ArticleJournal of hydrology2024
How vertical drainage positions of extensive green roofs affect the runoff control performance.
Article in Journal of hydrology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The capacity of extensive green roofs (EGRs) in runoff reduction and pollutants control significantly decreased with increasing rainfall intensity. This is attributed to most of EGRs are the lower-drainage method and use a thinner substrate layer because of the structural load-bearing limits of buildings. Existing solutions depend on increasing the rainwater storage by thickening the substrate layer of EGRs, or replacing the substrate materials. We propose to enhance the water retention capacity of EGRs by adjusting vertical drainage positions and moving the lower-drainage at the bottom to upper-drainage over the substrate layer. To test the runoff control performance of EGRs with the upper-drainage method, we designed three EGR models with two different (upper- and lower-) drainage methods based on the common EGR's structure in practice and carried out total 48 experiments under different rainfall intensities with an artificial rainfall simulator. The experimental design also included adjusting structural factors of the EGR to further explore the influences of roof slope, status of vegetation growth (height and canopy cover ratio), and model size. The average runoff retention rate for the upper-drainage EGR was 61.82 %, which was much higher than the 23.94 % for the lower-drainage EGR. The concentrations of TN and TP in runoff with the upper-drainage were 2.83 and 0.18 mg/L, which were much lower than the 8.47 and 2.10 mg/L for the lower-drainage EGR. EGRs with upper-drainage overall performed better in runoff control than EGRs with lower-drainage. Vegetation height and model size did not significantly affect the rainwater control performance for different drainage methods, while the change of slope affected the rainwater interception of the EGRs with upper-drainage method.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.