Difference between revisions of "Green roof media"
Jenny Hill (talk | contribs) |
Jenny Hill (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
!style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|Disadvantages | !style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|Disadvantages | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | |Increased water holding capacity, which benefits both vegetation health and stormwater retention | + | |*Increased water holding capacity, which benefits both vegetation health and stormwater retention *Often lighter weight, even when saturated|| |
| + | *Increased [[phosphorus]] concentration in runoff water, however this may be mitigated by the reduced runoff volume resulting in a lower loading overall *The lightweight material is more prone to wind erosion, and this should be accounted for in the initial design, alternatives include erosion control blankets, soil tackifiers, or Sedum mats. | ||
|} | |} | ||
Revision as of 14:49, 12 September 2017
ASTM International have a number of standards relating to various design considerations for green roofs. These standards provide good technical advice on the testing of systems and components. Of particular note are:
- E2399 Standard Test Method for Maximum Media Density for Dead Load Analysis of Vegetative (Green) Roof Systems[1], and
- E2396 Test Method for Saturated Water Permeability of Granular Drainage Media [2].
When these tests are completed, the results should be interpreted in relation to the objectives of the green roof. A product complying with overseas guidelines may not serve the needs of a green roof installed in Ontario. In particular, the FLL guide recommends green roof media specifications which may not provide optimal stormwater management or vegetation in our region. The green roof media used in Ontario can be classed according to proportion of composted biological material. Some existing installations use materials which comply with FLL guidelines, whilst others use a much higher proportion of compost.[3]
In many proprietary systems the default option for planting medium will be a granular material with very low organic matter content. However, many companies can arrange for a high organic content alternative to be substituted if requested.
| Benefits | Disadvantages |
|---|---|
| *Increased water holding capacity, which benefits both vegetation health and stormwater retention *Often lighter weight, even when saturated |
|
Increasing the depth of planting medium from 10 cm to 15 cm has been shown to benefit the vegetation[1]; stormwater retention was not improved with this increase in depth [2].
- ↑ MacIvor JS, Margolis L, Puncher CL, Carver Matthews BJ. Decoupling factors affecting plant diversity and cover on extensive green roofs. J Environ Manage. 2013;130:297-305. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.09.014.
- ↑ Hill J, Drake J, Sleep B, Margolis L. Influences of Four Extensive Green Roof Design Variables on Stormwater Hydrology. J Hydrol Eng. 2017;22(8):4017019. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0001534.