Next Article in Journal
Evidence of Anthropogenic Gadolinium in Triangle Area Waters, North Carolina, USA
Next Article in Special Issue
The Climate Road—A Multifunctional Full-Scale Demonstration Road That Prevents Flooding and Produces Green Energy
Previous Article in Journal
Possibilities of Using Neuro-Fuzzy Models for Post-Processing of Hydrological Forecasts
Previous Article in Special Issue
Numerical Study on the Hydrologic Characteristic of Permeable Friction Course Pavement
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Stormwater Harvested from Permeable Pavements as a Means to Save Potable Water in Buildings

Department of Civil Engineering, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Florianópolis 88040-900, Brazil
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Submission received: 18 May 2021 / Revised: 17 June 2021 / Accepted: 5 July 2021 / Published: 8 July 2021

Abstract

:
The main objective of this work is to analyse the potential for potable water savings in university buildings by using stormwater collected from permeable pavements. Six buildings located on the campus of the Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC) were selected to obtain monthly water consumption patterns and parking lot areas. The same six buildings were then evaluated considering their location in eight different cities in Brazil, with different rainfall patterns. Simulations using the computer programme Netuno were run to obtain the potential for potable water savings in each building and city combined. The structural design of permeable pavements was also assessed using two methods available in the literature, that is, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and Brazilian Portland Cement Association (ABCP). The hydrological-hydraulic design of the permeable pavement was also carried out. The designed thicknesses were compared with the thicknesses obtained using the computer programme Permeable Design Pro. The potential for potable water savings between 18.4% and 84.8% was obtained, depending on the city, building and non-potable water demand considered. For the structural design, the thicknesses obtained by using both methods were similar; however, it was observed that the AASHTO method better represents the pavement model. Regarding the hydrological-hydraulic design, the differences obtained show that the simplification performed for the pavement drainage was in favour of safety. In conclusion, the use of permeable pavements in stormwater harvesting systems is promising, aligning the drainage aid, structural capacity and potential for saving potable water.

1. Introduction

Climate change is evident in the urban environment. The increase in global temperature correlates with the increase in rainfall peak intensity, which facilitates the occurrence of urban flooding [1]. On the other hand, changes in rainfall patterns have made water management more difficult, affecting the amount of water available. As an example, Cape Town in South Africa had the worst drought in its history in 2015, limiting water consumption to 50 L per day per inhabitant [2]. São Paulo also experienced one of the worst droughts in its history in 2014, which resulted in actions on water management and rationing among users [2,3].
According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) [4], in 2012, Earth had a temperature increase of 0.85 °C compared to the pre-industrial average. According to the IPCC [5], if fast and deep changes are not adopted, the temperature increase may be higher than 1.5 °C by 2100. Amidst the uncertainties of future weather conditions, the use of alternative sources of water will become necessary. Alternative sources, such as rainwater, greywater, seawater and the use of water-efficient systems, are examples of measures that can be applied [6]. Rainwater harvesting in buildings is already a legal requirement in some cities around the world. We can mention the city of Curitiba, in Brazil, which in 2006 approved a decree that provides the criteria for the rational use and conservation of water in buildings. Thus, for the licensing of new constructions in the city, rainwater harvesting became mandatory, being treated and used for non-potable purposes [7].
Potable water savings through the use of rainwater combines the possibility of monetary savings for users and future security against water scarcity. In sustainable terms, the water utilities save chemical products used in water treatment and energy from pumping water, as less water is demanded. Some studies have verified the potential for potable water savings in buildings, as well as the investment feasibility analysis, such as Anand and Apul [8], Ghisi et al. [9] and Marinoski et al. [10], among others.
Another problem that can arise from anthropic intervention in the environment is the change in hydrological patterns due to high soil sealing. The water that once infiltrated the soil and drained towards the water table now becomes runoff in the streets, roofs and gutters. This factor is related to the increase in peak flow, which has a direct impact on urban drainage, which can end up overloaded. Other factors, such as the presence of sewage in drainage devices, may also be crucial to the presence of flooding [11].
Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) try to recover urban drainage through systems more adapted to the hydrological cycle. Examples of SUDS applications include the use of green roofs, infiltration trenches and permeable pavements [12]. SUDS avoid peak flow, which may occur in a centralised system of drainage galleries. Other terms that can be related to SUDS [11] are Low Impact Development (LID) and Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD).
Permeable pavement is one type of system that is described as SUDS [13]. The permeable capacity of the pavement takes up part of the permeability removed by the waterproofing of the urban surface, and this helps to reduce the peak flows [14]. The Brazilian Association of Portland Cement (ABCP, in Portuguese) indicates the use of permeable pavements for residential, commercial and industrial patios, parking lots, sidewalks and light traffic roads [15].
Other positive aspects of the application of permeable pavements are oil and grease retention [16], heavy metal retention [17], the reduction of the amount of runoff in the road [18] and the reduction of the noise emitted by vehicles [19]. Therefore, the use of permeable pavements is favourable not only in hydrological terms, adapting better to the natural cycle of water, but also to the user. Permeable pavements avoid the accumulation of water in puddles and wheel tracks, avoid pollution diffusion in water that can come into contact with the user, and can even suppress noise pollution.
Some recent studies have assessed how the combination of permeable pavements and stormwater harvesting performs. There is a concern about the quantity [20,21] and the quality of stormwater harvested [20,22,23] in order to be applicable in sustainable design approaches. Some other concerns include the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of the technique, which is crucial to understanding the environmental impacts and benefits of its application [24,25].

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Simulation Variables

The study began with the selection of six buildings, eight cities and the corresponding water end-uses. After obtaining the water consumption data and the built area of the six buildings, daily rainfall and Intensity-Duration-Frequency (IDF) equations for the eight cities were analysed. The potential for potable water savings in each scenario was evaluated using the Netuno 4 computer programme. The results obtained were grouped and analysed in order to assess the influence of the three parameters on the potential for potable water savings.
After the simulation of potable water savings, the hydrologic/hydraulic design was performed according to a method from the literature. Computer routines were performed using the GNU Octave programming language in order to simplify the process. The results obtained were then compared with those obtained from the Permeable Design Pro programme.
A computational routine was also proposed for the structural design of the pavement, based on the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) method [26]. The results obtained with the routine for the AASHTO method were compared with the thicknesses indicated by the Permeable Design Pro computer programme in order to validate the routine. The design was also performed using the Brazilian Portland Cement Association (ABCP) method [27], a method used in Brazilian designs.

2.1.1. Rainwater Harvesting Model

The rainwater harvesting model was carried out based on models available in the literature. Some authors [24,25] have proposed a permeable pavement water harvesting system composed of: a catchment area, the permeable pavement, underground and upper rainwater tanks and water pumping station. Rainwater falls over the pavement, infiltrates through the permeable layers and it is conducted via drains towards the underground tank. When the upper rainwater tank is about to become empty, that is, less than 10% of its capacity, rainwater from the underground tank is pumped to fill it up. If there is no rainwater available in the underground tank, potable water from the building’s water tank is conducted towards the upper rainwater tank by gravity. If both upper and underground rainwater tanks are full, rainwater is discarded in the drainage system. Figure S1 in the Supplementary Materials shows a schematic of the system. Water treatment—chlorination only—is applied in the upper rainwater tank in order to avoid waste of treated rainwater.

