International Journal of Sustainable Engineering

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsue20

Pollutant treatment efficiencies through rainwater

tank, recycled foamed glass and geofabrics

Monzur Alam Imteaz, Arul Arulrajah & Abdullah Gokhan Yilmaz

To cite this article: Monzur Alam Imteaz, Arul Arulrajah & Abdullah Gokhan Yilmaz
(2021) Pollutant treatment efficiencies through rainwater tank, recycled foamed glass
and geofabrics, International Journal of Sustainable Engineering, 14:5, 963-969, DOI:
10.1080/19397038.2020.1838660

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/19397038.2020.1838660

Published online: 29 Oct 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 171

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tsue20
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE ENGINEERING
2021, VOL. 14, NO. 5, 963–969
https://doi.org/10.1080/19397038.2020.1838660

Pollutant treatment efficiencies through rainwater tank, recycled foamed glass and
geofabrics
Monzur Alam Imteaza, Arul Arulrajah a
and Abdullah Gokhan Yilmazb
a
Department of Civil and Construction Engineering, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia; bSchool of Engineering and
Mathematical Sciences, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

This study investigated the effectiveness of removing pollutants from roof-collected rainwater through Received 30 October 2019
rainwater tank, filtration using recycled foam glass and geofabrics using series of laboratory experiments. Accepted 12 October 2020
It is found that rainwater tank itself helps to remove some pollutants, especially total suspended solids KEYWORDS
(TSS). To test the efficiency of recycled foam glass as filter material, the material was used to filter Foam glass; filtration;
rainwater collected from roof. It is found that through such filtration most of the pollutants’ concentra­ rainwater; pollutants
tions in the rainwater drop by about 50%. Also, removal efficiency of a 30 cm filter media is about double
compared to a filter media of 10 cm height. However, concentrations of Suspended Solids, Copper and
Lead in the filtered samples were higher than the concentrations in the raw sample, which might be due
to leaching of pollutants from filter media as it is found that higher the filter depth, higher the pollutants
concentrations in the filtrate. To overcome these pollutants’ leaching, similar experiments conducted
with geotextile layer at the bottom of the filter material revealed that through the use of geotextile layer
with 30 cm filter media, significant reductions of pollutants are achievable including an 87% removal in
number of Faecal Coliforms.

1. Introduction Filtration is a very common and established practice that

has been widely used for the separation of solids from fluids. In
Rainwater tank has been in use for centuries, mainly for
addition to trapping relatively larger size particles through
remote communities where other suitable source of water is
straining actions, some smaller sized particles are also being
scarce. However, with the ever-increasing demands of water
trapped through surface adsorption. Filtration was originally
and scarcity of potable water, contemporary urban authori­
introduced aiming at physical separation of solids/particles.
ties are also recommending installing rainwater tanks, mainly
However, later it was found that some filter media stimulates
to reduce potable water demand. Due to potential presence of
some biological processes, causing additional biological/che­
contaminants in the roof-collected rainwater, water from
mical treatments especially in water/sewage treatment in
rainwater tanks are not suitable for potable purposes. In
which undesirable constituents are removed by absorption
urban areas, it is mainly used for garden irrigation and toilet
into a biological film grown on the filter medium. Even in
flushing. However, to increase the uses of rainwater and as
modern treatment plants, filtration is a very fundamental step
such to further reduce the demand of potable water, roof-
of different pollutants’ treatments. After continuous and
collected rainwater can be used for higher level uses (i.e.
repeated use of such filter media, it is likely that the filter
shower and laundry) after proper treatment(s). Several
media will get clogged through continuous accumulations of
researchers reported high level removals of chemical
trapped particles. The common practice to remove this clog­
(Reyneke et al. 2020) and microbial (Waso et al. 2020;
ging is the back-washing of filter media, which causes the filter
Reyneke et al. 2020) contaminants through solar disinfection
media to expand and can sometime destabilise the system.
and solar photocatalysis techniques. Chys et al. (2013)
Nonetheless, even after traditional back-washing, such filtra­
reported a good removal of mono- and poly-aromatic hydro­
tion systems efficiency (regarding achievable flow rate) usually
carbons (MAH and PAH) and polychlorinated biphenyls
do not revert to its original state, i.e. through back-washing,
(PCB) through coagulation/flocculation followed by sand
systems flow efficiency can be improved, however cannot be
filtration. Also, they have further achieved more than 80%
recovered to its original level. When backwashing efficiency
removals of suspended solids and heavy metals through
declines to a very low level, the traditional practice is to replace
a coupled sand- and activated carbon filtration. Neto et al.
the filter media. As such, an optimum option can be to avoid
(2012) through a case study in Brazil reported that treatment
repeated back-washing and replace the filter media more often,
(through slow sand filtration followed by chlorination) of
when suitable filter media is easily available. To achieve this,
rainwater from airport buildings for non-potable purposes
different types of innovative filter materials needs to be
is 60% cheaper.
explored and investigated for their suitability. This paper

