Difference between revisions of "Swales"

From LID SWM Planning and Design Guide
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
(36 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
[[File:20161024 100338 550x550.jpg|thumb|Bioswale, County Court Boulevard, Brampton]]
 
This article is about installations designed to capture and convey surface runoff along a vegetated channel, whilst also promoting infiltration. <br>
 
This article is about installations designed to capture and convey surface runoff along a vegetated channel, whilst also promoting infiltration. <br>
 
For underground conveyance which promotes infiltration, see [[Exfiltration trenches]].
 
For underground conveyance which promotes infiltration, see [[Exfiltration trenches]].
 
{{TOClimit|2}}
 
{{TOClimit|2}}
 
==Overview==
 
==Overview==
[[File:20161024 100338 550x550.jpg|thumb|Bioswale, County Court Boulevard, Brampton]]
 
 
Swales are linear landscape features consisting of a drainage channel with gently sloping sides. Underground they may be filled with engineered soil and/or contain a water storage layer of coarse gravel material. Two variations on a basic swale are recommended as low impact development strategies, although using a combination design of both may increase the benefits:<br>
 
Swales are linear landscape features consisting of a drainage channel with gently sloping sides. Underground they may be filled with engineered soil and/or contain a water storage layer of coarse gravel material. Two variations on a basic swale are recommended as low impact development strategies, although using a combination design of both may increase the benefits:<br>
<strong>[[Bioswales]]</strong> are sometimes referred to as 'dry swales', 'vegetated swales', or 'water quality swales'. This type of structure is similar to a [[Bioretention cells|bioretention cell]] but with a long linear shape (surface area typically >2:1 length:width),<br>
+
'''[[Bioswales]]''' are sometimes referred to as 'dry swales', 'vegetated swales', or 'water quality swales'. This type of BMP is form of [[bioretention]] with a long linear shape (surface area typically >2:1 length:width) and a slope which convey water,<br>
<strong>[[Enhanced grass swales]]</strong> are a lower maintenance alternative, but generally have lower stormwater management potential. The enhancement over a basic grass swale is in the addition of check dams to slow surface water flow and create small temporary pools of water which can infiltrate the underlying soil.
+
'''[[Enhanced grass swales]]''' are a lower maintenance alternative, but generally have lower stormwater management potential. The enhancement over a basic grass swale is in the addition of [[check dams]] to slow surface water flow and create small temporary pools of water which can infiltrate the underlying soil.<br>
<blockquote>Swales are an ideal technology for:  
+
'''Grass swales''' are a relatively common landscape feature already and a great opportunity for retrofit, to reduce flow and improve water quality by encouraging settling and infiltration behind a series of check dams. <br>
 +
'''[[Retention swales]]''' can be imagined as linear, sloped [[dry ponds]]. They make a relatively little contribution to water volume and quality control than many other BMPs, but they may feature as part of a site-wide treatment train approach. 
 +
{{float right|{{#widget:YouTube|id=8b3-a_Na1dE}}}}
 +
{{textbox|Swales are an ideal technology for:  
 
*Sites with long linear landscaped areas, such as parking lots  
 
*Sites with long linear landscaped areas, such as parking lots  
*Connecting with one or more other types of LID</blockquote>
+
*Connecting with one or more other types of LID}}
 +
 
 
{|class="wikitable"
 
{|class="wikitable"
 
|+ Types of Swale
 
|+ Types of Swale
 
|-  
 
|-  
!style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|Property
+
!Property
!style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|Bioswale
+
!Bioswale
!style="background: darkcyan; color: white"|Enhanced grass swale
+
!Enhanced grass swale
 
|-
 
|-
!Surface water
+
|Surface water||Minimal<br>Any surface flow can be slowed with check dams||Ponding is encouraged with check dams
|Minimal<br>Any surface flow can be slowed with check dams||Ponding is encouraged with check dams
 
 
|-
 
|-
!Soil
+
|Soil||Filter media required||Amendment preferable when possible
|Filter media required||Amendment preferable when possible
 
 
|-
 
|-
!Underdrain
+
|Underdrain||Common||Uncommon
|Common||Uncommon
 
 
|-
 
|-
!Maintenance
+
|Maintenance||Medium to high||Low
|Medium to high||Low
 
 
|-
 
|-
!Stormwater benefit
+
|Stormwater benefit||High||Moderate
|High||Moderate
 
 
|-
 
|-
!Biodiversity benefit
+
|Biodiversity benefit||Increased with native planting||Typically lower
|Increased with native planting||Typically lower
 
 
|}
 
|}
----
 
  
 
