Journal of Environmental Management 152 (2015) 171e176

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Environmental Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jenvman

A pilot study to evaluate runoff quantity from green roofs

Ju Young Lee a, Min Jung Lee c, Mooyoung Han b, *
a
KIST(Korea Institute of Science and Technology)-Natural Products Research Center, Gangnueng, 210-340, South Korea
b
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Seoul National University, 599 Gwanak-ro, Gwanak-gu, Seoul, 151-744, South Korea
c
LIFTRC(LED-IT Fusion Technology Research Center), Daegu, South Korea

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The use of green roofs is gaining increased recognition in many countries as a solution that can be used to
Received 28 January 2013 improve environmental quality and reduce runoff quantity. To achieve these goals, pilot-scale green roof
Received in revised form assemblies have been constructed and operated in an urban setting. From a stormwater management
24 July 2014
perspective, green roofs are 42.8e60.8% effective in reducing runoff for 200 mm soil depth and 13.8
Accepted 17 January 2015
Available online 6 February 2015
e34.4% effective in reducing runoff for 150 mm soil depth. By using Spearman rank correlation analysis,
high rainfall intensity was shown to have a negative relationship with delayed occurrence time,
demonstrating that the soil media in green roofs do not efficiently retain rainwater. Increasing the
Keywords:
Green roofs
number of antecedent dry days can help to improve water retention capacity and delay occurrence time.
Environmental quality From the viewpoint of runoff water quality, green roofs are regarded as the best management practice by
Reducing runoff quantity filtration and adsorption through growth media (soil).
Spearman rank correlation © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Best management practice (BMP)

1. Introduction esthetic appeal (Vijayaraghavan et al., 2012; Emilsson et al., 2007).

Recently, green roofs have been receiving increased recognition
in many countries such as the USA, Japan, and European countries
(Vijayaraghavan et al., 2012; Berndtsson et al., 2008; Mentens et al.,
2006). Particularly, the installation of green roofs is now increasing
in Korea, as shown Fig. 1. Green roofs have several positive effects in
the urban setting. The most important effect is their ability to retain
and detain rainwater (Villarreal and Bengtsson, 2005). Green roofs
have been introduced for reducing urban stormwater runoff from
rooftops. The growth media in the green roof system typically re-
tains and detains rainwater. The depth of the growth media can
play an important role when used in an eco-friendly drainage
system by slowing and reducing runoff volume. Retaining rain-
water in soil reduces peak flow, which means that it prolongs the
time of concentration (Bengtsson et al., 2005). The green roof has
several benefits that include reduction of the urban heat island
effect (Wong et al., 2003) and reducing building energy consump-
tion by cooling roofs during the summer (Vijayaraghavan et al.,
2012; Del Barrio, 1998). Finally, green roofs improve urban biodi-
versity and create habitat for plants and animals in addition to their
Green roofs are mainly divided into two types. Intensive green roofs
are characterized by a thick layer of growth medium of more than
200 mm thickness, and extensive green roofs have a layer of less
than 200 mm thickness (Nagase and Dunnett, 2010). Most green
roof systems consist of a drainage layer, a root barrier, and a
waterproof membrane. Previous studies have focused on evapo-
rative and radiative heat transfer mechanisms of the different types
of roof assemblies (Ayata et al., 2011; Tabares-Velasco and Srebric,
2009). Many previous studies have considered the runoff quality
from green roofs (Ayata et al., 2011; Berndtsson et al., 2008, 2006).
These studies show that green roofs can filter and absorb nonpoint
pollutants (Berndtsson et al., 2008, 2006). However, in the long-
term they can contribute to the deterioration of runoff water
quality by releasing fertilizers regarded as pollutants (Berndtsson,
2010; Teemusk and Mander, 2007; Berndtsson et al., 2006).
Moran et al. (2003) found that green roof systems have advantages
and disadvantages. They are the best management practice for
achieving water retention and peak flow reduction as benefits;
however, they result in high nutrient concentrations. Thus, the
main purpose of the present paper is to evaluate the reduction of
peak flow, which prolongs the time of concentration during rainfall
events.