CONTACT Monzur Alam Imteaz mimteaz@swin.edu.au Department of Civil and Construction Engineering, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne,
Australia
© 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
964 M. A. IMTEAZ ET AL.
presents investigation of an innovative material for its suit­
ability as filter material.
To achieve a sustainable world through reducing our
exceedingly high ecological footprint, one of the contempor­
ary worldwide focuses is minimising the use of virgin mate­
rial through increasing use of recycled material. In recent
years, several researchers have investigated reuse potentials
of different recycled materials, i.e. Rahman et al. (2015) with
recycled demolition materials; Kua et al. (2019) with spent
coffee grounds; Neramitkornburi et al. (2015) with fly ash;
Horpibulsuk et al. (2014) with calcium carbide residue and
Phetchuay et al. (2014) with geopolymers. As for recycled
bottle making, with the smaller glass particles (less than
10 mm) collected through municipal waste collections, it is
difficult to colour sort those particles using existing recycling
technologies, researchers have been investigating other uses
of such smaller glass particles. For such non-recyclable glass
particles, using them for making recycled foam glass is an
excellent option. Foamed glass has been developed particu­
larly for usage in various lightweight structural and insulating
applications (Bumanis et al. 2013; Guo et al. 2013;
Pawanawichian et al. 2013; Ponsot and Bernardo 2013;
Wang et al. 2013b; Wu et al. 2013). Also, other researchers
investigated the development of foamed materials with the
usage of waste materials in engineering applications (Jana,
Fierro, and Celzard 2013; Wang, Sha, and Jin 2013a). In some
countries where alternate freezing and thawing causes foot­
path/bicycle path to crack, use of such foamed glass is recom­
mended due to its insulating property (www.foamit.fi).
However, the usage of recycled glass to manufacture foamed
glass is still insufficient, while having significant potential for
further production. Fernandes, Tulyaganov, and Ferreira
(2009) and Ponsot and Bernardo (2013) investigated use of
recycled foam glass for the production of ceramics. Arulrajah
et al. (2015), Alim (2009) and Fotiadou (2007) performed
extensive suite of engineering tests on foamed recycled glass
and reported its engineering properties regarding its suitabil­
ity as lightweight fill material in civil engineering applica­
tions. All the above-mentioned studies focused only on
engineering (i.e. strength) properties and reuse option of
foam glass in engineering structures. Arulrajah et al. (2015)
investigated environmental properties of foam glass in lim­
ited scale and reported that the total concentrations (TC) of
heavy metals found in recycled foamed glass are lower than
the allowable TC values for soil, waste materials and backfill
materials defined by the EPA Victoria. None of the above-
mentioned studies investigated the use of such material for
filtration.
Angrill et al. (2017) through analysing harvested rainwater
in Spain presented that harvested rainwater is acceptable
regarding physicochemical quality, however not acceptable in
regard to presence of microorganisms. Similar study by Lee
et al. (2017) in Vietnam reported that in general harvested
rainwater met the drinking standard quality, except micro-
organisms (Coliform and Escherichia coli), however these
microorganisms were removed through ultraviolet (UV) ster­
ilisation. However, application of ultraviolet technique is not
always economic or feasible. Aljerf, L. (2018) investigated
harvested rainwater quality in Damascus (Syria) and reported
that through filtration using recycled glass and crushed foam
glass, the harvested rainwater can be treated for heavy metals
as well as sulphate and nitrate to the World Health
Organisation’s drinkable standard.
Recycled foam glass is likely to have the potential to be used
for water treatment through filtration due to presence of
numerous pores and very high-water absorption capacity as
reported by Arulrajah et al. (2015). Such enormous pores
render large surface area, which is conducive as surface adsor­
bent for particles and/or pollutants. It is to be noted that in the
contemporary filtration process, activated carbon (which has
got similar physical property) is increasingly being used to
achieve higher level of filtration efficiency (Ratnoji and Singh
2014). In addition to filtration, Geofabrics can also trap some
sediments, as well as pollutants. With the aim of making roof
collected rainwater more suitable for domestic purposes, sev­
eral experimental tests were conducted to assess the effective­
ness of rainwater tank itself, recycled foamed glass and
geofabrics as filter materials in removing some selective
pollutants.
2. Materials and methods
For the roof-collected rainwater, a house having a rainwater
tank connected with the house roof in north Melbourne was
selected. To investigate the effectiveness of rainwater tanks in
removing pollutants, the rainwater was collected directly from
the roof (i.e. bypassing the rainwater tank), as well as from the
tank after three days of settlement.
The prime focus of this study is to investigate the effective­
ness of an innovative material, foamed recycled glass as filter
material. The foamed glass for this research was obtained from
a recycling industry in Melbourne, Australia. Figure 1 shows
the photo of recycled foamed glass aggregates after production,
details of which can be found from Misapor (2014). From the
figure it is clear that the glass aggregates are comprised of
vesicular, due to the presence of air that forms small voids
during the production process. The process of making foam
glass is that collected municipal waste glass (obtained from
glass recycler industry site) is first ground and then fired with
mineral additives in a furnace at temperatures up to 950°C.
The recycled glass foams and is then removed from the fur­
nace, which then cools down quickly forming low weight
foamed glass aggregates of up to 40 mm in size. The foamed
material comprises 98% ground recycled glass and 2% mineral
additives. Some physical properties of the foam glass sample
are presented in Table 1, most of which were reported by
Arulrajah et al. (2015). In addition, the hydraulic conductivity
was measured through the constant head permeability test.
Figure 2 shows the photo of custom made experimental
setup used for the filtration experiments. Collected foam
glass aggregates were placed in the experimental setup at
different depths (10 cm and 30 cm) and contaminated water
was sprinkled from the top of the cylinder. The contaminated
water (i.e. roof-collected rainwater) was collected in 5 L con­
tainers, which were directly connected with the downpipe
draining from a house roof during a rain event. The collected
rainwater sample was mixed within the container through
rigorous shaking before it was sprinkled on the filter setup.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE ENGINEERING 965