2.1.2. Permeable Pavement Model

The permeable pavement model used in the study was based on previous research [28], which made models of a permeable pavement using permeable concrete pavers. The main reason for using data from actual physical models is to be able to guarantee that the simulated pavers exist on the market. The infiltration rate obtained by Ghisi et al. for concrete pavers was 710 cm/h [28], which is approximately twice the lower limit of the Brazilian standards [29], that is, 360 cm/h for permeable coating.
Figure 1 shows the pavement layers used in the study with the following specifications:
  • Reservoir course: Gravel ASTM #2 and thickness according to design;
  • Choker course: Gravel ASTM #57 and thickness equal to 30 mm;
  • Bedding course: Gravel ASTM #8 and thickness equal to 30 mm;
  • Permeable concrete pavers: Dimensions equal to 200 mm in length, 100 mm in width and 80 mm in thickness. Thickness was defined as 80 mm instead of 60 mm, as used in Ghisi et al.’s model [28], in order to comply with Brazilian standards [29].

2.1.3. Buildings

Six university buildings were chosen for the study. They were chosen to represent different built areas and water consumption, and also for having a parking lot area nearby. All buildings were part of the Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC). Table 1 shows the six buildings and their parking lot areas and water consumption.
The decision to choose university buildings takes into account two points. The first is that the non-potable water end-uses in this type of building are usually higher than in residential buildings. As examples, the studies of Botelho [32] and Rainmap [33] found that the non-potable water end-uses of the UFSC Technology Centre were equal to 69% and 70%, respectively. The second point is the current Brazilian context, in which there are budgetary difficulties in the academic environment and the need for the reduction of expenses. In 2018, for example, UFSC spent approximately 7.3 million reais (R$) on water bills [30].

2.1.4. Cities

The eight Brazilian cities were chosen taking into account that they have a public university. Table 2 shows the different characteristics of the cities and Figure 2 shows the location of the cities on the map of Brazil.

2.2. Potable Water Savings

The simulations to evaluate the potential for potable water savings were carried out using the Netuno 4 computer programme [35]. Eight variables were considered, that is, daily rainfall, harvesting area, total water demand, rainwater demand, infiltration coefficient, upper rainwater tank capacity and underground rainwater tank capacity.
Netuno 4 is a computer programme, created by Ghisi and Cordova [35], used for sizing rainwater tanks and estimating the potential for potable water savings when there is rainwater harvesting. The simulation uses defined variables, that is, it does not rely on a stochastic model of variables and statistical outputs. The main use and definitions are for rooftop rainwater harvesting, but it has all the necessary inputs for a water balance simulation, which can be applied similarly in the permeable pavement system design.

2.2.1. Daily Rainfall

Rainfall data from 2003 to 2017 were obtained through the Meteorological Database for Education and Research (BDMEP) [36] of Brazil, in CSV format. The first flush was set to zero since the permeable pavement is meant to be used to filter the stormwater and there are no diverters for the first flush.

2.2.2. Harvesting Area

The harvesting area refers to all areas that contribute to the volume of rainwater harvested. For all six buildings, the areas of the parking lot and impermeable surrounding surfaces were considered, that is, the total harvesting area was equal to the sum of permeable and impermeable surfaces. The water on the impermeable surface flows towards the permeable pavement and then infiltrates it.

2.2.3. Total Water Demand

The total water demand in the building refers to all water consumption during a given period—daily, monthly or yearly. Thus, for each of the six buildings, the average monthly consumption was obtained through a historical series of water consumption data. Data were obtained via compiled files from the UFSC’s monitoring of water supply and sanitation [30].
Monthly water consumption was converted to daily data in order to be used in Netuno 4. This procedure was carried out by dividing the monthly consumption by the number of working days in each month plus one day. This extra day was to take into account the weekend; it was considered that all the weekend days in a month represent one working day. This consideration was made based on the fact that the university has a higher occupation over the week. Thus, consumption on a weekend day represents between 10.0% and 12.5% of the consumption on a working day. Equation (1) shows the consumption on a weekday, and Equation (2) shows the consumption on a weekend day.
D c w i i = M c i ( w d i i + 1 ) ,
D c w k i = M c i ( w d i i + 1 ) × w k i ,
where: D c w d i is the daily consumption on working days in the month i (L/day); M c i is the monthly consumption in the month i (L/month); D c w k i is the daily consumption on weekends in the month i (L/day); w d i is the number of working days in the month i (days); w k i is the number of weekend days in the month i (days).

2.2.4. Rainwater Demand

Rainwater demand represents the part of the total water demand that requires non-potable water. It is one of the parameters required by Netuno 4 to indicate the maximum potential for potable water savings that the system can obtain. It is related to the percentage of water end-uses that can be supplied with non-potable water, such as toilets, urinals and garden irrigation.
The Brazilian standard for non-potable water uses in buildings is NBR 16783 [37]. The possible non-potable uses included in the standard are car washing, toilet flushing, urinal flushing, cleaning of outside areas, irrigation, ornamental use and cooling. For these specific uses, the standard generally addresses seven quality parameters (pH, Escherichia coli, turbidity, biochemical oxygen demand, residual chlorine, electrical conductivity or total dissolved solids, and total organic carbon); for other uses it requires a specific study of quality parameters depending on the water source.
In this study, three rainwater demands were considered based on the studies of Botelho [32], Rainmap [33] and also on a survey carried out at UFSC library in 2018, which was not published. Based on such studies, three rainwater demand scenarios were analysed, that is, 69%, 77% and 85% of the total water demand.

2.2.5. Infiltration Coefficient

The infiltration coefficient refers to the percentage of stormwater that is harvested in relation to the amount of stormwater that falls onto the harvesting area. Since this study deals with permeable pavements, the infiltration coefficient refers to the relationship between the amount of stormwater that falls onto the pavement and the amount that reaches the lower rainwater tank. The value used in the study was the same as that obtained by Ghisi et al. [28] in their study on permeable pavements with pervious concrete pavers, that is, 88.1%.

2.2.6. Upper Rainwater Tank

It was defined that the upper rainwater tank in each building has a capacity equal to the average daily rainwater demand for that building. For the pumping pattern, it was defined that the pump will be turned on every time the amount of water in the upper rainwater tank reaches 10% of its total capacity.

2.2.7. Underground Rainwater Tank

The pavement will serve as a filter for stormwater and also as temporary storage, but the bottom drains in the reservoir course direct the stormwater to the underground rainwater tank. The capacity of the underground rainwater tank was sized using Netuno 4. As the programme iterates in the simulations, it calculates the potential for potable water savings and, from the results, indicates the optimal rainwater tank capacity.
The simulations were performed for underground rainwater tank capacities ranging from 0 to 50,000 L at intervals of 1000 L. For each lower tank capacity, a different potential for potable water savings was obtained. An optimal rainwater tank capacity was defined as a function of the potential for potable water savings and the underground rainwater tank capacity, that is, an added potential lower than 1%/m3.

2.3. Hydrologic/hydraulic Design

The hydrologic/hydraulic design consists of defining the thickness of the reservoir course layer. It was performed for each of the eight Brazilian cities in order to size for the city’s design rainfall, which was obtained via the Intensity-Duration-Frequency (IDF) equation or the design rainfall height. The ratio between the permeable area and the impermeable area of the pavement was assessed for each building. Another relevant point is the definition of the pavement bottom drain, which serves for the specific outlet flow and influences the thickness required for the reservoir course.