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: juyounglee@snu.ac.kr (J.Y. Lee), pepern@liftrc.re.kr (M.J. Lee),
myhan@snu.ac.kr (M. Han).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.01.028
0301-4797/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
172 J.Y. Lee et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 152 (2015) 171e176

Fig. 1. Extensive green roof (NAM-SAN annex, Seoul City Hall, Korea).

Table 1
Outline of each test batch.

Material Size (cm) Soil Vegetation Purpose Measure list Note

Width Length Height

A Acryl 70 70 e e e Rainfall sampling W$Qual, W$Quan Fig. 1(a)

B Concrete 100 100 3 e e Runoff sampling W$Qual, W$Quan Fig. 1(b)
C Green roof 100 100 15 Perlite Sedum Green roof outflow Fig. 1(c)
D 20

W$Qual: Water Quality; W$Quan: Water Quantity.

2. Methods and materials and water retention with soil depth. Further, Fig. 2(c) shows a cross
section of the test batches C and D. These test batches were
2.1. Data collection composed of layers of sedum, volcanic materials and soil with peat
moss (50 mm), perlite (100 mm for test C and 150 mm for test D),
The quantity and quality of runoff were evaluated for 4 types of and a drainage plate (40e50 mm). The soils were provided by the
pilot facilities that used acryl, concrete, and 2 different green roof producer (GreenInfra, Co., Ltd., South Korea). These porous media
models, and were established on the rooftop of Seoul National are widely employed in green roof systems. Total average diameter
University Building 35, Gwanak-Gu, Seoul, Korea (see Table 1). and density was 2.2 mm and 0.10e0.12, respectively, including 0.2-
There were 7 rainfall events in the test period from May 7, 2011 to mm perlite as growth type. For batches C and D, runoff quantity was
Sept 29, 2011. Total rainfall data and rainfall intensities were ob- measured with a 1-L graduated cylinder every hour.
tained for Seoul from the Seoul Meteorological Office (see Table 2).
A Norton Rainfall Simulator with 2 heads, model (DIK-600), which
2.2. Data and statistical analysis
was developed by USDA-ARS NSERL at Purdue University, West
Lafayette, Indiana, was used to simulate the 7 rainfall events.
For 7 rainfall events, the collected discrete samples were
For harvesting rainwater unaffected by the catchment area, the
analyzed in the laboratory at Seoul National University. The pH, EC,
catchment facility was made of acrylic material (Fig. 2(a)). The
and turbidity were measured by 550A model (Orion, USA) and
catchment installed in test batch B was made of concrete to
2100P model (HACH, USA). We performed a correlation analysis to
examine the effect of the catchment on runoff quality (Fig. 2(b)). In
determine the possible relationship among Qpk/Qth.pk, the delayed
Fig. 2(c), batches C (150 mm) and D (200 mm) were sampled at
occurrence time, and the antecedent dry day parameters. A
different soil depths to examine the relationship of runoff quantity
nonparametric Spearman rank correlation was performed to
compare relevant parameters, using SPSS v. 12.0 K software (SPSS,
Inc., USA).
Table 2
Rainfall characteristics.
3. Result and discussion
Rainfall events Rainfall duration Sustainment Total rainfall
(2003) time (mm)
Date. BeginningeEnd
3.1. Rainwater runoff quantity characteristic of green roof
E1 5.07. 04:00e5.07. 2h 3.5
06:00 There was no runoff from batches C and D in the tests with low
E2 5.31. 07:00e5.31. 17 h 7.5
24:00
rainfall in rainfall events E1 and E2. The data in Table 3 and Fig. 3
E3 6.22. 08:00e6.22. 14 h 16 provide the peak flow and time of occurrence of the peak flow
24:00 from the green roof for rainfalls E3eE7. The elapsed time means the
E4 7.03. 04:00e7.03. 15 h 115.0 time since the start of the rainfall. Theoretical runoff was calculated
19:00
on multiplying hourly rainfall by the catchment area (1 m2). This
E5 7.07. 04:00e7.07. 17 h 42.5
21:00 value was similar to the runoff from batch test B with the concrete
E6 8.30. 16:00e8.30. 3h 8.5 catchment, which was over 95%. It was considered that the error of
19:00 less than 5% was due to water being absorbed by the concrete or
E7 9.29. 05:00e9.29. 8h 22.5 lost to evaporation.
13:00
Theoretical and actual rainwater runoff in representative rainfall
 J.Y. Lee et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 152 (2015) 171e176 173

