東華大學圖書館 |

Evaluating Sand Filter Hydrologic Mitigation and Water Quality Treatment in North Carolina.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Evaluating Sand Filter Hydrologic Mitigation and Water Quality Treatment in North Carolina./
Author:	Tate, Jackson Ryan.
Description:	1 online resource (325 pages)
Notes:	Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 84-06.
Contained By:	Masters Abstracts International84-06.
Subject:	Load. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=30167952click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9798358409026

Evaluating Sand Filter Hydrologic Mitigation and Water Quality Treatment in North Carolina.
Tate, Jackson Ryan.

Evaluating Sand Filter Hydrologic Mitigation and Water Quality Treatment in North Carolina. - 1 online resource (325 pages)

Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 84-06.

Thesis (M.Sc.)--North Carolina State University, 2022.

Includes bibliographical references

Stormwater runoff has been growing in importance as communities become increasingly urbanized. This runoff exacerbates flooding and downstream erosion, while also conveying a host of contaminants such as sediment and excess nutrients. Sand filters are a stormwater control measure (SCM) designed to reduce peak flow rates and remove pollutants through filtration, sedimentation, and adsorption. Previous research indicates they primarily remove sediment while moderately removing nutrients and other pollutants such as hydrocarbons. Sand filters have not been monitored in North Carolina. Despite this, the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) assigns stormwater removal credits for sand filters based on studies that examined bioretention cells without internal water storage (IWS). Sand filter design modifications have been considered to improve water quality treatment, especially for nutrient removal. One such option, IWS can provide anaerobic conditions at the bottom of the media to promote denitrification, the primary process for nitrogen removal. As a design component, IWS has been proven to improve pollutant removal in bioretention cells and permeable pavement systems but has not been studied in sand filters. In this study, four stormwater sand filters were monitored for two years to quantify their water quality and hydrologic performance. The sand filters were divided into pairs, with one pair located in Greensboro, NC (Sheetz and North Greensboro) and the other in Fayetteville, NC (Cape Landing and RNR). Sheetz and Cape Landing were retrofitted to add an IWS zone halfway through their two-year monitoring period. The four SCM watershed areas ranged from 4,000 m2 to 24,000 m2 and sand chamber surface areas ranged from less than 11 m2 up to 131 m2 . Hydrologic treatment was characterized by volume reduction and peak flow mitigation.Flow-weighted composite samples were collected during storm events to characterize each device's pollutant concentration removal efficiencies (REs) and load reductions (LRs) for nutrients (Total Phosphorus (TP), Orthophosphate (OP), Total Nitrogen (TN), Ammonia-N (NH3), NO2-3-N (NOX), and Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN)) and total suspended solids (TSS).These sand filters significantly reduced runoff volume (20%) and mitigated peak flow (95%). The only pollutant that was significantly removed by all four sand filters (considering both RE and LR metrics) was TSS, but when all water quality EMC RE data were pooled, all pollutants except for NOX were significantly removed, while NOX was significantly exported. Most other pollutants were generally removed - when examining individual sites - when using both metrics.When considering the IWS retrofit, hydrologic mitigation was unaffected. At Sheetz, the significant removal of TN, TKN, and TSS was maintained while TP became significantly removed post-retrofit. At Cape Landing, the significant removal of TKN, NH3, TP, and TSS was maintained while the export of NOX became significant post-retrofit. The statistical impact of the retrofit was isolated using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) test on the log10 of the influent and effluent pollutant loads. This test was unable to detect a statistical difference due to the retrofit for any pollutant at either site.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2023

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798358409026Subjects--Topical Terms:

