Effects of Concrete Block Pavement on Flow Retardation Factor

Open access

Abstract

Surface roughness has an important role in retarding the runoff velocity. The increase in paving blocks usage, particularly in urban areas, can change the surface roughness of the land. This study investigated the effects of four types of concrete block pavements (CBPs) in retarding the surface runoff velocity. Three design parameters based on CBP properties that considerably influenced the flow retardation were promoted. They were opening ratio (Or), void ratio (Vr) and straight channel ratio (Sr). A tilted plot equipped with a rainfall simulator was used to investigate the influence of surface slope and rainfall intensity to the flow on various CBPs. A modified dye tracing method in view was performed to monitor the surface flow velocity under various rainfall intensities. Flow retardation coefficient (Frd) were calculated based on velocity data on smooth pavement and on CBPs layer measured under the same slope and rainfall intensity. The results showed that flow retardation coefficient increased with an increase in openings ratio, rainfall intensity and surface slope. The relationship between flow retardation coefficient and all design parameters was expressed by a linear regression function. A further study is required to increase the accuracy of the model by modifying the regression function and increasing the variation of design parameters.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Abbott C.L. Comino-Mateos L. 2003. In-situ hydraulic performance of a permeable pavement sustainable urban drainage system. Water Environ. J. 17 187–190.

  • Ahiablame L.M. Engel B.A. Chaubey I. 2012. Effectiveness of low impact development practices: literature review and suggestions for future research. Water. Air. Soil Pollut. 223 4253–4273. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11270-012-1189-2.

  • Alsubih M. Arthur S. Wright G. Allen D. 2016. Experimental study on the hydrological performance of a permeable pavement. Urban Water J. 1–8 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1573062X.2016.1176221.

  • Aungst P.E. 2015. Coupling Stormflow Attenuation with Gully and Trail Stabilization Wissahickon Valley Park Philadelphia. Low Impact Dev. Technol. 208. http://ascelibrary.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1061/9780784413883#page=219.

  • Ball J.E. Rankin K. 2010. The hydrological performance of a permeable pavement. Urban Water J. 7 79–90. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15730620902969773.

  • Bean E.Z. Hunt W.F. Bidelspach D.A. 2007. Field survey of permeable pavement surface infiltration rates. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 133 249–255. http://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(2007)133:3(249).

  • Belmeziti A. Cherqui F. Tourne A. Granger D. Werey C. Le Gauffre P. Chocat B. 2015. Transitioning to sustainable urban water management systems: how to define expected service functions? Civ. Eng. Environ. Syst. 32 316–334. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10286608.2015.1047355.

  • Bentarzi Y. Ghenaim A. Terfous A. Wanko A. Feugeas F. Poulet J.-B. Mosé R. 2016. Hydrodynamic behaviour of a new permeable pavement material under high rainfall conditions. Urban Water J. 13 687–696. http://iahr.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1573062X.2015.1024688.

  • Borgwardt S. 2006. Long-term in-situ infiltration performance of permeable concrete block pavement in: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Concrete Block Paving San Francisco CA USA.

  • Castro-Fresno D. Rodriguez-Hernandez J. Rodriguez-Hernandez J. Ballester-Munoz F. 2005. Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS). Interciencia 30 255.

  • Charlesworth S.M. Harker E. Rickard S. 2003. A review of sustainable drainage systems (SuDS): A soft option for hard drainage questions? Geography 99–107. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40573828.

  • Collins K.A. Hunt W.F. Hathaway J.M. 2008. Hydrologic comparison of four types of permeable pavement and standard asphalt in eastern North Carolina. J. Hydrol. Eng. 13 1146–1157. http://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0699(2008)13:12(1146).

  • Dierkes C. Lucke T. 2015. Development and approval of an innovative permeable pavement with high design demands in: Proceedings of the 36th International Association for Hydro-Environment Engineering and Research World Congress. International Association for Hydro-Environment Engineering and Research pp. 1–8.

  • Drake J.A. Bradford A. Marsalek J. 2013. Review of environmental performance of permeable pavement systems: state of the knowledge. Water Qual. Res. J. Can. 48 203–222.

  • Fletcher T.D. Deletic A. Mitchell V.G. Hatt B.E. 2008. Reuse of urban runoff in Australia: a review of recent advances and remaining challenges. J. Environ. Qual. 37 S–116.