Fig. 2. Experimental Set-up. (a) Experiment A, (b) Experiment B, (c) Experiments C and D and cross section of test batches. (d) Norton rainfall simulator.

events had similar patterns. Theoretical rainwater runoff in rainfall soil can store. Soil porosity and texture have a significant effect for
event E3 had a peak flow (Qth.pk) of 8.55 L/h after an elapsed time of that. In many respects, the soil porosity and texture in the green
11 h (June 22 at 5 p.m.) as indicated by the data in Table 3 and Fig. 3. roof system serve an effective purpose by retaining water and
However, batch tests C and D in event E3 had 1.57 L/h peak flow delaying peak flow as it passes from the soil media to drainage
(Qpk) and 0.74 L/h after 14 h (June 22 at 8 p.m.), respectively. For system. The soil media act as a series of pipelines. These many
reducing peak flow and delaying occurrence time, batches C and D different pipes store water and control the infiltration rate at which
reduced peak flow (Qpk/Qth.pk) to 0.18 and 0.09, respectively, and
delayed occurrence time for 3 h. For rainfall event E5, theoretical
rainwater runoff had a peak flow of 15.2 L/h after an elapsed time Table 3
Runoff from a green roof.
14 h (July 7 at 5 p.m.) and actual rainwater runoff had a peak flow of
3.35 L/h after an elapsed time 17 h (July 7 at 5 p.m.) for batch test C Events Duration Theoretical max Method Runoff amount Ratio
and 1.98 L/h after an elapsed time 18 h (July 7 at 6 p.m.) for batch (time) runoff (L/hr)
test D. Also, the different soil depth influenced the delay of the peak E3 07:00 Tpeak ¼ 11 h C Tpeak ¼ 14 h Qpk.C/
flow time. The peak flow reduction was 0.22 for the C test and 0.13 e24:00 (6.22.17:00) Qpeak ¼ 1.57 L/h Qth.pk ¼ 0.18
Qpeak ¼ 8.55 L/h D Tpeak ¼ 14 h Qpk.C/
for the D test. For event E6, the theoretical runoff had peak flow of
Qpeak ¼ 0.74 L/h Qth.pk ¼ 0.09
6.37 L/h after an elapsed time 2 h (August 30 at 5 p.m.). Batch tests C E5 04:00 Tpeak ¼ 14 h C Tpeak ¼ 17 h Qpk.C/
and D had the peak flows of 1.32 L/h and 1.08 L/h, respectively, after e21:00 (7.07.17:00) Qpeak ¼ 3.35 L/h Qth.pk ¼ 0.22
4 h (August 30 at 7 p.m.). The peak flow was reduced to 0.21 in the C Qpeak ¼ 15.2 L/h D Tpeak ¼ 18 h Qpk.C/
test and 0.17 in the D test with a 2-h delay in the occurrence time. Qpeak ¼ 1.98 L/h Qth.pk ¼ 0.13
E6 16:00 Tpeak ¼ 2 h C Tpeak ¼ 4 h Qpk.C/
Event E7 had a peak flow of 1.93 L/h after an elapsed time 6 h in the
e19:00 (8.30.17:00) Qpeak ¼ 1.32 L/h Qth.pk ¼ 0.21
C test and 1.34 L/h after an elapsed time 7 h in the D test after a Qpeak ¼ 6.37 L/h D Tpeak ¼ 4 h Qpk.C/
rainfall event. The peak flow was reduced to 0.29 in the C test and Qpeak ¼ 1.08 L/h Qth.pk ¼ 0.17
0.20 in the D test. Obviously, the soil depth is an important factor E7 05:00 Tpeak ¼ 4 h C Tpeak ¼ 6 h Qpk.C/
for reducing peak flow in the green roof system. Reducing peak e13:00 (9.29.08:00) Qpeak ¼ 1.93 L/h Qth.pk ¼ 0.29
Qpeak ¼ 6.65 L/h D Tpeak ¼ 7 h Qpk.C/
flow in the green roof system indicates the amount of water that a Qpeak ¼ 1.34 L/h Qth.pk ¼ 0.20
174 J.Y. Lee et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 152 (2015) 171e176

Fig. 3. Theoretical rainwater runoff quantity and comparison with runoff quantity of test batches C and D.