Figure 1. Foamed recycled glass after production.

Table 1. Physical properties of foam glass sample.

Parameter Value (EP026SP). Faecal Coliforms were measured using
D10 (mm) 0.13 Membrane Filtration as per US EPA (2010) Method 1103.1.
D30 (mm) 1.2 Total Phosphorus was measured as Phosphate by Discrete
D50 (mm) 18.7
D60 (mm) 20.6
Analyser (EK067G). Suspended solids were measured using
Cu (Coefficient of Uniformity) 158 standard method, EA025. For the metals, the test methods
Cc (Coefficient of Curvature) 0.53 used were recommended by the Chemical Abstracts Services,
Particle density (kg/m3) – coarse fraction 462.8
fraction (kg/m3)
CAS (https://www.cas.org/), a division of the American
Particle density (kg/m3) – fine fraction 1508 Chemical Society. Names of the tested metals along with
Minimum dry density (kg/m3) 170 corresponding testing methods as identified by CAS numbers
(kg/m3)
Maximum dry density (kg/m3) 290
are tabulated in Table 2. To explore the effect of filter depth,
Water absorption (%) – coarse fraction 60 two different depths (10 cm and 30 cm) of foam glass columns
Water absorption (%) – fine fraction 0.3 were used. The geotextile used in this study is ‘Bidim
California Bearing Ratio, CBR (%) 9–12
LA Abrasion Loss (%) 94
Nonwoven Geotextile’ from Geofabrics Pty. Ltd. (http://
Hydraulic conductivity (m/s) 6.5 × 10−7 www.geofabrics.com.au/). The pore size and hydraulic con­
ductivity, and porosity of the geotextile are 80 μm and
1.2 mm/s respectively. Details of chemical results are presented
A retention time of 15 minutes was used during filtration in the following section.
process. Filtered water was collected from the bottom of the
cylinder through the valve at the end of conical shaped outlet
3. Results and discussions
at the bottom shown in the Figure 1. Filtrate samples were
collected in oven-dried glass bottles supplied by the commer­ Table 3 shows the typical pollutants present in the rainwater
cial laboratory, who performed all the chemical testing (men­ samples collected directly from the roof and from the rain­
tioned below). The average flowrate of the filtrate from the water tank after 3 days’ settlement period. From the table it is
bottom of the experimental setup was 1.80 cm3/min. Three clear that after settlement/sedimentation of 3 days, concentra­
samples of treated water were collected, and the results pre­ tions of COD, Suspended Solids and Faecal Coliforms signifi­
sented are the average of three measurements. cantly drop down; concentration of Faecal Coliform dropped
Outflow samples were collected after the filtrations with and down to zero and concentration of Suspended Solids reduced
without geofabrics. Inflow and outflow rainwater samples by more than 50%, while concentration of COD dropped from
(with filtration having geofabrics and without geofabrics, 16.2 mg/L to <10 mg/L (detection limit). In addition, some
after sedimentation within the tank without filtration) were other pollutants’ including few heavy metals’ concentrations
tested through state-of-the art environmental laboratory, ALS were also dropped down. After 3 days sedimentation, coarse
Global (www.alsglobal.com) for measuring different pollu­ sediments and debris are likely to settle at the bottom of the
tants’ concentrations. For this study, commonly found pollu­ tank and coliforms are likely to die in course of time with lack
tants in the harvested rainwater in Australia such as Chemical of food (organic matter). As some pollutants (Phosphorus and
Oxygen Demand (COD), Faecal Coliforms, Total Phosphorus, heavy metals) are attached with the sediments, sedimentation
Suspended Solids and heavy metals (Chromium, Copper, process is likely to remove such pollutants indirectly through
Lead, Nickel, Selenium, Zinc and Mercury) were measured. removing sediments. In this particular case concentrations of
COD was measured using spectrophotometric method Phosphorus, Copper, Lead and Zinc were dropped. However,
966 M. A. IMTEAZ ET AL.

Figure 2. Apparatus setup with foamed glass sample.

Table 2. Test methods used for chemical testing. relative percent differences among three samples for all the
Parameter Test Method tested parameters were less than 20%. Table 4 also shows the
Chromium CAS 7440–47-3 US EPA standard for drinking water (US EPA 1999). From the
Copper CAS 7440–50-8
Lead CAS 7439–92-1
table it is evident that Chromium, Nickel, Selenium and
Nickel CAS 7440–02-0 Recoverable Mercury concentrations were very low (even
Selenium CAS 7782–49-2 lower than detectable limits) in inflow sample as well as filtered
Zinc CAS 7440–66-6
Recoverable Mercury CAS 7439–97-6
samples. Other contaminants such as Zinc, Total Phosphorus,
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) and Faecal Coliforms were
found present in the inflow sample; and through filtration
process concentrations of these pollutants dropped down.
in reality it may not be achievable to maintain a 3 days sedi­ Also, as expected it is found that with the higher depth of filter
mentation period, before the use of stored rainwater in the media, higher level of treatments was achieved, i.e. pollutants
tank and in some cases, it will be even used immediately removals were higher for the filter media with 30 cm depth.
during/after collection. As such, treatment only through such Among the above-mentioned pollutants which were detectable
sedimentation may not be safe for higher level uses of such after filtration, it is found that a 30 cm high filter column
stored rainwater. As such further treatment process is achieved almost double the removal efficiencies achieved
required. through a 10 cm filter column. Imteaz et al. (2017) through
Table 4 shows pollutants’ measurement results from inflow similar experiments using wood chips as filter media reported
sample (roof collected rainwater), filtered outflow samples that variations of removal efficiencies linearly vary with the
from 10 cm depth filter and 30 cm depth filter. As mentioned height of the filter column; however the rates of the variations
earlier three samples from each test were collected and the are different for different pollutants. It is to be noted that
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE ENGINEERING 967

Table 3. Pollutants’ concentrations in rainwater samples with and without sedimentation.