2.3.1. IDF Equations

The IDF equations are necessary for assessing design rainfall, which is used in the design of any type of hydraulic structure. The knowledge about design rainfall is necessary for making the structures compatible with future rainfall demands. As far as design rainfall is concerned, according to Back [38], some methods can be used to define the rainfall curve mathematically. In Brazil, the IDF curve is usually used.
The IDF equations were used in the potential format, as shown in Equation (3). Table 3 shows the IDF curve parameters of each of the eight cities.
i = K × T m ( t + d ) n ,
where: K, m, n and d are coefficients that vary according to the place; T is the return period (years); i is the average maximum intensity of the design rainfall (mm/h); and t is the duration of the design rainfall (minutes).
To calculate the average maximum intensity using the IDF equations, it is also necessary to define the duration of the rainfall and the return period. The return period and duration of rainfall have been chosen according to Brazilian standards [29]. The minimum return period was taken to be ten years, with a minimum duration of rainfall equal to 60 min.

2.3.2. Permeable to Impermeable Area Ration (R)

Another important parameter for performing the hydrologic/hydraulic design is the ratio between the total area and the permeable area of the pavement. Equation (4) shows how the ratio parameter (R) was calculated. R values between 1 and 2 can be used, that is, the impermeable area can range from zero to a figure equal to the permeable pavement area, not exceeding it [47].
R = A p e r + A i m p A p e r ,
where: R is the ratio of the total area to the permeable area (dimensionless); A p e r is the area of the permeable surface (m2); and A i m p is the area of the impermeable surface (m2).
For each building, parking lot sketches were made in order to estimate R. The pavement slope turns the runoff towards the edges of the track, where there is drainage through the permeable pavement. Figure S2 in the Supplementary Materials shows the sketch of the Technology Centre parking lot, as an example.

2.3.3. Bottom Drains

The specific output flow is the hydrologic/hydraulic design parameter that defines the drainage capacity after infiltration into the pavement. Hammes et al. (2018) used a simplified method to evaluate the specific output flow, defining it as a constant figure, which corresponds to the total amount of water falling on the floor divided by the permeable area over 24 h. The time necessary to empty the reservoir course was defined by Hammes et al. [20], based on Tomaz [48], as at least 24 h. Equation (5) shows the simplified method for calculating the specific output flow, which was used herein.
q s = i × t × A t o t A p e r × T E × 1000 ,
where: q s is the specific output flow (m/h); i is the average maximum rainfall intensity (mm/h); t is the duration of the design rainfall, considered equal to 1 h (h); A t o t is the total pavement area (m2); A p e r is the permeable pavement area (m2); and TE is the time necessary to empty the reservoir course (h).

2.3.4. Hydrologic/hydraulic Design Method

The method of Hammes et al. [20] was used herein for hydrologic/hydraulic design. The method is very similar to that in the Tennessee Permanent Stormwater Management and Design Guidance Manual [47] and the Brazilian standard [29]. The result of the hydrologic design is the thickness of the reservoir course required for temporary rainwater storage. After the storage, the water is drained by gravity through underground drains to a lower rainwater tank; if the rainwater tank is full, the water flows into the drainage system. Equation (6) shows the method of Hammes et al. [20].
H r c = t 60 × ( R × i q s × 1000 ) η ,
where: H r c is the required thickness of the reservoir course (mm); t is the duration of the design rainfall (min); R is the ratio of the total area to the permeable area (dimensionless); q s is the constant specific outlet flow of the pavement (m/h); i is the average maximum intensity of the design rainfall (mm/h); and η is the porosity of the reservoir course (dimensionless).

2.4. Structural Design

The structural design of the permeable pavement is necessary in order to guarantee that the thickness of the layers is adequate to dissipate the stress generated by the traffic of vehicles. Two methods used for design were assessed: the ABCP method [27] and the AASHTO method [26]. The ABCP method is a simple design method that has as its input parameters the Equivalent Single Axle Load (ESAL) data, estimated for pavement life, and the California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of the subgrade. Only these two parameters are necessary to design the reservoir course. As a restriction for the subgrade material, the method indicates a minimum CBR equal to 20% for less than 500,000 ESALs, and 30% for more than 500,000 ESALs.
The AASHTO method requires more input parameters than the ABCP. The AASHTO parameters are: the number of ESALs, also estimated for the pavement’s lifespan; subgrade CBR; thickness and material of all layers; pavement’s drainage condition; Present Serviceability Index (PSI) and statistical parameters. It is a more comprehensive method, with application to flexible pavements in general, while the ABCP method is restricted to pavements with interlocking concrete pavement. The thickness and materials of the pavers, the bedding layer and choker course were chosen following the permeable pavement construction manuals [47,49] and the Brazilian standard [29]. Drainage coefficient, PSI and statistical parameters were chosen according to the AASHTO manual [26] in order to agree with the type of pavement and its use. Equations (7) and (8) show the AASHTO method for structural design.
log 10 ( W 18 ) = Z r × S o + 9.36 × log 10 ( S N + 1 ) 0.2 + log 10 ( Δ P S I 4.2 1.5 ) 0.4 + 1094 ( S N + 1 ) 5.19 + 2.32 × log 10 ( M r ) 8.07 ,
S N = i = 1 n a ( i ) × d ( i ) × m ( i ) ,
where: W 18 is the number of ESALs over the pavement lifespan (dimensionless, 18 stands for the reference axle load of 18,000 lb); and Z r is the number of standard deviations needed to obtain, in a standard normal distribution, the probability of structural failure. For example, at 95% reliability and 5% chance of failure, Z is −1.645 (dimensionless); S o is the standard deviation of the supported value of traffic over the service life, taking into account the variability of construction, assumed parameters of materials and the assumed number of future vehicles the pavement will support (dimensionless); SN is the Structural Number of the pavement, which takes into account the thickness and materials of layers (inches); PSI is the difference of Present Serviceability Index in the beginning and at the end of the pavement’s life cycle (dimensionless); M r is the resilient modulus of the subgrade layer (psi); a ( i ) is the structural coefficient of the pavement layer i (dimensionless); d ( i ) is the thickness of the pavement layer i (inches); m ( i ) is the drainage coefficient of the pavement layer i (dimensionless); n is the number of layers in the pavement.
As the AASHTO structural design method uses the resilient modulus of the layers, it was necessary to make a correlation between the resilient modulus and CBR to be able to compare with the ABCP method. Thus, the correlation shown in Equation (9) between CBR and the resilient modulus was used [50,51].
M r = 2555 × C B R 0.64 ,
where M r is the Resilient Modulus (psi) and CBR is the California Bearing Ratio (dimensionless).

2.5. Model Validation

The permeable pavement was also designed using Interlocking Concrete Pavement Institute (ICPI) programme Permeable Design Pro [51]. The purpose was to compare the results obtained through the hydrologic/hydraulic design method found in the literature with those obtained from the programme. The programme uses an hourly analysis of mass balance in the hydrologic/hydraulic design.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Potential for Potable Water Savings

The potential for potable water savings was estimated for each combination of building, city and rainwater demand, totalling 144 simulations. The resulting analysis was performed in order to understand how these three parameters influence the potential for potable water savings.

