Difference between revisions of "Overview for filtration"
m |
m |
||
| (17 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | [[File:General information page image.png| | + | [[File:Pdf image.png|100px|thumb|alt=pdf image|<font size=3>[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=File:Overview_for_filtration_-_Minnesota_Stormwater_Manual_June_2022.pdf Download pdf]</font size>]] |
| + | [[File:General information page image.png|right|100px|alt=image]] | ||
| + | [[File:Beam Ave sand filter 1.jpg|thumb|300px|alt=photo of an iron ehanced sand filter basin|<font size=3>Iron enhanced sand filter basin, Maplewood, MN. Photo courtesy of Barr Engineering.</font size>]] | ||
| + | [[file:Vegetated filter strip 4.png|300px|thumb|alt=image of vegetated filter strip|<font size=3>Vegetated filter strips filter solids and debris from stormwater runoff before the runoff enters the treatment practice. In this image, the filter strip is treating runoff prior to the runoff entering a detention pond. Source: [http://www.stormwaterpartners.com/facilities/detention.html StormwaterPartners]</font size>]] | ||
| − | Filtering practices include | + | See also |
| − | + | *[[Overview for dry swale (grass swale)]] | |
| + | *[[Overview for high-gradient stormwater step-pool swale]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | Filtering practices include media filters (surface, underground, perimeter), <span title="Pretreatment vegetated filter strips are designed to provide sedimentation and screening (by vegetation) to treat stormwater runoff prior to entering a structural stormwater BMP. Pretreatment vegetated filter strips are especially effective at capturing excess sediment in stormwater runoff by settling solids. Pretreatment vegetated filter strips provide limited (due to size) volume reduction, peak flow reduction, infiltration, and biological treatment. Stormwater management processes not provided in pretreatment vegetated filter strips include filtration and sorption."> [https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Overview_for_pretreatment_vegetated_filter_strips '''vegetated filters''']</span> (filter strips, grass channels), and combination media/vegetative filters (<span title="Dry swales, sometimes called grass swales, are similar to bioretention cells but are configured as shallow, linear channels. They typically have vegetative cover such as turf or native perennial grasses. Dry swales may be constructed as filtration or infiltration practices, depending on soils."> [https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Dry_swale_(Grass_swale) '''dry swales''']</span>). Media and media/vegetative filters operate similarly and provide comparable water quality capabilities as bioretention. Vegetative filters are generally more suitable as <span title="Pretreatment reduces maintenance and prolongs the lifespan of structural stormwater BMPs by removing trash, debris, organic materials, coarse sediments, and associated pollutants prior to entering structural stormwater BMPs. Implementing pretreatment devices also improves aesthetics by capturing debris in focused or hidden areas. Pretreatment practices include settling devices, screens, and pretreatment vegetated filter strips."> [https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Pretreatment '''pretreatment''']</span> practices, but in some situations can be used on a stand alone basis. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Filtering practices have widespread applicability and are suitable for all land uses, as long as the <span title="The total drainage area, including pervious and impervious surfaces, contributing to a BMP"> '''[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Contributing_drainage_area_to_stormwater_BMPs contributing drainage areas]'''</span> are limited (e.g., typically less than 5 acres). Media filters are not as aesthetically appealing as <span title="Bioretention, also called rain gardens, is a terrestrial-based (up-land as opposed to wetland) water quality and water quantity control process. Bioretention employs a simplistic, site-integrated design that provides opportunity for runoff infiltration, filtration, storage, and water uptake by vegetation. Bioretention areas are suitable stormwater treatment practices for all land uses, as long as the contributing drainage area is appropriate for the size of the facility. Common bioretention opportunities include landscaping islands, cul-de-sacs, parking lot margins, commercial setbacks, open space, rooftop drainage and street-scapes (i.e., between the curb and sidewalk). Bioretention, when designed with an underdrain and liner, is also a good design option for treating Potential stormwater hotspots. Bioretention is extremely versatile because of its ability to be incorporated into landscaped areas. The versatility of the practice also allows for bioretention areas to be frequently employed as stormwater retrofits."