Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10216/101792
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.creatorMonzur Alam Imteaz
dc.creatorUpendra Paudel
dc.creatorAmimul Ahsan
dc.creatorCristina Santos
dc.date.accessioned2022-09-07T10:46:19Z-
dc.date.available2022-09-07T10:46:19Z-
dc.date.issued2015
dc.identifier.issn0921-3449
dc.identifier.othersigarra:106026
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10216/101792-
dc.description.abstractMajority of the investigations on rainwater harvesting focused on sizing and potential water savings including studies proposing different methods of estimating rainwater tank outcomes. Several studies used monthly rainfall data to estimate rainwater tank outcomes. However, quantification using daily rainfall data will be much more accurate compared to using monthly rainfall data. A vast majority of works using daily rainfall data used daily water balance model for analysis. Again most of the studies using daily water balance model used historical rainfall data, calculated water savings for many years and then presented an average of all the calculated years' total outcome(s). 'Raintank Analyser' is a tool, which uses the same methodology and widely used; used by the South Australian policy makers for producing relevant design charts. In contrast, eTank, a daily water balance model was developed to produce potential rainwater savings, augmented townwater supply, tank overflow, reliability and payback period for three distinct climate conditions (dry, average and wet years). This paper presents comparison of eTank calculated potential water savings with those calculated by 'Raintank Analyser' under similar conditions for a rainfall station in central Adelaide. In general, 'Raintank Analyser' produced water savings are very close to the eTank calculated water savings in average year. However, through the eTank produced potential water savings in dry and wet years, itis found that significant climatic variations exist. Magnitudes of climatic variations under different scenario are presented. Again, to assess spatial variability, three more rainfall stations from different regions of Adelaide metropolitan were selected. eTank was used to calculated potential water savings in three climatic conditions (dry, average and wet years) for various combinations of roof and tank sizes. Again it is found that depending input variable conditions (tank size, roof area and climate) significant spatial variations exist within some ofthe regions. Also, it is found that potential water savings not only depends on total rainfall amount of a particular area, but also on other input conditions; i.e. under similar conditions an area with lower annual rainfall may provide higher water savings due to rainfall pattern.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.rightsrestrictedAccess
dc.subjectEngenharia hidraúlica, Engenharia civil
dc.subjectHydraulic engineering, Civil engineering
dc.titleClimatic and spatial variability of potential rainwater savings for a large coastal city
dc.typeArtigo em Revista Científica Internacional
dc.contributor.uportoFaculdade de Engenharia
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.10.023
dc.subject.fosCiências da engenharia e tecnologias::Engenharia civil
dc.subject.fosEngineering and technology::Civil engineering
Appears in Collections:FEUP - Artigo em Revista Científica Internacional

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
106026.pdf
  Restricted Access
898.94 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.