==Planning Considerations==
 
==Planning Considerations==
Line 42: Line 39:
 
A linear design (surface area typically >2:1 length:width) is a common feature of a swales:
 
A linear design (surface area typically >2:1 length:width) is a common feature of a swales:
 
*An absolute minimum width is 0.6 m is required for bioswales to have healthy plant growth, and to facilitate construction,
 
*An absolute minimum width is 0.6 m is required for bioswales to have healthy plant growth, and to facilitate construction,
*Grassed swales are usually mown as part of routine maintenance, so the cross section will be parabolic or trapzoidal in shape. The minimum width for this type is 2 m.
+
*Grassed swales are usually mown as part of routine maintenance, so the cross section will be triangular or trapzoidal in shape with maximum side slopes of 1:3. The minimum width for this type would be 2 m. See [[Enhanced grass swales#Best cross sections| Best cross sections]]
  
 
Swales may be graded along longitudinal slopes between 0.5 - 6 %:
 
Swales may be graded along longitudinal slopes between 0.5 - 6 %:
*Check dams are required on slopes > 3 %.
+
*Between 1 - 6 %, check dams are recommended to bring the compensation gradient <1 %.
*Slopes > 6% can accommodate a series of stepped [[bioretention cells]], each overflowing into the next with a weir.
+
*Slopes > 6% can accommodate a series of stepped [[bioretention cells]], each overflowing into the next with a spillway.
  
 
==Design==
 
==Design==
Line 54: Line 51:
 
To minimize erosion and maximize the functionality of the swale, sheet flow of surface water should be directed into the side of the BMP. [[Gravel diaphragms]], [[vegetated filter strips]] and shallow side slopes are ideal. Alternatively, a series of curb inlets can be employed, where each has some form of flow spreading incorporated. Single point inflow can cause increased erosion and sedimentation which will damage vegetation and contribute to BMP failure. Again, flow spreading devices can mitigate these processes, where concentrated point inflow is required.
 
To minimize erosion and maximize the functionality of the swale, sheet flow of surface water should be directed into the side of the BMP. [[Gravel diaphragms]], [[vegetated filter strips]] and shallow side slopes are ideal. Alternatively, a series of curb inlets can be employed, where each has some form of flow spreading incorporated. Single point inflow can cause increased erosion and sedimentation which will damage vegetation and contribute to BMP failure. Again, flow spreading devices can mitigate these processes, where concentrated point inflow is required.
  
<h4>Check dams</h4>
+
==Performance==
<p>Check dams are a feature of enhanced swales. They promote infiltration and evaporation by promoting limited ponding.
+
A review of swale-like practices was published by STEP in 1999. The project page and additional tools are available [https://sustainabletechnologies.ca/home/urban-runoff-green-infrastructure/low-impact-development/swales-and-roadside-ditches/ here].
To design check dams into a swale:
 
#The height of each dam is determined by the depth of ponded water that will infiltrate in 24 hours. The infiltration may be into the native soils, into biomedia, or some other soil amendment may be proposed in the design.
 
#Dams are usually installed between 10-20 m along the swale. They are distributed such that the crest of each dam is at approximately the same elevation as the toe of the upstream dam.  If the slope along the swale varies, so should the distance between the dams.
 
The objective of these design recommendations are to maximize the distribution of ponded water along the whole BMP. Detailed design may require iteration of the dam heights and distances along each section of a long swale.
 
*Dams may be constructed of any resilient and waterproof material, including: rock gabions, earth berms, coarse aggregate or rip-rap, concrete, metal or wood.
 
*Energy dissipation and erosion control measures should be installed in the 1 - 2 m  downstream of each dam. Examples include large aggregate or [[Turf reinforcement|turf reinforcement]]
 
<h4>Other components</h4>
 
*[[Underdrain]]
 
*[[Bioretention: Filter media]]
 
  
==Performance==
+
===Bioswales===
<h3>Bioswales</h3>
 
 
{{:Bioswales: Performance}}
 
{{:Bioswales: Performance}}
<h3>Enhanced grass swales</h3>
+
===Enhanced grass swales===
  
 
==Construction==
 
==Construction==
{{:Infiltration:_Construction}}
+
[[Construction]]
  
==Incentives and Credits==
+
==Galleries==
<h3>In Ontario</h3>
+
===Simple grass swales===
<strong>City of Mississauga</strong><br>
+
{{:Swales: Gallery}}
The City of Mississauga has a stormwater management credit program which includes RWH as one of their recommended site strategies[https://www.mississauga.ca/portal/services/credit-program].
 