3.1.1. Rainfall Data

Rainfall data were obtained for each of the eight cities and were treated and organised for better visualisation. Three main characteristics that differ among the cities were observed. The first is the average annual rainfall, which varied between 1454 and 2287 mm/year. Porto Alegre has the lowest annual rainfall and Manaus has the highest. The second characteristic is the distribution of monthly rainfall during the year. Some of the cities had a fairly constant monthly rainfall, while others had well defined dry and wet periods. As an example, Brasília has a dry period between May and September. The last characteristic observed is the maximum rainfall in one day, which was compared with the results obtained using the IDF curves, in order to understand whether the curves match the local rainfall profile. Table 4 shows the characteristics observed for each of the eight cities. Figure 3 and Figure 4 show the minimum, average and maximum rainfall for Brasília and Porto Alegre, respectively. Figures S3–S8 in the Supplementary Materials show the minimum, average and maximum rainfall for the other cities studied herein.

3.1.2. Water Consumption

Water consumption was assessed in order to understand two points: differences in the consumption of the buildings over time and distribution of consumption during the year. The analysis of the variation over the years serves to check divergences due to leaks or retrofits in plumbing systems. The analysis of distribution during the year serves to create the daily water consumption model, used in the computer simulations. Figure S9 in the Supplementary Materials shows the water consumption for the six buildings. Figure 5 shows the monthly average water consumption during the year for the six buildings.
Based on the monthly average water consumption in each building, it was possible to estimate the daily water consumption. Figure 6 shows, as an example, the daily water consumption of the Technology Centre building used as input data in the computer simulations. Figures S10–S14 in the Supplementary Materials show the daily water consumption for the remaining buildings.

3.1.3. Potable Water Savings

Figure 7 shows, as an example, the potential for potable water savings for the six buildings in the city of Florianópolis considering the three different rainwater demands. The ideal underground tank capacity for the Technology Centre was 24,000, 21,000 and 23,000 L for rainwater demands equal to 69%, 77% and 85%, respectively. Figures S15–S21 in the Supplementary Materials show the results for the other cities.
Figure 8 summarises the average potential for potable water savings for the six buildings, eight cities and three rainwater demands. Such savings ranged from 18.48% to 82.81%. The lowest potential occurred in the architecture and urbanism building when the rainwater demand was equal to 69% of the total water consumption in Belo Horizonte. The highest potential for potable water savings occurred in the Department of Architecture and Engineering Projects building when the rainwater demand was equal to 85% of the total water consumption in Florianópolis. Table 5 shows, as an example, the optimal underground tank size for each building in Florianópolis.
Three factors were observed in the results:
The first factor is the water consumption in each building. The Department of Civil Engineering and the Department of Architecture and Engineering Projects buildings presented a much lower consumption compared to the other buildings. Both buildings also obtained the highest potential for potable water savings. All other buildings presented water consumption of the same order of magnitude with different distributions throughout the year, which resulted in different potentials for potable water savings for each city. It should be noted that the harvesting area in these buildings was not proportional to water consumption, and therefore buildings with smaller water consumption showed greater availability of rainwater.
The second factor is the rainfall pattern. The cities of Belo Horizonte and Brasília had a distinction between the rainfall volume in the dry period, which occurred in winter, and in the rainy period, which occurred in summer. This characteristic can be seen by analysing the standard deviation of the monthly average rainfall, which is, respectively, 96.12 and 113.15 mm/month (as shown in Table 4). For both cities, the monthly average rainfall in June, July and August did not exceed 20 mm/month, while in November, December and January it was over 200 mm/month. The cities of São Paulo, Manaus and Recife also did not show consistency in the rainfall pattern, with standard deviations equal to 84.71, 100.31 and 124.55, respectively. Finally, the cities in the south, that is, Florianópolis, Curitiba and Porto Alegre, showed low variation in the monthly average rainfall; the standard deviations were much lower than in the other cities, that is, 39.79, 33.49 and 16.73, respectively.
The third factor is the annual rainfall. The cities of Manaus and Recife have the highest annual rainfall, that is, 2287 and 2230 m3/year, respectively. Both cities have considerably higher rainfall than other cities, which varied between 1454 and 1789 m3/year. Thus, even if they have a variation in the monthly rainfall pattern, Recife and Manaus showed the greatest potential for potable water savings in some of the combinations between building and rainwater demand.
By combining these three factors, one can explain the results obtained. Low consumption buildings, such as the Department of Architecture and Engineering Projects, obtained the best results in all combinations of city and rainwater demand. Within the cities, the best results were obtained for Florianópolis, Porto Alegre and Curitiba due to low variation in rainfall. High consumption buildings, such as the Technology Centre, showed the best results in the cities with higher rainfall, that is, Manaus, Recife and Florianópolis. It can also be observed that Florianópolis presented the best result for low water consumption buildings and the third-best for high consumption buildings, as it has high annual average rainfall and low variation between months.
Differences in the water consumption pattern between buildings also influenced the results. As an example, the Technology Centre presented the best results in Recife and the University Library presented the best results in Manaus. The difference in the results occurred as rainfall and water consumption distribution are different in both buildings and cities.
One also assessed how different rainwater demands influenced the results obtained for each building. In order not to extend the analysis of the results too much, the average potential for potable water savings for all cities was used. Table S1 in the Supplementary Materials shows the potential for potable water savings for each building and the rainwater demand. A linear regression was performed and the slope was calculated to assess the impact of the rainwater demand on the potable water savings potential. The linear regression slope was higher for the low water consumption buildings; therefore the rainwater demand has a greater impact on the potable water savings potential of low water consumption buildings. Although this impact is lower in high water consumption buildings, rainwater harvesting in such buildings can lead to significant monetary savings.

3.2. Hydrologic/hydraulic Design

The hydrologic/hydraulic design was performed using the method proposed by Hammes et al. [20], with the author’s simplification for the specific output flow. Rainfall data were assessed for the last 15 years using data from BDMEP, based on Geraldi and Ghisi [52]. IDF curve data were obtained from published works that show local coefficients based on a locally measured rainfall database, as shown in Table 3. Table 6 shows the rainfall intensity, the number of rainfall events above the design rainfall and the extreme rainfall observed in the BDMEP data.
R values equal to 1.50, 1.75 and 2.00 were used. They were obtained from sketches of the parking lots for each building. Table 7 shows the areas and the R values obtained from the sketches. Figure 9 shows the results obtained for the design of the reservoir course using the method of Hammes et al. The reservoir course thickness varied between 170 and 493 mm, depending on the city and building.