> '''bioretention'''</span>, which makes them more appropriate for commercial or light industrial land uses or in locations that will not receive significant public exposure. Media filters are particularly well suited for sites with high percentages of impervious cover (e.g., greater than 50 percent). Media filters can be designed with an <span title="An underground drain or trench with openings through which the water may percolate from the soil or ground above"> '''underdrain'''</span>, which makes them a good option for treating potential <span title="Stormwater Hotspots (PSHs) are activities or practices that have the potential to produce relatively high levels of stormwater pollutants"> '''[https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Potential_stormwater_hotspots stormwater hotspots]'''</span> (PSHs). They can also be installed underground to prevent the consumption of valuable land space (often an important retrofit or redevelopment consideration). Vegetative filters can be incorporated into landscaped areas, providing dual functionality. | ||
==Function within stormwater treatment train== | ==Function within stormwater treatment train== | ||
| − | Media filtration systems are designed primarily as | + | Media filtration systems are designed primarily as <span title="A stormwater system in which part or all of the stormwater runoff is diverted from the primary treatment practice. Partial diversion is employed for bypass runoff, which is runoff in excess of the designed treatment volume of the practice. Full offline diversion is employed as a temporary means to divert all runoff from a stormwater practice, typically to avoid erosion of exposed soil or establishment of vegetation."> '''offline'''</span> systems for stormwater quality and typically are used in conjunction with other structural controls in the stormwater <span title="Multiple BMPs that work together to remove pollutants utilizing combinations of hydraulic, physical, biological, and chemical methods"> [https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Using_the_treatment_train_approach_to_BMP_selection '''treatment train''']</span>. Vegetative filters, designed as grass channels or <span title="Are configured as shallow, linear channels. They typically have vegetative cover such as turf or native perennial grasses"> [https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Dry_swale_(Grass_swale) '''swales''']</span>, may be the main form of conveyance between or out of BMPs, as well as providing treatment for stormwater runoff. |
==MPCA permit applicability== | ==MPCA permit applicability== | ||
| − | One of the goals of this Manual is to facilitate understanding of and compliance with the [https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title= | + | One of the goals of this Manual is to facilitate understanding of and compliance with the [https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Construction_stormwater_program MPCA Construction General Permit (CGP)], which includes design and performance standards for permanent stormwater management systems. These standards must be applied in all projects in which at least 1 acre of new impervious area is being created, and the permit stipulates certain standards for various categories of stormwater management practices. |
| − | For regulatory purposes, [ | + | For regulatory purposes, <span title="Filtration Best Management Practices (BMPs) treat urban stormwater runoff as it flows through a filtering medium, such as sand or an organic material. They are generally used on small drainage areas (5 acres or less) and are primarily designed for pollutant removal. They are effective at removing total suspended solids (TSS), particulate phosphorus, metals, and most organics. They are less effective for soluble pollutants such as dissolved phosphorus, chloride, and nitrate."> [https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Filtration '''filtration''']</span> practices fall under Filtration systems of the MPCA CGP. If used in combination with other practices, credit for combined stormwater treatment can be given. Due to the statewide prevalence of the MPCA permit, design guidance in this section is presented with the assumption that the permit does apply. Also, although it is expected that in many cases the filtration practice will be used in combination with other practices, standards are described for the case in which it is a stand-alone practice. |
The following terms are thus used in the text to distinguish various levels of filtration practice design guidance: | The following terms are thus used in the text to distinguish various levels of filtration practice design guidance: | ||
| Line 20: | Line 28: | ||
==Retrofit suitability== | ==Retrofit suitability== | ||
| − | The use of filters as a retrofit practice primarily depends on existing infrastructure and the compatibility of existing storm drain inverts that need to connect to the filter | + | The use of filters as a retrofit practice primarily depends on existing infrastructure and the compatibility of existing storm drain inverts that need to connect to the filter underdrain outflow. In general, four to six feet of elevation above the existing collection system invert is needed for <span title="Engineered media is a mixture of sand, fines (silt, clay), and organic matter utilized in stormwater practices, most frequently in bioretention practices. The media is typically designed to have a rapid infiltration rate, attenuate pollutants, and allow for plant growth."> [https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Design_criteria_for_bioretention#Materials_specifications_-_filter_media '''media''']</span> filter retrofits (2 to 3 feet is needed for perimeter filters). Underground media filters are excellent for <span title="Highly urban and ultra-urban settings have a large percentage of impermeable surface and typically have limited space to install surface BMPs. An example would be a downtown area."> '''highly urban and ultra-urban environments'''</span> where space is at a premium. |