3562902
Load.
Index Terms--Genre/Form:

542853
Electronic books.

Evaluating Sand Filter Hydrologic Mitigation and Water Quality Treatment in North Carolina.
LDR:04664nmm a2200409K 4500 001 2355082
005 20230515064607.5
006 m o d
007 cr mn ---uuuuu
008 241011s2022 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798358409026
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI30167952
035 $a (MiAaPQ)NCState_Univ18402039936
035 $a AAI30167952
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a Tate, Jackson Ryan. $3 3695472
245 1 0 $a Evaluating Sand Filter Hydrologic Mitigation and Water Quality Treatment in North Carolina.
264 0 $c 2022
300 $a 1 online resource (325 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 84-06.
500 $a Advisor: Hunt, William F.
502 $a Thesis (M.Sc.)--North Carolina State University, 2022.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a Stormwater runoff has been growing in importance as communities become increasingly urbanized. This runoff exacerbates flooding and downstream erosion, while also conveying a host of contaminants such as sediment and excess nutrients. Sand filters are a stormwater control measure (SCM) designed to reduce peak flow rates and remove pollutants through filtration, sedimentation, and adsorption. Previous research indicates they primarily remove sediment while moderately removing nutrients and other pollutants such as hydrocarbons. Sand filters have not been monitored in North Carolina. Despite this, the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) assigns stormwater removal credits for sand filters based on studies that examined bioretention cells without internal water storage (IWS). Sand filter design modifications have been considered to improve water quality treatment, especially for nutrient removal. One such option, IWS can provide anaerobic conditions at the bottom of the media to promote denitrification, the primary process for nitrogen removal. As a design component, IWS has been proven to improve pollutant removal in bioretention cells and permeable pavement systems but has not been studied in sand filters. In this study, four stormwater sand filters were monitored for two years to quantify their water quality and hydrologic performance. The sand filters were divided into pairs, with one pair located in Greensboro, NC (Sheetz and North Greensboro) and the other in Fayetteville, NC (Cape Landing and RNR). Sheetz and Cape Landing were retrofitted to add an IWS zone halfway through their two-year monitoring period. The four SCM watershed areas ranged from 4,000 m2 to 24,000 m2 and sand chamber surface areas ranged from less than 11 m2 up to 131 m2 . Hydrologic treatment was characterized by volume reduction and peak flow mitigation.Flow-weighted composite samples were collected during storm events to characterize each device's pollutant concentration removal efficiencies (REs) and load reductions (LRs) for nutrients (Total Phosphorus (TP), Orthophosphate (OP), Total Nitrogen (TN), Ammonia-N (NH3), NO2-3-N (NOX), and Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN)) and total suspended solids (TSS).These sand filters significantly reduced runoff volume (20%) and mitigated peak flow (95%). The only pollutant that was significantly removed by all four sand filters (considering both RE and LR metrics) was TSS, but when all water quality EMC RE data were pooled, all pollutants except for NOX were significantly removed, while NOX was significantly exported. Most other pollutants were generally removed - when examining individual sites - when using both metrics.When considering the IWS retrofit, hydrologic mitigation was unaffected. At Sheetz, the significant removal of TN, TKN, and TSS was maintained while TP became significantly removed post-retrofit. At Cape Landing, the significant removal of TKN, NH3, TP, and TSS was maintained while the export of NOX became significant post-retrofit. The statistical impact of the retrofit was isolated using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) test on the log10 of the influent and effluent pollutant loads. This test was unable to detect a statistical difference due to the retrofit for any pollutant at either site.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2023
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Load. $3 3562902
650 4 $a Water quality. $3 556913
650 4 $a Best management practices. $3 3685326
650 4 $a Phosphorus. $3 671778
650 4 $a Pollutants. $3 551065
650 4 $a Precipitation. $3 3680799
650 4 $a Gauges. $3 3687797
650 4 $a Stormwater management. $3 3685325
650 4 $a Algae. $3 546231
650 4 $a Watersheds. $3 544815
650 4 $a Sensors. $3 3549539
650 4 $a Seasons. $3 523975
650 4 $a Storms. $3 520680
650 4 $a Hydrology. $3 545716
650 4 $a Rainfall measurement. $3 3695473
650 4 $a Effluents. $3 3559973
650 4 $a Rain. $3 3560372
650 4 $a Nitrogen. $3 1314426
650 4 $a Civil engineering. $3 860360
650 4 $a Engineering. $3 586835
650 4 $a Hydrologic sciences. $3 3168407
650 4 $a Meteorology. $3 542822
650 4 $a Microbiology. $3 536250
650 4 $a Transportation. $3 555912
650 4 $a Water resources management. $3 794747
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 lcsh $3 542853
690 $a 0543
690 $a 0537
690 $a 0388
690 $a 0454
690 $a 0557
690 $a 0410
690 $a 0709
690 $a 0595
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 783688
710 2 $a North Carolina State University. $3 1018772
773 0 $t Masters Abstracts International $g 84-06.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=30167952 $z click for full text (PQDT)