Simulation Evaluation of the Effects of Non‐Uniform Flow and Degradation Parameter Uncertainty on Subsurface‐Flow Constructed Wetland Performance

Although constructed wetland treatment systems have been used in a variety of applications, uncertainty in adequately determining flow conditions or hydraulic residence times ("hydraulic efficiencies") and degradation model parameters remains a problem with their design. Breakthrough or impulse-type tracer studies in constructed wetlands often result in residence-time distributions exhibiting long skewed "tails" suggesting multiple flow channels or perhaps unrealistically large dispersion factors. A fractional-flow analysis is developed here to quantify possible flow non-uniformity in a subsurface-flow constructed wetland and is then used to assess the effects of non-uniformity and degradation model parameter variability on constituent (for example, chemical oxygen demand) removal. A model application to tracer data developed previously demonstrates how flow non-uniformity alone can account for significant "tailing" and can be related to even moderate estimated dispersion numbers. From the analysis, it is evident that flow non-uniformity is of greater concern than decay parameter uncertainty, and that, from a constructed wetland design and operation perspective, every effort should be made to ensure relative flow uniformity across the constructed wetland.

[1]  Robert H. Kadlec,et al.  The inadequacy of first-order treatment wetland models , 2000 .

[2]  D McNevin,et al.  Alternative analysis of BOD removal in subsurface flow constructed wetlands employing Monod kinetics. , 2001, Water research.

[3]  Robert H. Kadlec,et al.  Chemical, physical and biological cycles in treatment wetlands , 1999 .

[4]  Hydraulic Characteristics of a Subsurface Flow Constructed Wetland for Winery Effluent Treatment , 2001 .

[5]  Mark E Grismer,et al.  Evaluation of Constructed Wetland Treatment Performance for Winery Wastewater , 2003, Water environment research : a research publication of the Water Environment Federation.

[6]  G. Leite,et al.  Performance of two macrophyte species in experimental wetlands receiving variable loads of anaerobically treated municipal wastewater. , 2001, Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research.

[7]  James A. Moore,et al.  Variability of treatment performance in constructed wetlands , 1995 .

[8]  Robert H. Kadlec,et al.  Wetland residence time distribution modeling , 2000 .

[9]  P. S. Burgoon,et al.  Performance of subsurface flow wetlands with batch-load and continuous-flow conditions , 1995 .

[10]  R. Kadlec,et al.  Temperature Effects in Treatment Wetlands , 2001, Water environment research : a research publication of the Water Environment Federation.

[11]  George Tchobanoglous,et al.  Treatment of High‐Strength Winery Wastewater Using a Subsurface‐Flow Constructed Wetland , 2001 .

[12]  K M Leonard,et al.  Comparison of operational design criteria for subsurface flow constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment. , 2001, Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research.

[13]  Jesper Persson,et al.  Influence of Wetland Design Parameters on the Hydrodynamics of Stormwater Wetlands , 1998 .

[14]  C. Mitchell,et al.  Design and hydraulic performance of a constructed wetland treating oil refinery wastewater , 1999 .

[15]  Tony Hoong Fatt Wong,et al.  Hydraulics efficiency of constructed wetlands and ponds , 1999 .

[16]  M. Dahab,et al.  Start-Up Performance of a Subsurface-Flow Constructed Wetland for Domestic Wastewater Treatment , 2001, Environmental technology.

[17]  D. McNevin,et al.  Towards an integrated performance model for subsurface flow constructed wetlands , 2000 .

[18]  L T Angenent,et al.  Anaerobic migrating blanket reactor treatment of low-strength wastewater at low temperatures. , 2001, Water environment research : a research publication of the Water Environment Federation.