Parameter Lower detection limit Unit Sample with sedimentation Sample without sedimentation
Suspended Solids
Suspended Solids (SS) 5 mg/L <5 10 (σ = 0.36)
Total Metals
Chromium 0.001 mg/L <0.001 <0.001
Copper 0.001 mg/L 0.004 (σ = 0.001) 0.006 (σ = 0.001)
Lead 0.001 mg/L <0.001 0.001 (σ = 0.0002)
Nickel 0.001 mg/L <0.001 <0.001
Selenium 0.01 mg/L <0.01 <0.01
Zinc 0.005 mg/L 0.060 (σ = 0.004) 0.090 (σ = 0.002)
Total Recoverable Mercury
Mercury 0.0001 mg/L <0.0001 <0.0001
Total Phosphorus as P
Total Phosphorus as P 0.01 mg/L 0.03 (σ = 0.002) 0.04 (σ = 0.004)
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen Demand 10 mg/L <10 16.2 (σ = 0.7)
E. coli and Faecal Coliforms
Faecal Coliforms 1 Orgs/100 mL 0 (σ = 0.0) 30 (σ = 5.29)

except Faecal Coliforms and Suspended Solids, all other pollu­
tants’ concentrations both in inflow and outflow samples are
lower than the US EPA limits for drinking water. Suspended
Solids do not pose any potential health effect/hazard, however
drinking water should be free from Suspended Solids from
consumers’ satisfaction point of view. Regarding Faecal
Coliforms, where continuous regular monitoring programme
exists, US EPA states that only 5% samples may contain pre­
sence of these bacteria. For this case, this is not a part of regular
monitoring, rather a random sample test. In such situation,
Australian Standard (NHMRC 1996) states that there should
be no trace of Faecal Coliform. The above findings conform
with the earlier findings, who reported that through filtration
pollutants’ concentrations can be alleviated (Aljerf, L., 2018),
however only filtration is not enough to eliminate the faecal
coliform.
Contrary to the expectation, concentrations of few pollu­
tants (Suspended Solids, Copper and Lead) in the filtered
samples were higher than the concentrations in the inflow
sample. Potential reason for these higher concentrations is
that these pollutants were leached from the foam glass itself.
Arulrajah et al. (2015) reported presence of higher concentra­
tions of Lead and Copper in the recycled foam glass samples.
Also, as the recycled foam glass sample aggregates’ bonding is
not very strong, i.e. particles likely to break apart under small
force/disturbance, some detached particles under the water
flow caused to increase the suspended solid concentrations in
the outflow sample. Inherent Lead and Copper present in the
foam glass particles, which were carried with the detached
particles caused to increase the concentrations of Lead and
Copper in the filtrate sample.
To prevent such leached-out pollutants in the filtered water,
it is proposed to provide thick geotextile fabric layer at the
bottom of the filter media, i.e. before the outlet valve. Another
set of experiments were conducted to investigate the effective­
ness of geotextile fabric layer for those particular pollutants, i.e.
Suspended Solids, Copper, Lead and Faecal Coliforms. Last
column of Table 4 presents concentrations of these pollutants

Table 4. Pollutants’ concentrations in inflow and filtered water samples.