==Special receiving waters suitability== | ==Special receiving waters suitability== | ||
| − | The following table provides guidance regarding the use of filtration practices in areas upstream of special receiving waters | + | The following table provides guidance regarding the use of filtration practices in areas upstream of <span title="Waters with qualities that warrant extra protection"> [https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Construction_stormwater_program#Special_Waters_and_Impaired_Waters '''special receiving waters''']</span>. |
| − | {{: | + | {{:Infiltration and filtration bmp design restrictions for special waters and watersheds}} |
==Cold climate suitability== | ==Cold climate suitability== | ||
| − | Various options for use of | + | Various options for use of filtration are available for treating snowmelt runoff. Some of the installations are built below the frost line (trenches, sub-grade proprietary chambers) and do not need further adaptation for the cold. However, some special consideration is ''HIGHLY RECOMMENDED'' for surface systems. |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | The problem with filtration in cold weather is the ice that forms both over the top of the facility and within the soil interstices. To avoid these problems to the extent possible, it is ''HIGHLY RECOMMENDED'' that the facility be actively managed to keep it dry before it freezes in the late fall. This can be done by various methods, including limiting inflow, under-drainage, and surface disking. | |
| + | |||
| + | Proprietary, sub-grade filtration systems provide an alternative to standard surface based systems. Essentially, these systems provide an insulated location for pre-treated snowmelt to be stored and slowly filtered, or simply filtered and drained away if ground water sensitivity is an issue. The insulating value of these systems adds to their appeal as low land consumption alternatives to ponds and surface infiltration basins. | ||
==Water quantity treatment== | ==Water quantity treatment== | ||
| − | Filters are not typically a primary practice for providing water quantity control. They are normally either designed | + | Filters are not typically a primary practice for providing water quantity control. They are normally either designed offline using a flow diversion or configured to safely pass large storm flows while still protecting the filter bed. In limited cases, filters may be able to accommodate the channel protection volume, V<sub>cp</sub>, in either an off- or online configuration, and in general they do provide some (albeit limited) storage volume. Vegetative filters, in particular, can help reduce detention requirements for a site by providing elongated flow paths, longer times of concentration, and volumetric losses from infiltration and <span title="Loss of water to the atmosphere as a result of the joint processes of evaporation and transpiration through vegetation"> '''evapotranspiration'''</span>. Generally, however, to meet site water quantity or peak discharge criteria, it is ''HIGHLY RECOMMENDED'' that another structural control (e.g., detention) be used in conjunction with a filter. |
It is ''HIGHLY RECOMMENDED'' that vegetative filters have a maximum slope of 5 percent and a minimum slope of 1 percent. | It is ''HIGHLY RECOMMENDED'' that vegetative filters have a maximum slope of 5 percent and a minimum slope of 1 percent. | ||
| Line 40: | Line 50: | ||
==Water quality treatment== | ==Water quality treatment== | ||
| − | Filters can be an excellent stormwater treatment practice with the primary pollutant removal mechanism being filtering and settling. Less significant processes can include | + | Filters can be an excellent stormwater treatment practice with the primary pollutant removal mechanism being filtering and settling. Less significant processes can include evaporation, infiltration, transpiration, biological and microbiological uptake, and soil adsorption. Pollutant removal data for select parameters are provided for filtration BMPs in the table below. “Performance” can also be defined as the quality of the water flowing out of a treatment BMP. These outflow concentrations can be used to assess how well a BMP is performing and what its benefit to a down-gradient receiving water will be. The Pollutant concentrations for filtration BMPs table below contains information on typical expectations for outflow concentration. |
{{:Pollutant removal percentages for filtration BMPs}} | {{:Pollutant removal percentages for filtration BMPs}} | ||
| Line 46: | Line 56: | ||
