m |
m |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
+ | ==Infiltration quiz== | ||
+ | Answers below | ||
+ | #Using information from the Minnesota Stormwater Manual, which of these classification systems is not used for determining infiltration rates from boring logs | ||
+ | ##Hydrologic soil group | ||
+ | ##USGS published values for saturated hydraulic conductivity | ||
+ | ##USDA soil classification | ||
+ | ##Unified Soil Classification | ||
+ | #True or False: A 3-foot separation distance is widely applied in determining the feasibility of infiltration at sites. This value is based on extensive research at sites employing stormwater best management practices. | ||
+ | #True or False: If soil or ground water contamination is detected at a site, infiltration is prohibited | ||
+ | #True or False: Values used in determining infiltration rates and thus feasibility of infiltration at a site are based on instantaneous measurement of water infiltration into a soil | ||
+ | #Which of these is not recommended for measuring infiltration rates at a site? | ||
+ | ##Modified Phillip-Dunn permeameter | ||
+ | ##Double-ring infiltrometer | ||
+ | ##Guelph permeameter | ||
+ | ##Soil tensiometer | ||
+ | #Which of these is not an important reason why we prefer to infiltrate stormwater runoff when it is feasible? | ||
+ | ##It provides numerous co-benefits, such as habitat creation and carbon sequestration | ||
+ | ##It helps alleviate flood potential for small- and medium-intensity storms | ||
+ | ##It keeps rain water close to it's source, thus somewhat mimicking natural hydrology | ||
+ | ##It effectively reduces the potential for many pollutants to reach receiving waters | ||
+ | |||
+ | Answers | ||
+ | #b - USGS published values. While these values may have utility in some cases, they are not included as options in the Manual. See [[Design infiltration rates]]. | ||
+ | #False: It is generally believed the 3-foot value is based on applications to septic system drainfield measurements, where the 3-foot separation is widely applied. There is no significant body of evidence supporting a specific value for separation for stormwater infiltration practices. Studies show significant pollutant attenuation in the upper 6 inches of soil containing high organic matter contents, while a 3-foot separation may be inadequate for coarse-textured soils containing low organic matter concentrations. This is an area needing more research. | ||
+ | #False: The CSW permit specifies infiltration is prohibited when contaminants will be mobilized. If infiltration practices can be located on a site such that contaminants on the site will not be mobilized, infiltration is acceptable. | ||
+ | #False: Steady-state infiltration rates are applied in determining soil infiltration rates and feasibility at sites. Infiltration into soil, particularly unsaturated soil, is complex. Put on your physics cap and [https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Soil_hydrologic_properties_and_processes read more here]. | ||
+ | ##d - soil tensiometer. Tensiometers are used to measure soil water (moisture) content. See [[Determining soil infiltration rates]] | ||
+ | ##a - provides numerous co-benefits. Co-benefits can be incorporated into the design of infiltration systems, but they are not a fundamental characteristic of infiltration practices. See [[Green Infrastructure benefits of infiltration practices]] | ||
+ | |||
==Vegetation quiz== | ==Vegetation quiz== | ||
Answers below | Answers below |
Answers below
Answers
Answers below
Answers
Answers below
Answers
Answers below
Answers
Answers