Outflow Outflow Outflow
Parameter Lower detection limit Inflow (10 cm filter) (30 cm filter) with geotextile layer US EPA limit#
Suspended Solids (mg/L) 5 10 71 107 <5 -
(σ = 2.65) (σ = 3.61)
Total Phosphorus as P (mg/L) 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.01 - -
(σ =.005) (σ = 0)
Chemical Oxygen Demand (mg/L) 10 16.2 12.5 <10 - -
(σ =.902)
Faecal Coliforms (Orgs/100 mL) 1 30 16 7 4 5%*
(σ = 0.72) (σ = 0.36) (σ = 0.529)
Chromium (mg/L) 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 - 0.1
Copper (mg/L) 0.001 0.006 0.023 0.047 0.002 1.3
(σ =.001) (σ =.002) (σ = 0.001)
Lead (mg/L) 0.001 0.001 0.003 0.005 <0.001 0.015
(σ =.001) (σ =.001)
Nickel (mg/L) 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 - -
Selenium 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 - 0.05
Zinc (mg/L) 0.005 0.090 0.087 0.040 - 5.0
(σ =.005) (σ =.003)
Recoverable Mercury (mg/L) 0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 - 0.002
#
US EPA (1999)
*For a continuous and regular monitoring program US EPA recommends that less than 5% of the tested samples may contain Faecal Coliforms
968 M. A. IMTEAZ ET AL.
in filtered water with 30 cm depth of filter material supported
by geotextile fabric. From the table it is clear that pollutants’
concentrations dropped down significantly with the use of
geotextile fabric. Concentrations of Suspended Solids and
Lead were removed below their individual detection levels.
The concentration of Copper in the filtrate was still detectable,
however on average removed by almost 67% from inflow
samples. Geotextile fabric provided at the bottom acted as an
effective filter media for the suspended solids as well as for the
heavy metals (Lead and Copper). Vieira, Weeber, and Ghisi
(2013) used similar geofabric (BIDIM) with an upward flow
filtration to treat rainwater and achieved removals of sus­
pended solids in the range of 71–79%. In regard to Faecal
Coliforms, there were still traces of this microorganism in
the filtrate, which are not expected to be removed only through
physical treatment. Findings from Kim et al. (2016) conforms
with this. The usual practice to kill pathogens or such bacteria
is to apply disinfectant (i.e. Chlorine), which requires addi­
tional cautiousness and expertise as excess use of such disin­
fectant may cause undesirable taste and/or disease if consumed
for long time.
It is to be noted here that like other filter material, foam
glass is also expected to be getting clogged after prolonged use
and common practice for removing such clogging is to apply
backwashing, efficiency of which degrades day by day. Imteaz,
Khan, and Ahsan (2019) presented detailed studies on predict­
ing clogging and backwashing efficiencies of sand-based filters
for removing arsenic. For the present study, it was out of
scopes to study long-term clogging/backwashing behaviour
of foam glass filter. However, it is recommended to be a part
of future study.
4. Conclusions
To increase the uses of roof-collected rainwater, as well as
recycled material such as ‘foam glass’, this study investigated
the effectiveness of treating rainwater through sedimentation
within the tank, filtration with recycled foam glass and geo­
fabrics. This is a novel study exploring use of an innovative
material for filtration. Before investigating such material for
commercial purposes, a common domestic purpose was
selected, and filtration capability of such material was investi­
gated for some commonly found contaminants. From the
presented results it is clear that rainwater tank itself does
some treatment through sedimentation, especially for SS,
COD and Faecal Coliforms. It also facilitates removing some
heavy metals and phosphorus from the stored rainwater.
Regarding filtration through ‘foam glass’, it is found that it
acted as an effective filter media and almost all the pollutants’