<br>
 
<h3>LEED BD + C v. 4</h3>
 
  
<h3>SITES v.2 </h3>
+
===Bioswales===
 +
{{:Bioswales: Gallery}}
 +
===Check dams===
 +
{{:Check dams: Gallery}}
  
 
==See Also==
 
==See Also==
 
*[[Bioretention cells]]
 
*[[Bioretention cells]]
 
*[[Check dams]]
 
*[[Check dams]]
 +
----
  
==External Links==
 
 
----
 
 
[[Category:Infiltration]]
 
[[Category:Infiltration]]
[[Category:Planted]]
+
[[Category:Green infrastructure]]
[[Category:Conveyance]]
 

Revision as of 16:37, 7 December 2018

Bioswale, County Court Boulevard, Brampton

This article is about installations designed to capture and convey surface runoff along a vegetated channel, whilst also promoting infiltration.
For underground conveyance which promotes infiltration, see Exfiltration trenches.

Overview[edit]

Swales are linear landscape features consisting of a drainage channel with gently sloping sides. Underground they may be filled with engineered soil and/or contain a water storage layer of coarse gravel material. Two variations on a basic swale are recommended as low impact development strategies, although using a combination design of both may increase the benefits:
Bioswales are sometimes referred to as 'dry swales', 'vegetated swales', or 'water quality swales'. This type of BMP is form of bioretention with a long linear shape (surface area typically >2:1 length:width) and a slope which convey water,
Enhanced grass swales are a lower maintenance alternative, but generally have lower stormwater management potential. The enhancement over a basic grass swale is in the addition of check dams to slow surface water flow and create small temporary pools of water which can infiltrate the underlying soil.
Grass swales are a relatively common landscape feature already and a great opportunity for retrofit, to reduce flow and improve water quality by encouraging settling and infiltration behind a series of check dams.
Retention swales can be imagined as linear, sloped dry ponds. They make a relatively little contribution to water volume and quality control than many other BMPs, but they may feature as part of a site-wide treatment train approach.

Swales are an ideal technology for:

  • Sites with long linear landscaped areas, such as parking lots
  • Connecting with one or more other types of LID
Types of Swale
Property Bioswale Enhanced grass swale
Surface water Minimal
Any surface flow can be slowed with check dams
Ponding is encouraged with check dams
Soil Filter media required Amendment preferable when possible
Underdrain Common Uncommon
Maintenance Medium to high Low
Stormwater benefit High Moderate
Biodiversity benefit Increased with native planting Typically lower

Planning Considerations[edit]

Bioswale with check dams
(vertical scale exaggerated)
Stepped bioretention cells alternative for slopes >6 %
(vertical scale exaggerated)

A linear design (surface area typically >2:1 length:width) is a common feature of a swales:

  • An absolute minimum width is 0.6 m is required for bioswales to have healthy plant growth, and to facilitate construction,
  • Grassed swales are usually mown as part of routine maintenance, so the cross section will be triangular or trapzoidal in shape with maximum side slopes of 1:3. The minimum width for this type would be 2 m. See Best cross sections

Swales may be graded along longitudinal slopes between 0.5 - 6 %:

  • Between 1 - 6 %, check dams are recommended to bring the compensation gradient <1 %.
  • Slopes > 6% can accommodate a series of stepped bioretention cells, each overflowing into the next with a spillway.

Design[edit]

Distance between dams is determined by equalling the elevation of the crest of each dam, with the elevation of the toe of the upstream dam.
(vertical scale exaggerated)

Pretreatment and inlets

To minimize erosion and maximize the functionality of the swale, sheet flow of surface water should be directed into the side of the BMP. Gravel diaphragms, vegetated filter strips and shallow side slopes are ideal. Alternatively, a series of curb inlets can be employed, where each has some form of flow spreading incorporated. Single point inflow can cause increased erosion and sedimentation which will damage vegetation and contribute to BMP failure. Again, flow spreading devices can mitigate these processes, where concentrated point inflow is required.

Performance[edit]

A review of swale-like practices was published by STEP in 1999. The project page and additional tools are available here.