3.3. Structural Design

Structural design using the AASHTO method [26] was performed in a routine written in GNU Octave, while the ABCP method [27] was assessed using an abacus. Parameters used in the methods are shown in Table 8.
The number of ESALs was chosen based on light traffic, defined according to PMSP [27], which has design traffic of 100,000 ESALs. CBR of the subgrade was chosen to be 5%, according to the soil profile at the site, which presented very weak structural support capacity with low Standard Penetration Test (SPT) values. Thus, a choice was made to replace the material of the subgrade with soil with a bearing capacity equal to the minimum recommended for permeable pavements [51]. It is also worth mentioning that the AASHTO method uses the resilient modulus and not the CBR value, and thus a correlation was used to calculate the required thickness, according to Equation (8). In an executive project, it is necessary to find out the real resilient module of the layers materials. Figure 10 shows the variable results according to the CBR of the sub-bed and drainage coefficient.
The ABCP method resulted in a good estimation of the pavement thickness, presenting results similar to those of AASHTO for good and excellent drainage. However, in cases where the accumulation of rainwater for longer periods in the reservoir course is desired, the method becomes inefficient as it does not consider the drainage period. For CBR between 6% and 8%, the ABCP method led to results lower than those from AASHTO with excellent drainage and may represent insufficient thickness for the layer. It is also interesting to analyse the fact that, for CBR above 16%, regardless of the quality of drainage, all structural design is minimal.
The system was defined to be of fast storage type, that is, it does not maintain the rainwater for long periods. Thus, it was considered that the pavement should present good drainage, which indicates a thickness of 20.3 cm according to the AASHTO method and 17.5 cm according to the ABCP method. We chose a thickness equal to 21.0 cm in order to address the design of the AASHTO method.

3.4. Model Validation

The pavement was then modelled using the Permeable Design Pro computer programme. Two criteria are analysed through the design method of the programme, that is, structural and hydrologic/hydraulic requirements. The structural method is the same as that used in our study, that is, the AASHTO method. The drainage considered in the programme is good drainage, which corresponds to the outflow of water from the reservoir course in up to one day. Thus, the thickness obtained using the AASHTO method, 20.3 cm, did not differ from the result obtained from the Permeable Design Pro, that is, 20.5 cm. The final design thickness remained equal to 21.0 cm.
The hydrologic/hydraulic design method used in the programme is more precise than the method of Hammes et al. [20], requesting additional data. The programme creates a water balance on an hourly basis. In order to obtain the water balance, it uses the permeability of the pavement layers, drainage system parameters, pavement geometry and daily rainfall distribution.
Layer permeabilities were based on the programme standard figures for the choker course and reservoir course materials [51] and on Ghisi et al. for the paver layer [28]. Drainage data were defined according to the recommendations of permeable pavement manuals [47,49]. The pavement geometry was obtained through the parking lot sketches obtained through Google Earth Pro photos [31]; the streets were considered an impermeable area and the parking lots as a permeable area. Finally, the daily rainfall distribution was defined as the NRCS type III rainfall, because, among the options available in the programme, it presents the highest rainfall concentration, that is, it is the critical model. For each city, we adopted the rainfall curve with the intensities obtained from the IDF equations. Table 9 shows the parameters used in the Permeable Design Pro computer programme (ICPI, 2019).
In conclusion, 48 output reports were obtained, one for each combination of city and building. For the 48 combinations, the hydrologic/hydraulic design resulted in a reservoir course thickness smaller than that obtained in the structural design. Figure 11, Figure 12, Figure 13 and Figure 14 show, as an example, the results obtained for the critical case, which occurred at the Technology Centre parking lot in Florianópolis.
The simplification used by Hammes et al. [20] was much in favour of safety, with a specific output flow much lower than the actual drain capacities. The divergence happens because the simplified model only uses one drain to collect all the branches of the drainage, without distinction among the branches that reach the rainwater tank.

4. Conclusions

In this work, an analysis of three aspects of permeable pavements was performed to improve knowledge about the technique. The first aspect was the evaluation of the potential for potable water savings as a result of stormwater harvesting. For this purpose, analyses were performed on the rainfall pattern of eight Brazilian cities and the consumption of six university buildings. The potential for potable water savings ranged from 18.48% to 82.81%. Such disparity in results is due to both large differences in water consumption patterns and differences in rainfall patterns. The city of Florianópolis presented the best results in terms of potable water savings potential overall, as it has a fairly constant rainfall distribution pattern and a high annual rainfall.
The second aspect verified was the structural design. For this, a GNU Octave code was written for the AASHTO method. The thicknesses according to the ABCP structural design method were also assessed. The results were validated through those obtained from the Permeable Design Pro programme, which also uses the AASHTO methodology for the structural design of permeable pavements.
There was little variation among the structural results of the ABCP method, the AASHTO code and the Permeable Design Pro, especially for the CBR of 5%. It should be noted that the ABCP method does not indicate the use of a choker course and does not consider drainage conditions, which may modify the result in other system settings. The absence of more parameters makes it less exact for the evaluation of permeable pavement systems with stormwater harvesting purposes.
The results of the hydrologic/hydraulic design using Permeable Design Pro diverged greatly from the values found using the method of Hammes et al. The main difference is that the programme considers an hourly water balance, requesting drainage specifications. The programme specific output flow was higher than the output flow obtained via the simplification that Hammes et al. considered. The difference obtained in drainage resulted in smaller reservoir course thicknesses.
It can be concluded that the results shown herein are examples of how a permeable pavement system can save potable water in buildings. It is believed that, for public universities, the system has a great potential for reducing the water bill costs and relieving the urban drainage systems.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://0-www-mdpi-com.brum.beds.ac.uk/article/10.3390/w13141896/s1, Figure S1: Rainwater harvesting schematic with water flows, Figure S2: Permeable and impermeable areas of the parking lot in the Technology Centre, Table S1: Potential for potable water savings and rainwater demand influence in the potential for potable water savings, Figure S3: Average, minimum and maximum monthly rainfall in the city of Florianópolis over 2003–2017, Figure S4: Average, minimum and maximum monthly rainfall in the city of Manaus over 2003–2017, Figure S5: Average, minimum and maximum monthly rainfall in the city of São Paulo over 2003–2017, Figure S6: Average, minimum and maximum monthly rainfall in the city of Recife over 2003–2017, Figure S7: Average, minimum and maximum monthly rainfall in the city of Curitiba over 2003–2017, Figure S8: Average, minimum and maximum monthly rainfall in the city of Belo Horizonte over 2003–2017, Figure S9: Water consumption for the buildings over 2013–2018, Figure S10: Daily water consumption in the Department of Architecture and Engineering Projects considered in the simulation, Figure S11: Daily water consumption in the Civil Engineering Building considered in the simulation, Figure S12: Daily water consumption in the University Library considered in the simulation, Figure S13: Daily water consumption in the University Administration Building considered in the simulation, Figure S14: Daily water consumption in the architecture and urbanism building considered in the simulation, Figure S15: Potential for potable water savings for the six buildings located in São Paulo, Figure S16: Potential for potable water savings for the six buildings located in Curitiba, Figure S17: Potential for potable water savings for the six buildings located in Brasília, Figure S18: Potential for potable water savings for the six buildings located in Belo Horizonte, Figure S19: Potential for potable water savings for the six buildings located in Manaus, Figure S20: Potential for potable water savings for the six buildings located in Recife, Figure S21: Potential for potable water savings for the six buildings located in Porto Alegre.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, I.C.M.V., E.G. and L.P.T.; methodology, I.C.M.V. and E.G.; software, I.C.M.V.; validation, I.C.M.V. and E.G.; writing—original draft preparation, I.C.M.V.; writing—review and editing, I.C.M.V., E.G. and L.P.T.; supervision, E.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no funding. The first author is thankful for Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) for the scholarship during the writing and submission of this research.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank UFSC for the support, LAMGEO (a laboratory of UFSC) for the geotechnical data of the building sites, and ICPI for the student license of Permeable Design Pro.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
IPCCIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
SUDSSustainable Urban Drainage Systems
LIDLow Impact Development
LCALife Cycle Assessment
IDFIntensity-Duration-Frequency
AASHTOAmerican Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
ABCPBrazilian Association of Portland Cement
UFSCFederal University of Santa Catarina
BDMEPMeteorological Database for Teaching and Research
ESALEquivalent Single Axle Load
CBRCalifornia Bearing Ratio
ICPIInterlocking Concrete Pavement Institute
SPTStandard Penetration Test