{{:Pollutant concentrations1 for filtration BMPs}} | {{:Pollutant concentrations1 for filtration BMPs}} | ||
| − | While it is possible to design media filters to discharge a portion of the effluent to the | + | While it is possible to design media filters to discharge a portion of the effluent to the groundwater, they are typically designed as enclosed systems (i.e., no “infiltration”). Vegetative filters, on the other hand, can readily be designed as an effective infiltration/recharge practice, particularly when parent soils have good permeability (> ~ 0.5 inch per hour). Consult the <span title="The stormwater runoff volume or pollutant reduction achieved toward meeting a runoff volume or water quality goal."> [https://stormwater.pca.state.mn.us/index.php?title=Overview_of_stormwater_credits '''credit (stormwater credit)''']</span> section for more guidance on how to use filters to meet water quality and recharge criteria. Note that the vegetative filters might not meet the 80 percent TSS removal required by the Construction permit. |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | The benefits associated with filtration BMPs should only be accrued based on the amount of water actually passing through the BMP. Excess runoff beyond that designed for the BMP should not be routed through the system because of the potential for hydraulic and particulate over-loading, both of which will adversely impact the life and operation of the BMP. | |
| + | |||
| + | For example, a filtration device designed to treat the first 0.5 inch of runoff from a fully impervious surface will catch about 30 percent of the volume of runoff in the Twin Cities. This means that 70 percent of the runoff volume should be routed around the filtration system and will not be subject to the removals reflected in the above tables. Attributing removal to all runoff just because a BMP is in place in a drainage system is not a legitimate claim. | ||
==Limitations== | ==Limitations== | ||
The following general limitations should be recognized when considering installation of a filtration practice. | The following general limitations should be recognized when considering installation of a filtration practice. | ||
| − | *Nitrification of water in | + | *<span title="The biological oxidation of ammonia or ammonium to nitrite followed by the oxidation of the nitrite to nitrate."> '''Nitrification'''</span> of water in media filters may occur where aerobic conditions exist. |
*Filtration offers limited water quantity control. | *Filtration offers limited water quantity control. | ||
*The potential to create odors exists | *The potential to create odors exists | ||
| Line 65: | Line 77: | ||
*[[Construction specifications for filtration]] | *[[Construction specifications for filtration]] | ||
*[[Assessing the performance of swales]] | *[[Assessing the performance of swales]] | ||
| − | *[[Assessing the performance of sand filters]] | + | *[[Assessing the performance of sand (media) filters]] |
*[[Operation and maintenance of filtration]] | *[[Operation and maintenance of filtration]] | ||
*[[Calculating credits for sand filter]] | *[[Calculating credits for sand filter]] | ||
| Line 72: | Line 84: | ||
*[[References for filtration]] | *[[References for filtration]] | ||
| − | [[Category:BMP overview]] | + | [[Category:Level 3 - Best management practices/Guidance and information/BMP overview]] |
</noinclude> | </noinclude> | ||
Latest revision as of 20:06, 22 November 2022
See also
Filtering practices include media filters (surface, underground, perimeter), vegetated filters (filter strips, grass channels), and combination media/vegetative filters ( dry swales). Media and media/vegetative filters operate similarly and provide comparable water quality capabilities as bioretention. Vegetative filters are generally more suitable as pretreatment practices, but in some situations can be used on a stand alone basis.
Filtering practices have widespread applicability and are suitable for all land uses, as long as the contributing drainage areas are limited (e.g., typically less than 5 acres). Media filters are not as aesthetically appealing as bioretention, which makes them more appropriate for commercial or light industrial land uses or in locations that will not receive significant public exposure. Media filters are particularly well suited for sites with high percentages of impervious cover (e.g., greater than 50 percent). Media filters can be designed with an underdrain, which makes them a good option for treating potential stormwater hotspots (PSHs). They can also be installed underground to prevent the consumption of valuable land space (often an important retrofit or redevelopment consideration). Vegetative filters can be incorporated into landscaped areas, providing dual functionality.
Contents
Function within stormwater treatment train
Media filtration systems are designed primarily as offline systems for stormwater quality and typically are used in conjunction with other structural controls in the stormwater treatment train. Vegetative filters, designed as grass channels or swales, may be the main form of conveyance between or out of BMPs, as well as providing treatment for stormwater runoff.
