Affiliation:
1. 1 Department of Civil Engineering and Future Water Institute, University of Cape Town, Private Bag X3, Rondebosch, 7700 Cape Town, South Africa
Abstract
ABSTRACT
The study assessed static management, i.e., without planned periodic maintenance of the storage (no sediment dredging) denoted as SC1, or with maintenance denoted as SC2. The second approach was dynamic management based on applying Real-Time Control (RTC) techniques to scenario SC1 and scenario SC2 denoted as RTC-1 and RTC-2, respectively. The dynamic management of the UCT dam with RTC-1 and RTC-2 approaches increase yield by 2.1 and 1.1 ml, respectively. Additionally, RTC-1 and RTC-2 approaches increase volumetric reliability by 5.3 and 2.5%, respectively, while maintaining the required level of service of a stormwater harvesting system. SC1 and SC2 results in water savings of up to 21.15 and 21.45 ZAR/kl, respectively, while RTC-1 and RTC-2 could save up to 19.35 and 19.45 ZAR/kl. Thus, static configurations results in water savings approximately 9% in comparison to RTC. In addition, static configurations harvested stormwater at a relatively lowest unit cost in comparison to RTC configurations. Notwithstanding this finding, the RTC system exhibits a great potential in reshaping the stormwater harvesting system to simultaneously deliver water conservation and stormwater management.
Reference53 articles.
1. Automatic calibration of the US EPA SWMM model for a large urban catchment;Journal of Hydraulic Engineering,2008
2. Open storm: A complete framework for sensing and control of urban watersheds;Environmental Science: Water Research and Technology, Royal Society of Chemistry,2017
3. Modelling real-time control options on virtual sewer systems;Journal of Environmental Engineering and Science,2008