, NO [23] | 2 | 12.24 | 38.40 | 25.32 | 25.32 | 13.08 | 0.52 |
Gdansk, PL [26] | 4 | 0.42 | 0.71 | 0.52 | 0.48 | 0.12 | 0.22 |
New Orleans, USA [37] | 14 | 3.31 | 70.81 | 21.58 | 14.37 | 19.70 | 0.91 |
All studies (test 1 only) | 38 | 0.14 | 70.81 | 10.84 | 4.10 | 15.79 | 3.85 |
Study | n | Minimum (%) | Maximum (%) | Mean (%) | Median (%) | Standard Deviation (%) | Coefficient of Variation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Present study—July (dry period) | 4 | −53% | −29% | −40% | −38% | 11% | 0.28 |
Present study—October (wet period) | 4 | −47% | −33% | −41% | −42% | 6% | 0.15 |
Dalfsen, NL—drought [24] | 3 | −65% | −11% | −34% | −27% | 28% | 0.80 |
Dalfsen, NL—normal conditions [24] | 3 | −71% | −50% | −58% | −54% | 11% | 0.19 |
New Orleans, USA [37] | 4 | −46% | −21% | −31% | −28% | 10% | 0.33 |
All studies | 18 | −71% | −11% | −42% | −44% | 15% | 0.36 |
Study | n | Minimum (%) | Maximum (%) | Mean (%) | Median (%) | Standard Deviation (%) | Coefficient of Variation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Present study—July 2023 (dry period) | 4 | −67% | −29% | −46% | −44% | 16% | 0.35 |
Present study—October 2023 (wet period) | 4 | −61% | −33% | −43% | −39% | 12% | 0.29 |
Dalfsen, NL—drought [24] | 3 | −77% | −52% | −69% | −76% | 14% | 0.21 |
Dalfsen, NL—normal conditions [24] | 3 | −76% | −70% | −74% | −75% | 3% | 0.05 |
New Orleans, USA [37] | 4 | −46% | −21% | −31% | −28% | 10% | 0.33 |
All studies | 18 | −77% | −21% | −50% | −45% | 19% | 0.39 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Kondratenko, J.; Boogaard, F.C.; Rubulis, J.; Maļinovskis, K. Spatial and Temporal Variability in Bioswale Infiltration Rate Observed during Full-Scale Infiltration Tests: Case Study in Riga Latvia. Water 2024, 16, 2219. https://doi.org/10.3390/w16162219
Kondratenko J, Boogaard FC, Rubulis J, Maļinovskis K. Spatial and Temporal Variability in Bioswale Infiltration Rate Observed during Full-Scale Infiltration Tests: Case Study in Riga Latvia. Water. 2024; 16(16):2219. https://doi.org/10.3390/w16162219
Chicago/Turabian StyleKondratenko, Jurijs, Floris C. Boogaard, Jānis Rubulis, and Krišs Maļinovskis. 2024. "Spatial and Temporal Variability in Bioswale Infiltration Rate Observed during Full-Scale Infiltration Tests: Case Study in Riga Latvia" Water 16, no. 16: 2219. https://doi.org/10.3390/w16162219
APA StyleKondratenko, J., Boogaard, F. C., Rubulis, J., & Maļinovskis, K. (2024). Spatial and Temporal Variability in Bioswale Infiltration Rate Observed during Full-Scale Infiltration Tests: Case Study in Riga Latvia. Water, 16(16), 2219. https://doi.org/10.3390/w16162219