Table 5
flows through the soil media. However, the delayed occurrence Runoff reduction effect by green roof.
time was not effective in the C and D tests, because perlite has high
Rainfall Rainfall Test Total Reduction of Ratio of
permeability and prevents soil compaction. In addition, the event characteristic runoff [L] runoff reduction (%)
experimental soil depth conditions (i.e., 100 mm in C and 150 mm
E3 Total rainfall: C 9.97 5.23 34.4
in D) were limited for identification of the delayed occurrence time. 16 mm
The data in Table 4 show that the correlation among the Qpk/Qth.pk, Theoretical runoff: D 5.96 9.24 60.8
the delayed occurrence time, and the antecedent dry day (ADD) had 15.2 L
a significant relationship through correlation coefficient (g). Duration of
Rainfall: 14 h
The data in Table 4 show that delayed occurrence time and ADD
E5 Total rainfall: C 29.77 10.63 26.3
had a significantly positive value of 0.855 (p < 0.01). The ADD had a 42.5 mm
stronger relationship with the delayed occurrence time (g ¼ 0.855, Theoretical runoff: D 23.12 17.28 42.8
p < 0.01). The ADD is an important factor for water retaining 40.4 L
Duration of
Rainfall: 17 h
E6 Total rainfall: C 6.98 1.12 13.8
Table 4 8.5 mm
Spearman correlation coefficients among the Qpk/Qth.pk, the delayed occurrence Theoretical runoff: D 4.49 3.61 44.6
time, and the antecedent dry days (ADD) (4 events). 8.1 L
Duration of
Qpk/ Delayed occurrence Antecedent dry
Rainfall: 3 h
Qth.pk time days
E7 Total rainfall: C 14.16 7.24 33.8
Qpk/Qth.pk 1.00 0.583 0.295 22.5 mm
Delayed occurrence 0.583 1.00 0.855** Theoretical runoff: D 11.25 10.15 47.4
time 21.4 L
Antecedent dry days 0.295 0.855** 1.00 Duration of
Rainfall: 8 h
Qactual peak flow(Qpk)/Qtheoretical peak flow (Qth.pk); *p < 0.05; **
p < 0.01.
 J.Y. Lee et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 152 (2015) 171e176
Fig. 4. Cumulative runoff quantity curve.
capacity. Increasing ADD represents the possibility for improving
water retaining capacity. Qpk/Qth.pk has a negative relationship to
the delayed occurrence time (g ¼ 0.583) and ADD (g ¼ 0.583). A
high Qpk/Qth.pk means that the actual peak flow approaches the
theoretical peak flow. Interestingly, high rainfall intensity has a
negative relationship with the delayed occurrence time, demon-
strating that the soil media in an extensive green roof do not effi-
ciently retain rainwater, whereas the ADD has a weak negative
relationship with Qpk/Qth.pk. The water holding capacity is
decreased in high Qpk/Qth.pk level. That means the flood peak time is
not effectively extended by the extensive green roof. The data in
Table 5 and Fig. 4 provide the runoff reduction efficiency and the
cumulative runoff quantity for 4 rainfall events (E3, E5, E6, and E7).
In E3 the ratios of reduction were 34.4% in batch C and 60.8% in
batch D. In E5, the ratios of reduction were 26.3% in C and 42.8% in
D. In E6 the ratios of reduction were 13.8% and 44.6% in C and D,
respectively. In E7, the ratios of reduction were 33.8% and 47.4%,
respectively. In batches C and D, the average ratios of runoff
reduction were about 27% and 49%, respectively. Judging by that,
the runoff reduction effect was improved by increasing soil depth.
The soil depth was an important factor for green roof design. As the
soil depth increased, the runoff quantity decreased, and runoff time
increased. However, the building roof could not carry the weight of
175
the deeper soil.
4. Summary and conclusion
This research was performed to investigate the effects of
reducing runoff through an extensive green roof based on 4 types of
rainfall events using a rainfall simulator.
1) The extensive green roof system was analyzed, and it was found
that it achieved a 13.8e60.8% reduction in runoff for the total
rainfall in the test period by retention and the evapotranspira-
tion effect from the soil layer and vegetation layer. Particularly,
there was a 42.8e60.8% reduction in runoff with 200 mm soil