concentrations were lowered through filtration, except for
Suspended Solids, Copper and Lead, for which it was found
that concentrations of these pollutants in the filtered samples
were higher than the concentrations in the inflow sample.
Reason for these higher concentrations is that these pollutants
were leached from the foam glass itself. However, further
investigation proved that through the use of geotextile, such
leaching can be significantly trapped and rainwater can be
treated to a very good standard, except Faecal Coliform. To
eliminate Faecal Coliform a chemical treatment using suitable
disinfectant will be required. Through such higher-level treat­
ment rainwater can be converted to potable water standard. In
brief, rainwater retained in the tank for 3 days found to be the
best quality among all the tested treatment options.
The second-best treatment was achieved through higher
depth filter media supported by geotextile layer at the bottom.
It is found that depth of filter media has significant effect on
the pollutants’ removal efficiencies. However, to derive
a generalised relationship between filter media depth and
removal efficiency, tests should be conducted with more dif­
ferent depths of filter media. Also, for the current research
being a pilot study, only domestic roof-collected rainwater was
tested. For a wider use of this material, future study should
look in to the effectiveness of such material in treating higher-
level contaminants present in different industrial wastes.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes on contributors
Dr Monzur Alam Imteaz is an Associate Professor in the Department of
Civil & Construction Engineering at Swinburne University of
Technology, Melbourne. He obtained his Ph.D. in 1997 from Saitama
University, Japan. Later he has completed his post-doctoral research at
The University of Queensland, Brisbane. He has been actively involved
with various researches on sustainability, water recycling, developing
decision support tools and seasonal rainfall forecasting. Dr Imteaz is the
author of the book, “Urban Water Resources”. He is serving as editorial
board member for the international journals, “Resources, Conservation &
Recycling”, “Journal of Hydroinformatics”, “Hydrology”, “World
Environment” and “Journal of Water Resource and Hydraulic
Engineering”.
Prof. Arul Arulrajah is the Professor of Geotechnical Engineering at
Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia. He is cur­
rently involved in research topics such as recycled materials in geotech­
nical applications, geotechnics of pavements and ground improvement.
Arulrajah joined Swinburne in 2006 after 14 years of prior industry
experience in Australia, Singapore and Malaysia (1992-2006) in the
design, site implementation and project management of geotechnical
engineering and civil engineering infrastructure projects. Arulrajah is a
Fellow of the Institute of Engineers Australia (FIEAust) and a Chartered
Professional Engineer (CPEng).
Dr Abdullah Gokhan Yilmaz is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of
Engineering at La Trobe University. Prior to joining La Trobe University,
he worked as an Assistant Professor at the University of Sharjah and the
American University of Sharjah, Research Fellow at Victoria University
and Lecturer at Heriot-Watt University. Dr Yilmaz has over 40 publica­
tions in prestigious journals and several conference papers. His research
interests are climate change, hydrological modeling, flood and drought
analysis, renewable energy, water quality modeling, and desalination
systems.
ORCID
Arul Arulrajah http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1512-9803
References
Alim, D. M. A. 2009. “Production and Characterization of Form Glass
from Container Glass Waste.” Master’s Thesis, American University in
Cairo, Egypt.