MPCA permit applicability
One of the goals of this Manual is to facilitate understanding of and compliance with the MPCA Construction General Permit (CGP), which includes design and performance standards for permanent stormwater management systems. These standards must be applied in all projects in which at least 1 acre of new impervious area is being created, and the permit stipulates certain standards for various categories of stormwater management practices.
For regulatory purposes, filtration practices fall under Filtration systems of the MPCA CGP. If used in combination with other practices, credit for combined stormwater treatment can be given. Due to the statewide prevalence of the MPCA permit, design guidance in this section is presented with the assumption that the permit does apply. Also, although it is expected that in many cases the filtration practice will be used in combination with other practices, standards are described for the case in which it is a stand-alone practice.
The following terms are thus used in the text to distinguish various levels of filtration practice design guidance:
- REQUIRED:Indicates design standards stipulated by the MPCA CGP (or other consistently applicable regulations).
- HIGHLY RECOMMENDED: Indicates design guidance that is extremely beneficial or necessary for proper functioning of the filtration practice, but not specifically required by the MPCA CGP.
- RECOMMENDED: Indicates design guidance that is helpful for filtration practice performance but not critical to the design.
Of course, there are situations, particularly retrofit projects, in which a filtration facility is constructed without being subject to the conditions of the MPCA permit. While compliance with the permit is not required in these cases, the standards it establishes can provide valuable design guidance to the user. It is also important to note that additional and potentially more stringent design requirements may apply for a particular filtration facility, depending on where it is situated both jurisdictionally and within the surrounding landscape.
Retrofit suitability
The use of filters as a retrofit practice primarily depends on existing infrastructure and the compatibility of existing storm drain inverts that need to connect to the filter underdrain outflow. In general, four to six feet of elevation above the existing collection system invert is needed for media filter retrofits (2 to 3 feet is needed for perimeter filters). Underground media filters are excellent for highly urban and ultra-urban environments where space is at a premium.
Special receiving waters suitability
The following table provides guidance regarding the use of filtration practices in areas upstream of special receiving waters.
Infiltration and filtration bmp1 design restrictions for special waters and watersheds. See also Sensitive waters and other receiving waters.
Link to this table
| BMP Group | receiving water | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A Lakes | B Trout Waters | C Drinking Water2 | D Wetlands | E Impaired Waters | |
| Infiltration | RECOMMENDED | RECOMMENDED | NOT RECOMMENDED if potential stormwater pollution sources evident | RECOMMENDED | RECOMMENDED unless target TMDL pollutant is a soluble nutrient or chloride |
| Filtration | Some variations NOT RECOMMENDED due to poor phosphorus removal, combined with other treatments | RECOMMENDED | RECOMMENDED | ACCEPTABLE | RECOMMENDED for non-nutrient impairments |
1Filtration practices include green roofs, bmps with an underdrain, or other practices that do not infiltrate water and rely primarily on filtration for treatment.
2 Applies to groundwater drinking water source areas only; use the lakes category to define BMP design restrictions for surface water drinking supplies
Cold climate suitability
Various options for use of filtration are available for treating snowmelt runoff. Some of the installations are built below the frost line (trenches, sub-grade proprietary chambers) and do not need further adaptation for the cold. However, some special consideration is HIGHLY RECOMMENDED for surface systems.
The problem with filtration in cold weather is the ice that forms both over the top of the facility and within the soil interstices. To avoid these problems to the extent possible, it is HIGHLY RECOMMENDED that the facility be actively managed to keep it dry before it freezes in the late fall. This can be done by various methods, including limiting inflow, under-drainage, and surface disking.
Proprietary, sub-grade filtration systems provide an alternative to standard surface based systems. Essentially, these systems provide an insulated location for pre-treated snowmelt to be stored and slowly filtered, or simply filtered and drained away if ground water sensitivity is an issue. The insulating value of these systems adds to their appeal as low land consumption alternatives to ponds and surface infiltration basins.