References

  1. Wasko, C.; Sharma, A. Steeper temporal distribution of rain intensity at higher temperatures within Australian storms. Nat. Geosci. 2015, 8, 527–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Muller, M. Cape Town’s drought: Don’t blame climate change. Nature 2018, 559, 174–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Soriano, É.; De Resende Londe, L.; Di Gregorio, L.T.; Coutinho, M.P.; Santos, L.B.L. Water crisis in são paulo evaluated under the disaster’s point of view. Ambiente E Soc. 2016, 19, 21–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. IPCC. Summary for Policymakers. In Climate Change 2013—The Physical Science Basis; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2014; pp. 1–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. IPCC. Climate Change 2014 Mitigation of Climate Change; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Hurlimann, A.; Dolnicar, S. Public acceptance and perceptions of alternative water sources: A comparative study in nine locations. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 2016, 32, 650–673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Curitiba. Decree No. 293 of 22 March 2006. Regulates Law 10,785 of 2003 and Provides on the Criteria for the Rational Use and Conservation of Water in Buildings and Makes Other Provisions. Available online: http://leismunicipa.is/lfkcp (accessed on 17 June 2021).
  8. Anand, C.; Apul, D.S. Economic and environmental analysis of standard, high efficiency, rainwater flushed, and composting toilets. J. Environ. Manag. 2011, 92, 419–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Ghisi, E.; Rupp, R.F.; Triska, Y. Comparing indicators to rank strategies to save potable water in buildings. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2014, 87, 137–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Marinoski, A.K.; Ghisi, E. Aproveitamento de água pluvial para usos não potáveis em instituição de ensino: Estudo de caso em Florianópolis–SC (Rainwater harvesting for non-potable uses in schools: Case study in Florianópolis–SC). Ambiente Construído 2008, 8, 67–84. [Google Scholar]
  11. Tucci, C.E.M. Urban Stormwater Management (Gestão de Águas Pluviais Urbanas, in Portuguese); Ministério das Cidades: Brasilia, Brazil; Global Water Partnership: Stockholm, Sweden; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA; UNESCO: Paris, France, 2005.
  12. Agostinho, M.D.S.P.; Poleto, C. Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems: Devices (Sistemas Sustentáveis de Drenagem Urbana: Dispositivos, in portuguese). Holos Environ. 2012, 12, 121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Scholz, M.; Grabowiecki, P. Review of permeable pavement systems. Build. Environ. 2007, 42, 3830–3836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Acioli, L.A. Experimental Study of Permeable Pavements for Surface Runoff Control at Source (Estudo Experimental de Pavimentos Permeáveis para o Controle do Escoamento Superficial na Fonte, in Portuguese). Ph.D. Thesis, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, Brazil, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  15. Marchioni, M.; Silva, C.O. Permeable Interlocking Pavement–Best Practices (Pavimento Intertravado Permeável–Melhores Práticas, in Portuguese); Technical Report; Associação Brasileira de Cimento Portland: São Paulo, Portland, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  16. Pratt, C.J.; Newman, A.P.; Bond, P.C. Mineral oil big-degradation within a permeable pavement: Long term observations. Water Sci. Technol. 1999, 39, 103–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Legret, M.; Colandini, V.; Le Marc, C. Effects of a porous pavement with reservoir structure on the quality of runoff water and soil. Sci. Total Environ. 1996, 189–190, 335–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Bernucci, L.L.B.; da Motta, L.M.G.; Ceratti, J.A.P.; Soares, J.B. Asphalt Paving: Basic Training for Engineers (Pavimentação Asfáltica: Formação Básica para Engenheiros, in Portuguese); PETROBRÁS Asfaltos e ABEDA (Associação Brasileira das Empresas Distribuidoras de Asfaltos): Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  19. Knabben, R.M.; Trichês, G.; Gerges, S.N.Y.; Vergara, E.F. Evaluation of sound absorption capacity of asphalt mixtures. Applied Acoustics 2016, 114, 266–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Hammes, G.; Thives, L.P.; Ghisi, E. Application of stormwater collected from porous asphalt pavements for non-potable uses in buildings. J. Environ. Manag. 2018, 222, 338–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Antunes, L.; Thives, L.; Ghisi, E. Potential for Potable Water Savings in Buildings by Using Stormwater Harvested from Porous Pavements. Water 2016, 8, 110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Nirmalaraja, J.; Meyers, B. Use of Permeable Pavement to Stormwater Harvesting and Reuse to irrigate oval at Morphett Vale Sport Complex, South Australia. In Proceedings of the Stormwater 2014 3rd National Conference on Urban Water Management, Adelaide, Australia, 13–17 October 2014. [Google Scholar]
  23. Kazemi, F.; Hill, K. Effect of permeable pavement basecourse aggregates on stormwater quality for irrigation reuse. Ecol. Eng. 2015, 77, 189–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Antunes, L.N.; Ghisi, E.; Severis, R.M. Environmental assessment of a permeable pavement system used to harvest stormwater for non-potable water uses in a building. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 746, 141087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Martins Vaz, I.C.; Ghisi, E.; Thives, L.P. Life cycle energy assessment and economic feasibility of stormwater harvested from pervious pavements. Water Res. 2020, 170, 115322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. American Association of State Highways and Transportation Officials. Guide for Design of Pavement Structures; American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO): Washington, DC, USA, 1993; p. 640. [Google Scholar]
  27. PMSP (Prefeitura do Município de São Paulo). Interlocking Concrete Pavement Design (Dimensionamento de Pavimentos com Blocos Intertravados de Concreto, in Portuguese); Technical Report; PMSP: São Paulo, Portland, 2004.
  28. Ghisi, E.; Belotto, T.; Thives, L.P. The use of permeable interlocking concrete pavement to filter stormwater for non-potable uses in buildings. Water 2020, 12, 2045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Associação Brasileira De Normas Técnicas (ABNT). NBR 16416: Pervious Concrete Pavement—Requirements and Procedures; ABNT: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  30. UFSC-Sustentável. Water Consumption Monitoring per Consumer Unit (Monitoramento do Consumo de Água por Unidade Consumidora, in Portuguese); Technical Report; Coordenadoria de Gestão Ambiental (Environmental Management Office): Florianópolis, Brazil, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  31. Google Earth. Version Google Earth Pro 7.3. Available online: https://www.google.com.br/earth (accessed on 1 August 2019).
