Sizing onsite wastewater treatment systems using soil characteristics as compared to the percolation test

被引:0
|
作者
Gross, MA [1 ]
Owens, PR [1 ]
Dennis, ND [1 ]
Robinson, AK [1 ]
Rutledge, EM [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Arkansas, Dept Civil Engn, Fayetteville, AR 72701 USA
关键词
percolation tests; soil morphology; sizing filter fields; loading rates;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
This study is a direct comparison of sizing filter fields based upon percolation test results and soil morphology. Eighteen sites were selected to compare soil morphology and percolation tests. Soil profile descriptions were written using the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) soil description guide and percolation tests were performed in strict accordance with the Arkansas Department of Health rules and regulations in areas 2 to 3 m adjacent to the pits. Percolation test were performed in August, 1996 and were repeated for 13 of the sites during the Winter and Spring of 1997. Shallow 1.5 m monitoring wells were installed at 7 of the sites, and soil samples were taken at 8 of the sites to determine Atterberg limits. The results of this study show that percolation rates vary from season to season, with wet season results indicating some sites as unsuitable even though dry season tests would result in selecting the minimum soil absorption area for that site. The study also indicates that soil morphology, although not completely accurate, is a reasonable indicator of seasonal water table depth from the surface during wet seasons. Sizing the soil absorption system based upon indicators of seasonal water tables, soil texture and structure results in a somewhat more conservative design.
引用
收藏
页码:52 / 59
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Model Test of Proposed Loading Rates for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems
    Radcliffe, D. E.
    Bradshaw, J. K.
    SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL, 2014, 78 (01) : 97 - 107
  • [2] Onsite Wastewater Treatment Management Systems
    Allison, Leigh
    Kaminsky, Jessica
    CONSTRUCTION RESEARCH CONGRESS 2016: OLD AND NEW CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGIES CONVERGE IN HISTORIC SAN JUAN, 2016, : 1577 - 1587
  • [3] Using soil surveys to predict the type of onsite wastewater treatment system
    Engebretson, AC
    Tyler, EJ
    ON-SITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT, PROCEEDINGS, 2001, : 116 - 124
  • [4] Evaluation of genotoxicity potential of household effluents from onsite wastewater treatment systems using umu test
    Bai, Wenzhi
    Takao, Yuji
    Kubo, Takashi
    JOURNAL OF TOXICOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH-PART A-CURRENT ISSUES, 2020, 83 (01): : 36 - 44
  • [5] Sizing of a subsurface flow constructed wetland for onsite domestic wastewater treatment
    Stecher, MC
    Weaver, RW
    McInnes, KJ
    ON-SITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT, PROCEEDINGS, 2001, : 539 - 547
  • [6] Guidance available for onsite wastewater treatment systems
    Spicer, Steve
    Water Environment and Technology, 2002, 14 (08): : 29 - 30
  • [7] Assessing the Status of Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems in the Alabama Black Belt Soil Area
    He, Jiajie
    Dougherty, Mark
    Zellmer, Richard
    Martin, George
    ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING SCIENCE, 2011, 28 (10) : 693 - 699
  • [8] Integrated Risk Framework for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems
    Steven Carroll
    Ashantha Goonetilleke
    Evan Thomas
    Megan Hargreaves
    Ray Frost
    Les Dawes
    Environmental Management, 2006, 38 : 286 - 303
  • [9] Integrated risk framework for onsite wastewater treatment systems
    Carroll, Steven
    Goonetilleke, Ashantha
    Thomas, Evan
    Hargreaves, Megan
    Frost, Ray
    Dawes, Les
    ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2006, 38 (02) : 286 - 303
  • [10] Review of Organic Wastewater Compound Concentrations and Removal in Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems
    Schaider, Laurel A.
    Rodgers, Kathryn M.
    Rudel, Ruthann A.
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2017, 51 (13) : 7304 - 7317