depth and a 13.8e34.4% reduction in runoff with 150 mm soil
depth.
2) In a Spearman rank correlation analysis, the delayed occurrence
time and antecedent dry day (ADD) had a significantly positive
value. Increasing ADD represents the possibility for improving
water retention capacity and delayed occurrence time. Inter-
estingly, high rainfall intensity had a negative relationship with
delayed occurrence time, demonstrating that the soil media in
an extensive green roof do not efficiently retain rainwater,
whereas the ADD has a weak negative relationship with Qpk/
176 J.Y. Lee et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 152 (2015) 171e176
Qth.pk. A high Qpk/Qth.pk value means that the water-holding
capacity was low, demonstrating that a high Qpk/Qth.pk value
in an extensive green roof did not effectively extend the flood
peak time.
In many respects, the green roof systems serve a very effective
purpose by runoff control. The green roof system acts as both
retaining water for reducing peak flow. For retaining water, the soil
texture and porosity act as a series of pipelines. These many
different pipes store water and control the flow rate at which water
flows through the soil media. In addition, this study showed that
green roofs are highly effective for small-magnitude rainfall events.
Acknowledgments
This research was funded by KIST (Korea Institute of Science and
Technology)-Natural Products Research Center (#2Z04211
(2Z04371) and 2Z04223 (2Z04383)). The authors would like to
thank members for their help and involvement in the completion of
the project.
References
Ayata, T., Tabares-Velasco, P.C., Srebric, J., 2011. An investigation of sensible heat
fluxes at a green roof in a laboratory setup. Build. Environ. 46, 1851e1861.
Bengtsson, L., Grahn, L., Olsson, J., 2005. Hydrological function of a thin extensive
green roof in southern Sweden. Nord. Hydrol. 36, 259e268.
Berndtsson, J.C., 2010. Green roof performance towards management of runoff
water quantity and quality: a review. Ecol. Eng. 36, 351e360.
Berndtsson, J.C., Bengtsson, L., Jinno, K., 2008. First flush effect from vegetated roofs
during simulated rain events. Hydrol. Res. 39, 171e179.
Berndtsson, J.C., Emilsson, T., Bengtsson, L., 2006. The influence of extensive
vegetated roofs on runoff water quality. Sci. Total Environ. 355, 369e380.
Del Barrio, E.P., 1998. Analysis of green roofs cooling potential in buildings. Energy
Build. 27, 179e193.
Emilsson, T., Berndtsson, J.C., Mattsson, J.E., Rolf, K., 2007. Effect of using conven-
tional and controlled release fertiliser on nutrient runoff from various vegetated
roof systems. Ecol. Eng. 29, 260e271.
Mentens, J., Raes, D., Hermy, M., 2006. Green roofs as a tool for solving the rainwater
runoff problem in the urbanized 21st century. Landsc. Urban Plan. 77, 217e226.
Moran, A., Hunt, B., Jennings, G., 2003. A north Carolina field study to evaluate
green-roof runoff quantity, runoff quality, and plant growth. ASCE Conf. Proc.
118, 335.
Nagase, A., Dunnett, N., 2010. Drought tolerance in different vegetation types for
extensive green roofs: effects of watering and diversity. Landsc. Urban Plan. 97,
318e327.
Tabares-Velasco, P.C., Srebric, J., 2009. The role of plants in the reduction of heat flux
through green roofs: laboratory experiments. ASHRAE Trans. 2009, 115.
Teemusk, A., Mander, U., 2007. Rainwater runoff quantity and quality performance
from a green roof: the effects of short term rain events. Ecol. Eng. 30, 271e277.
Vijayaraghavan, K., Joshi, U.M., Balasubramanian, R., 2012. A field study to evaluate
runoff quality from green roofs. Water Res. 46, 1337e1345.
Villarreal, E.L., Bengtsson, L., 2005. Response of a Sedum green roof to individual
rain events. Ecol. Eng. 25, 1e7.
Wong, N.H., Chen, Y., Ong, C.L., Sia, A., 2003. Investigation of thermal benefits of
rooftop garden in the tropical environment. Build. Environ. 38, 261e270.