  32. Botelho, A.N. Estimation of Water End-Uses at the Federal University of Santa Catarina. (Estimativa dos Usos Finais de Água Potável na Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, in Portuguese); UFSC: Florianópolis, Brazil, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  33. RainMap. Feasibility Analysis of a Rainwater Harvesting System at the Technological Center, Brazil–CTC/UFSC (Análise de Viabilidade para Implantação de um Sistema de Aproveitamento de Águas Pluviais no Centro Tecnológico–CTC/UFSC, in Portuguese); Technical Report; Rainmap: Florianópolis, Brazil, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  34. IBGE (Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística). Cidades@; IBGE: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2019. Available online: https://cidades.ibge.gov.br/ (accessed on 17 June 2021).
  35. Ghisi, E.; Cordova, M.M. Netuno 4 Programme (Netuno 4, Programa Computacional, in Portuguese); Federal University of Santa Catarina—UFSC, Civil Engineering Department: Florianópolis, Brazil, 2014; Available online: http://www.labeee.ufsc.br/ (accessed on 17 June 2021).
  36. INMET Meteorological Database. Available online: https://bdmep.inmet.gov.br/ (accessed on 17 June 2021).
  37. Associação Brasileira De Normas Técnicas (ABNT). NBR 16783: Use of Alternative Sources of Non-Potable Water in Buildings; ABNT: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  38. Back, A.J. Intense Rainfall and Design Rainfall for Superficial Drainage Structures Design in the State of Santa Catarina (Chuvas Intensas e Chuva para o Dimensionamento de Estruturas de Drenagem para o Estado de Santa Catarina, in Portuguese); EPAGRI: Florianópolis, Brazil, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  39. Souza, J.C.B.; Azevedo, J.R.G. IDF Versus Design Water Flow of an Urban Drainage System. (Curvas IDF Versus Vazão de Projeto de um Sistema de Drenagem Urbana, in Portuguese); Associação Brasileira de Recursos Hídricos: Porto Alegre, Brazil, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  40. CPRM (Companhia de Pesquisa de Recursos Minerais); Adriana Burin Weschenfelder, K.P.; Pinto, E.J.D.A. Pluviometric Atlas of Brazil, Intensity-Duration-Frequency Equations. City: Porto Alegre (Atlas Pluviométrico do Brasil, Equações Intensidade-Duração-Frequência. Município: Porto Alegre, in Portuguese). Estação Pluviográfica: Porto Alegre, Códigos 0305101; Technical Report; CPRM: Porto Alegre, Brazil, 2015.
  41. Silva, D.D.; Valverde, A.E.L.; Pruski, F.F.; Gonçalves, R.A.B. Parameter estimation and spatialization in the rainfall intensity-duration-frequency equation for the state of São Paulo (Estimativa e espacialização dos parâmetros da equação intensidade-duração-frequência da precipitação para o estado de São Paulo. Eng. Nat. Agric. 1999, 7, 70–87. [Google Scholar]
  42. Agência Reguladora de Águas, Energia e Saneamento Básico do Distrito Federal (ADASA). Federal District Urban Drainage Plan–PDDU/DF (Plano Diretor de Drenagem Urbana do Distrito Federal—PDDU/DF, in Portuguese); Technical Report; ADASA: Brasília, Brazil, 2016.
  43. Fendrich, R. Intense Rainfall for Drainage Structures in Parana State (Chuvas Intensas para Obras de Drenagem no Estado do Paraná, in Portuguese); Champagnat: Curitiba, Brazil, 1998; p. 99. [Google Scholar]
  44. CPRM (Companhia de Pesquisa de Recursos Minerais); De Azambuja, A.M.S.; Pinto, E.J.D.A. Pluviometric Atlas of Brazil, Intensity-Duration-Frequency Equations. City: Rio Branco do Sul-Santa Cruz-Tigre, Code 02549054. (Atlas Pluviométrico do Brasil; Equações Intensidade-Duração-Frequência, Desagregação de Precipitações Diárias. Município: R; Technical Report; CPRM: Belém, Brazil, 2014.
  45. Back, Á.; Bonetti, A. Design rainfall for stormwater plumbing in Santa Catarina (Chuva de projeto para instalações prediais de águas pluviais de Santa Catarina, in portuguese). Rev. Bras. De Recur. Hidricos 2014, 19, 260–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Freitas, A.J.; Silva, D.D.; Pruski, F.F.; Pinto, F.A.; Pereira, S.B.; Gomes Filho, R.R.; Teixeira, A.F.; Baena, L.G.N.; Mello, L.T.A.; Novaes, L.F. Intense Rainfall Equations in the State of Minas Gerais (Equações de Chuvas Intensas no Estado de Minas Gerais, in Portuguese); Companhia de Saneamento de Minas Gerais: Belo Horizonte, Brazil; Universidade Federal de Viçosa: Viçosa, Minas Gerais, Brazil, 2001; 65p. [Google Scholar]
  47. TSM (Tennessee Stormwater Management). Permeable Pavement. In Tennessee Permanent Stormwater Management and Design Guidance Manual; Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation—Division of Water Resources: Nashville, TN, USA, 2015; pp. 187–214. [Google Scholar]
  48. Plinio Tomaz Engenharia. Diffuse Pollution: Porous Pavements. Stormwater Management Course (Poluição Difusa: Pavimento Poroso. Curso de Manejo de águas Pluviais, in Portuguese); Plínio Tomaz: Guarulhos, Brazil, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  49. Eisenberg, B.; Lindow, K.C.; Smith, D.R. Permeable Pavements; American Society of Civil Engineers: Reston, VA, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  50. Buchanan, S. Resilient Modulus: What, Why and How? Vulcan Materials Company: Naperville, IL, USA, 2007; pp. 1–13. [Google Scholar]
  51. ICPI. Permeable Design Pro; Interlocking Concrete Pavement Institute, Developed by Applied Research Associates, Inc.: Chantilly, VA, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  52. Soares Geraldi, M.; Ghisi, E. Assessment of the length of rainfall time series for rainwater harvesting in buildings. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2018, 133, 231–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Permeable pavement model used in the study.
Figure 1. Permeable pavement model used in the study.
Water 13 01896 g001
Figure 2. Location of the cities used in the study. Source: [31] for background image.
Figure 2. Location of the cities used in the study. Source: [31] for background image.
Water 13 01896 g002
Figure 3. Average, minimum and maximum monthly rainfall in the city of Brasília over 2003–2017.
Figure 3. Average, minimum and maximum monthly rainfall in the city of Brasília over 2003–2017.
Water 13 01896 g003
Figure 4. Average, minimum and maximum monthly rainfall in the city of Porto Alegre over 2003–2017.
Figure 4. Average, minimum and maximum monthly rainfall in the city of Porto Alegre over 2003–2017.
Water 13 01896 g004
Figure 5. Monthly average water consumption in the six buildings.
Figure 5. Monthly average water consumption in the six buildings.
Water 13 01896 g005
Figure 6. Daily water consumption in Technology Centre building considered in the computer simulations.
Figure 6. Daily water consumption in Technology Centre building considered in the computer simulations.
Water 13 01896 g006
Figure 7. Potential for potable water savings for the six buildings located in Florianópolis.
Figure 7. Potential for potable water savings for the six buildings located in Florianópolis.
Water 13 01896 g007
Figure 8. Potable water savings potential for the average rainwater demand (77%), minimum (69%) and maximum (85%).