Water quantity treatment
Filters are not typically a primary practice for providing water quantity control. They are normally either designed offline using a flow diversion or configured to safely pass large storm flows while still protecting the filter bed. In limited cases, filters may be able to accommodate the channel protection volume, Vcp, in either an off- or online configuration, and in general they do provide some (albeit limited) storage volume. Vegetative filters, in particular, can help reduce detention requirements for a site by providing elongated flow paths, longer times of concentration, and volumetric losses from infiltration and evapotranspiration. Generally, however, to meet site water quantity or peak discharge criteria, it is HIGHLY RECOMMENDED that another structural control (e.g., detention) be used in conjunction with a filter.
It is HIGHLY RECOMMENDED that vegetative filters have a maximum slope of 5 percent and a minimum slope of 1 percent.
Water quality treatment
Filters can be an excellent stormwater treatment practice with the primary pollutant removal mechanism being filtering and settling. Less significant processes can include evaporation, infiltration, transpiration, biological and microbiological uptake, and soil adsorption. Pollutant removal data for select parameters are provided for filtration BMPs in the table below. “Performance” can also be defined as the quality of the water flowing out of a treatment BMP. These outflow concentrations can be used to assess how well a BMP is performing and what its benefit to a down-gradient receiving water will be. The Pollutant concentrations for filtration BMPs table below contains information on typical expectations for outflow concentration.
Pollutant removal percentages for filtration BMPs.
Link to this table
| Practice | TSS Low-Med-High | TP Low-Med-High | TN4 | Metals3 (average of Zn and Cu) | Bacteria3 | Hydrocarbons3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Media Filter1 | 75-85-90 | 30-50-55 | 35 | 80 | 50 | 80 |
| Vegetative Filter2 | see here | see here | 35 | 80 | 0 | 80 |
1 For example, sand, mixed sand/peat and other geologic media
2 Grass filter/swale
3 Not enough information given in databases to differentiate type of filter so both combined for this entry
Typical pollutant effluent concentrations, in milligrams per liter, for filtration BMPs.
Link to this table
| Practice | TSS Low-Med-High4 | TP Low-Med-High4 | TN | Cu | Zn |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Media Filter2 | 5-11-16 | 0.06-0.10-0.19 | 1.1 | 0.008 | 0.060 |
| Vegetative Filter3 | 13-20-44 | 0.15-0.24-0.36 | 1.1 | 0.008 | 0.060 |
1 All concentration values in mg/L which equals parts per million
2 For example, sand, mixed sand/peat and other geologic media
3 Grass filter/swale
4 Not enough information given in databases to differentiate type of filter so both combined for this entry
While it is possible to design media filters to discharge a portion of the effluent to the groundwater, they are typically designed as enclosed systems (i.e., no “infiltration”). Vegetative filters, on the other hand, can readily be designed as an effective infiltration/recharge practice, particularly when parent soils have good permeability (> ~ 0.5 inch per hour). Consult the credit (stormwater credit) section for more guidance on how to use filters to meet water quality and recharge criteria. Note that the vegetative filters might not meet the 80 percent TSS removal required by the Construction permit.
The benefits associated with filtration BMPs should only be accrued based on the amount of water actually passing through the BMP. Excess runoff beyond that designed for the BMP should not be routed through the system because of the potential for hydraulic and particulate over-loading, both of which will adversely impact the life and operation of the BMP.
For example, a filtration device designed to treat the first 0.5 inch of runoff from a fully impervious surface will catch about 30 percent of the volume of runoff in the Twin Cities. This means that 70 percent of the runoff volume should be routed around the filtration system and will not be subject to the removals reflected in the above tables. Attributing removal to all runoff just because a BMP is in place in a drainage system is not a legitimate claim.
Limitations
The following general limitations should be recognized when considering installation of a filtration practice.
- Nitrification of water in media filters may occur where aerobic conditions exist.
- Filtration offers limited water quantity control.
- The potential to create odors exists
It is HIGHLY RECOMMENDED that media filters be equipped with a minimum 8 inches diameter underdrain in a 1 foot gravel bed.
Related pages
- Overview for filtration
- Types of filtration
- Design criteria for filtration
- Construction specifications for filtration
- Assessing the performance of swales
- Assessing the performance of sand (media) filters
- Operation and maintenance of filtration
- Calculating credits for sand filter
- Calculating credits for swale
- Cost-benefit considerations for filtration
- References for filtration
This page was last edited on 22 November 2022, at 20:06.