Bioswales[edit]

While few field studies of the pollutant removal capacity of bioswales are available from cold climate regions like Ontario, it can be assumed that they would perform similar to bioretention cells. Bioretention provides effective removal for many pollutants as a result of sedimentation, filtering, plant uptake, soil adsorption, and microbial processes. It is important to note that there is a relationship between the water balance and water quality functions. If a bioswale infiltrates and evaporates 100% of the flow from a site, then there is essentially no pollution leaving the site in surface runoff. Furthermore, treatment of infiltrated runoff will continue to occur as it moves through the native soils.

Volumetric runoff reduction from bioswales
LID Practice Location Runoff Reduction* Reference
Bioswale without underdrain Washington 98% Horner et al. (2003)[1]
Scotland 94% Jefferies (2005)[2]
Bioswale with Underdrain Maryland 46 to 54% Stagge (2006)[3]
Bioretention without underdrain China 85 to 100%* Gao, et al. (2018)[4]
Connecticut 99% Dietz and Clausen (2005) [5]
Pennsylvania 80% Ermilio (2005)[6]
Pennsylvania 70% Emerson and Traver (2004)[7]
Bioretention with underdrain
Ontario 64% CVC (2020)[8]
Maryland and North Carolina 20 to 50% Li et al. (2009) [9]
North Carolina 40 to 60% Smith and Hunt (2007)[10]
North Carolina 33 to 50% Hunt and Lord (2006) [11]
Runoff Reduction Estimate* 85% without underdrain;

45% with underdrain

Enhanced grass swales[edit]

Construction[edit]

Construction

Galleries[edit]

Simple grass swales[edit]

Bioswales[edit]

Check dams[edit]

Also see Jen's Pinterest board of check dams

See Also[edit]


  1. Horner RR, Lim H, Burges SJ. HYDROLOGIC MONITORING OF THE SEATTLE ULTRA-URBAN STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROJECTS: SUMMARY OF THE 2000-2003 WATER YEARS. Seattle; 2004. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.365.8665&rep=rep1&type=pdf. Accessed August 11, 2017.
  2. Jefferies, C. 2004. Sustainable drainage systems in Scotland: the monitoring programme. Scottish Universities SUDS Monitoring Project. Dundee, Scotland. https://www.climatescan.nl/uploads/projects/8126/files/1277/SNIFFERSR_02_51MainReport.pdf
  3. Stagge, J. 2006. Field evaluation of hydrologic and water quality benefits of grass swales for managing highway runoff. Master of Science Thesis, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Maryland. https://drum.lib.umd.edu/items/42be6ce6-e4ef-4162-a991-c273607d422d
  4. Gao, J., Pan, J., Hu, N. and Xie, C., 2018. Hydrologic performance of bioretention in an expressway service area. Water Science and Technology, 77(7), pp.1829-1837.
  5. Dietz, M.E. and J.C. Clausen. 2005. A field evaluation of rain garden flow and pollutant treatment. Water Air and Soil Pollution. Vol. 167. No. 2. pp. 201-208. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.365.9417&rep=rep1&type=pdf
  6. Ermilio, J.F., 2005. Characterization study of a bio-infiltration stormwater BMP (Doctoral dissertation, Villanova University). https://www1.villanova.edu/content/dam/villanova/engineering/vcase/vusp/Ermilio-Thesis06.pdf
  7. Emerson, C., Traver, R. 2004. The Villanova Bio-infiltration Traffic Island: Project Overview. Proceedings of 2004 World Water and Environmental Resources Congress (EWRI/ASCE). Salt Lake City, Utah, June 22 – July 1, 2004. https://ascelibrary.org/doi/book/10.1061/9780784407370
  8. Credit Valley Conservation. 2020. IMAX Low Impact Development Feature Performance Assessment. https://sustainabletechnologies.ca/app/uploads/2022/03/rpt_IMAXreport_f_20220222.pdf
  9. Li, H., Sharkey, L.J., Hunt, W.F., and Davis, A.P. 2009. Mitigation of Impervious Surface Hydrology Using Bioretention in North Carolina and Maryland. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering. Vol. 14. No. 4. pp. 407-415.
  10. Smith, R and W. Hunt. 2007. Pollutant removals in bioretention cells with grass cover. Proceedings 2nd National Low Impact Development Conference. Wilmington, NC. March 13-15, 2007.
  11. Hunt, W.F. and Lord, W.G. 2006. Bioretention Performance, Design, Construction, and Maintenance. North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service Bulletin. Urban Waterways Series. AG-588-5. North Carolina State University. Raleigh, NC.