  • 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. others 2015. SUDS LID BMPs WSUD and more–The evolution and application of terminology surrounding urban drainage. Urban Water J. 12 525–542. http://iahr.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1573062X.2014.916314.

  • González-Angullo N. Castro D. Rodríguez-Hernández J. Davies J.W. 2008. Runoff infiltration to permeable paving in clogged conditions. Urban Water J. 5 117–124. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15730620701723538.

  • Guillette A. Studio L.I.D. 2010. Achieving Sustainable Site Design through Low Impact Development Practices. Whole Build. Des. Guide Www Wbdg Org.

  • Guillette A. Studio L.I.D. 2005. Low impact development technologies. National Institute of Building Sciences.

  • Hopperus-Buma P.B. 2015. Tough water-permeable paver. Google Patents.

  • Jia H. Lu Y. Shaw L.Y. Chen Y. 2012. Planning of LID–BMPs for urban runoff control: The case of Beijing Olympic Village. Sep. Purif. Technol. 84 112–119. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1383586611002504

  • Jia H. Yao H. Shaw L.Y. 2013. Advances in LID BMPs research and practice for urban runoff control in China. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng. 7 709–720. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11783-013-0557-5.

  • Kirby A. 2005. SuDS-innovation or a tried and tested practice? in: Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Municipal Engineer. London: Published for the Institution of Civil Engineers by Thomas Telford Services c1992- pp. 115–122.

  • Lin W. Cho Y. Kim I.T. 2016. Development of Deflection Prediction Model for Concrete Block Pavement Considering the Block Shapes and Construction Patterns. Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2016. https://www.hindawi.com/journals/amse/2016/5126436/abs/.

  • Lucke T. 2014. Using drainage slots in permeable paving blocks to delay the effects of clogging: Proof of concept study. Water 6 2660–2670. http://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/6/9/2660/htm.

  • Lucke T. Beecham S. 2011. An investigation into long term infiltration rates for permeable pavements on sloping sub-catchments in: 12th International Conference on Urban Drainage Brazil.

  • Pagliara S. Das R. Carnacina I. 2008. Flow resistance in large-scale roughness condition. Can. J. Civ. Eng. 35 1285–1293. http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/abs/10.1139/l08-068

  • Park D.-G. Sandoval N. Lin W. Kim H. Cho Y.-H. 2014. A case study: Evaluation of water storage capacity in permeable block pavement. KSCE J. Civ. Eng. 18 514–520. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12205-014-0036-y.

  • Pollack R. 2014. Interlocking construction systems and methods. Google Patents.

  • Schlichting H. Gersten K. 2017. Fundamentals of Boundary–Layer Theory in: Boundary-Layer Theory. Springer pp. 29–49. http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-662-52919-5_2.

  • Scholz M. Grabowiecki P. 2007. Review of permeable pavement systems. Build. Environ. 42 3830–3836. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360132306004227.

  • WB Nichols P. Lucke T. Dierkes C. 2014. Comparing two methods of determining infiltration rates of permeable interlocking concrete pavers. Water 6 2353–2366. http://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/6/8/2353/htm.

  • Wolff A. 2013. Simulation of pavement surface runoff using the depth-averaged shallow water equations. http://elib.uni-stuttgart.de/handle/11682/505.

  • Yong C.F. McCarthy D.T. Deletic A. 2013. Predicting physical clogging of porous and permeable pavements. J. Hydrol. 481 48–55. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022169412010694.

  • Yu C.C. Chang J.W. Hao S.W. 2013. A Numerical Method for the Paving Block Evaluation in: Applied Mechanics and Materials. Trans Tech Publ pp. 524–528. http://www.scientific.net/AMM.395-396.524.

  • Zhang S. Liu Y. Li M. Liang B. 2016. Distributed hydrological models for addressing effects of spatial variability of roughness on overland flow. Water Sci. Eng. 9 249–255. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1674237016300205.

  • Zhou Q. 2014. A review of sustainable urban drainage systems considering the climate change and urbanization impacts. Water 6 976–992. http://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/6/4/976/htm.

Search
Journal information
Cited By
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 242 70 3
PDF Downloads 172 70 4