Performance of a large building rainwater harvesting system.
Performance of a large building rainwater harvesting system.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.watres.2012.06.043
复制
发表时间：
2012-10
期刊：
影响因子：
12.8
通讯作者：
Sarah Ward;F. Memon;David Butler
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sarah Ward;F. Memon;David Butler
雨水收集正日益成为可持续水管理工具包的一个组成部分。尽管有大量的研究模拟了在特定情况下利用雨水收集（RWH）系统的可行性，但在详细的性能实证评估方面，知识方面仍然存在重大差距。在包括英国在内的文献中，对家庭系统进行了有限程度的调查，但最近对大型非家庭系统的纵向研究很少。此外，很少有研究比较估计和实际性能。本文介绍了对英国一座办公楼内的非家用RWH系统进行纵向实证绩效评估的结果。此外，它还将实际性能与基于英国标准协会推荐的两种方法（中间（简单计算）和详细（基于模拟）方法）的估计性能进行比较。结果显示，在8个月的时间里，基于办公室的RWH系统的平均节水效率（节约的总水量）为87%，因为该系统的规模超出了实际占用水平。因此，使用较小尺寸的油箱可以达到类似的性能水平。据估计，实际的超大型储罐和较小的优化储罐的资本回收期分别为11年和6年。然而，需要更详细的维护和运行成本数据来进行全寿命成本分析。这些发现表明，办公室规模的RWH系统可能提供显著的水和成本节约。他们还强调了监测数据的重要性，并且需要过渡到使用详细方法（特别是在英国），以(a)尽量减少储罐的超大尺寸，(b)建立对RWH系统性能的信心。
Rainwater harvesting is increasingly becoming an integral part of the sustainable water management toolkit. Despite a plethora of studies modelling the feasibility of the utilisation of rainwater harvesting (RWH) systems in particular contexts, there remains a significant gap in knowledge in relation to detailed empirical assessments of performance. Domestic systems have been investigated to a limited degree in the literature, including in the UK, but there are few recent longitudinal studies of larger non-domestic systems. Additionally, there are few studies comparing estimated and actual performance. This paper presents the results of a longitudinal empirical performance assessment of a non-domestic RWH system located in an office building in the UK. Furthermore, it compares actual performance with the estimated performance based on two methods recommended by the British Standards Institute – the Intermediate (simple calculations) and Detailed (simulation-based) Approaches. Results highlight that the average measured water saving efficiency (amount of mains water saved) of the office-based RWH system was 87% across an 8-month period, due to the system being over-sized for the actual occupancy level. Consequently, a similar level of performance could have been achieved using a smaller-sized tank. Estimated cost savings resulted in capital payback periods of 11 and 6 years for the actual over-sized tank and the smaller optimised tank, respectively. However, more detailed cost data on maintenance and operation is required to perform whole life cost analyses. These findings indicate that office-scale RWH systems potentially offer significant water and cost savings. They also emphasise the importance of monitoring data and that a transition to the use of Detailed Approaches (particularly in the UK) is required to (a) minimise over-sizing of storage tanks and (b) build confidence in RWH system performance.