Figure 8. Potable water savings potential for the average rainwater demand (77%), minimum (69%) and maximum (85%).
Water 13 01896 g008
Figure 9. Hydrologic/hydraulic design thickness.
Figure 9. Hydrologic/hydraulic design thickness.
Water 13 01896 g009
Figure 10. Structural design thickness.
Figure 10. Structural design thickness.
Water 13 01896 g010
Figure 11. Thickness of saturated base (reservoir course) for the Technology Centre in Florianópolis.
Figure 11. Thickness of saturated base (reservoir course) for the Technology Centre in Florianópolis.
Water 13 01896 g011
Figure 12. Precipitation considered in the model for the Technology Centre in Florianópolis.
Figure 12. Precipitation considered in the model for the Technology Centre in Florianópolis.
Water 13 01896 g012
Figure 13. Water height in the reservoir course for the Technology Centre in Florianópolis.
Figure 13. Water height in the reservoir course for the Technology Centre in Florianópolis.
Water 13 01896 g013
Figure 14. Drainage in the system for Technology Centre in Florianópolis.
Figure 14. Drainage in the system for Technology Centre in Florianópolis.
Water 13 01896 g014
Table 1. Parking lot area and water consumption for the six buildings.
Table 1. Parking lot area and water consumption for the six buildings.
BuildingParking
Lot
Area (m2)
Water
Consumption
(L/Year)
University Library31503899
Department of Civil Engineering16001540
Department of Architecture and Engineering Projects1750322
Department of Architecture and Urbanism20504541
University Administration Building16504089
Technology Centre55004953
Source: Based on [30,31].
Table 2. Characteristics of the eight cities.
Table 2. Characteristics of the eight cities.
CityPopulationArea (Km2)LatitudeLongitude
Manaus2,182,76311,401.092−3.10719−60.0261
Recife1,645,727218.843−8.05428−34.8813
Brasília3,015,2685760.783−15.7801−47.9292
Belo Horizonte2,512,070331.401−19.8157−43.9542
São Paulo12,252,0231521.110−23.5489−46.6388
Curitiba1,933,105435.036−25.4284−49.2733
Florianópolis500,973674.844−27.5969−48.5495
Porto Alegre1,483,771495.390−30.0277−51.2287
Source: Based on [34].
Table 3. Intensity-Duration-Frequency variables used in the hydrological design in each city.
Table 3. Intensity-Duration-Frequency variables used in the hydrological design in each city.
CitySourceVariables
Kmdn
ManausSouza and Azevedo [39]1701.3400.11025.000.798
RecifeCPRM [40]4247.9000.21025.201.120
BrasíliaSilva et al. [41]1646.1200.12815.720.856
Belo HorizonteADASA [42]1574.7000.20711.000.884
São PauloFendrich [43]5950.0000.21726.001.150
CuritibaCPRM [44]3221.0700.25826.001.010
FlorianópolisBack and Bonetti [45]1168.5000.2389.100.703
Porto AlegreFreitas et al. [46]682.8740.1693.990.671
Table 4. Rainfall data in each city over 2003–2017.
Table 4. Rainfall data in each city over 2003–2017.
CityAverage
Annual
Rainfall (mm/Year)
Standard Deviation of
Monthly Average
Rainfall (m3/Month)
Highest
Daily
Rainfall (mm/Day)
Manaus2287100.31142
Recife2230124.55150
Brasília146996.12111
Belo Horizonte1522113.15156
São Paulo164184.71140
Curitiba158433.49128
Florianópolis178939.79253
Porto Alegre145416.73150
Table 5. Optimal underground tank capacity, rainfall and harvesting area for Florianópolis.
Table 5. Optimal underground tank capacity, rainfall and harvesting area for Florianópolis.
BuildingAnnual
Average
Rainfall
(mm/Year)
Total
Harvesting
Area (m2)
Optimal Underground
Tank Capacity (m3) for
Each Rainwater Demand
69%77%85%
University Library1789315023.022.022.0
Department of Civil Engineering160021.021.022.0
Department of Architecture and Engineering Projects17509.010.011.0
Department of Architecture and Urbanism205020.019.020.0
University Administration Building165019.018.019.0
Technology Centre550024.021.023.0
Table 6. Intensity-Duration-Frequency and hydraulic data for each city.
Table 6. Intensity-Duration-Frequency and hydraulic data for each city.
CityDesign Rainfall
Intensity (mm/h)
Number of Days with
Rainfall Greater Than the
Design Rainfall (Days)
Highest Rainfall
in a Day (mm)
Manaus66.453142.00
Recife63.382149.70
Brasília58.635110.70
Belo Horizonte61.946156.30
São Paulo54.465140.40
Curitiba64.925128.20
Florianópolis102.912253.00
Porto Alegre47.476149.60
Table 7. Pavement areas and R-values.
Table 7. Pavement areas and R-values.
BuildingPermeable
Area (m2)
Impermeable
Area (m2)
Total
Area (m2)
R
Department of Architecture and Engineering Projects87587517502.00
Department of Civil Engineering80080016002.00
University Library1575157531502.00
Technology Centre2750275055002.00
University Administration Building110055016501.50
Department of Architecture and Urbanism116087020301.75
Table 8. Structural design parameters.
Table 8. Structural design parameters.
ParametersValue
PaversThickness110 mm
Structural coefficient0.3 (dimensionless)
Choker courseThickness30 mm
Structural coefficient0.11 (dimensionless)
Reservoir courseStructural coefficient0.08 (dimensionless)
Drainage coefficient0.4/0.6/0.8/1.0/1.2
Traffic(80 kN axle) ESALs100,000 (ESALs)
SubgradeCBR (%)5 (%) 1
Method considerationsZr 2−0.385 (dimensionless)
So 30.48 (dimensionless)
ΔPSI 42.2 (dimensionless)
1 In order to plot Figure 10, values of CBR ranged between 1% and 20%, but 5% was used for the design. 2 Parameter is related to data reliability. It takes into consideration the type of pavement designed. 3 Statistical parameter related to standard deviation. It varies according to the type of pavement designed. 4 A dimensionless parameter used to consider the acceptance level of the pavement.
Table 9. Hydrologic/hydraulic design parameters.
Table 9. Hydrologic/hydraulic design parameters.
ParameterFigure Considered
PaversPermeability (mm/s)1.972
Choker course0.011
Reservoir course1.014
Subgrade0.000 (impermeable)
Drainage conditionsDaily rainfall distributionType III - NRCS
Drainage area 1 Variable
Distance between adjacent drains 2 6 m
Drain diameter10.0 cm
Drain slope0.5 %
Drain roughness coefficient0.012
System’s initial water volume0.0 m3
Maximum water height in the reservoir course100.0%
1 Variable according to the building and its parking lot. For each parking lot, a sketch was made and the maximum drainage area that a single drain drains was assessed in order to size the drain; 2 The recommendation of the TSM permeable pavement manual [47] was taken into account.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Martins Vaz, I.C.; Ghisi, E.; Thives, L.P. Stormwater Harvested from Permeable Pavements as a Means to Save Potable Water in Buildings. Water 2021, 13, 1896. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/w13141896

AMA Style

Martins Vaz IC, Ghisi E, Thives LP. Stormwater Harvested from Permeable Pavements as a Means to Save Potable Water in Buildings. Water. 2021; 13(14):1896. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/w13141896

Chicago/Turabian Style

Martins Vaz, Igor Catão, Enedir Ghisi, and Liseane Padilha Thives. 2021. "Stormwater Harvested from Permeable Pavements as a Means to Save Potable Water in Buildings" Water 13, no. 14: 1896. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/w13141896

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop