4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Planning of LID-BMPs for urban runoff control: The case of Beijing Olympic Village

期刊

SEPARATION AND PURIFICATION TECHNOLOGY
卷 84, 期 -, 页码 112-119

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.seppur.2011.04.026

关键词

Low impact development (LID); Best management practices (BMP); BMPDSS; SWMM; Optimization

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this paper, a planning analysis of implementing low impact development (LID) type of stormwater best management practices (BMPs) for urban runoff control is presented. The Beijing Olympic Village (BOV) residential area in China was used as a case study. The original BOV stormwater system incorporated some LID BMPs such as porous pavements, green roofs and rainwater cisterns. After the 2008 Olympics, the BOV was converted to a residential complex and some stormwater facilities were modified for landscaping purposes. The performance of the original stormwater management system at the BOV residential area was first evaluated by using the model BMPDSS. BMPDSS is a best management practice (BMP) planning and analysis tool, which is capable of simulating BMP performance and optimizing BMP placement and design. The Storm Water Management Model (SWMM) was used to simulate pipe network hydraulics for the BOV. The present study then examined the performance associated with the BMP modifications for landscaping purposes, and then further BMP modifications designed for enhancing runoff control capabilities of the system. Using the 2008 rainfall data for Beijing, peak flow rate and runoff volume reductions under the three scenarios were calculated by using the coupled SWMM-BMPDSS framework and compared. Optimization analysis for BMP design aimed at achieving either maximum runoff control or total minimum system cost was then conducted. The results were used to form recommendations to the Beijing authorities for modifying the present stormwater management system in order to achieve more runoff control benefits. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据