Aljerf, L. 2018. “Advanced Highly Polluted Rainwater Treatment
Process.” Journal of Urban and Environmental Engineering 12 (1):
50–58. doi:10.4090/juee.2018.v12n1.050058.
Angrill, S., A. Petit-Boix, T. Morales-Pinzón, A. Josa, J. Rieradevall, and
X. Gabarrell. 2017. “Urban Rainwater Runoff Quantity and Quality –
A Potential Endogenous Resource in Cities?” Journal of Environmental
Management 189: 14–21. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.12.027.
Arulrajah, A., M. M. Disfani, F. Maghoolpilehrooda, S. Horpibulsuk,
A. Udonchai, M. A. Imteaz, and Y. Du. 2015. “Engineering and
Environmental Properties of Foamed Recycled Glass as a Lightweight
Engineering Material.” Journal of Cleaner Production 94: 369–375.
Bumanis, G., D. Bajare, J. Locs, and A. Korjakins. 2013. “Alkali-silica
Reactivity of Foam Glass Granules in Structure of Lightweight
Concrete.” Construction and Building Materials 47: 274–281.
doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.05.049.
Chys, M., V. Depuydt, C. Boeckaert, and S. W. H. Van Hulle. 2013.
“Treatment of Rainwater Runoff in Recovery and Recycling
Companies: Lab and Pilot-scale Testing.” Journal of Environmental
Science and Health, Part A 48 (4): 446–452. doi:10.1080/
10934529.2013.729912.
Fernandes, H. R., D. U. Tulyaganov, and J. M. F. Ferreira. 2009.
“Production and Characterisation of Glass Ceramic Foams from
Recycled Raw Materials.” Advances in Applied Ceramics 108 (1):
9–13. doi:10.1179/174367509X344971.
Fotiadou, S. 2007. “Use of Foamed Glass Gravel for Sustainable Concrete
Construction.” PhD thesis, Kingston University, UK.
Guo, H. W., Z. X. Mo, P. Liu, and D. N. Gao. 2013. “Improved Mechanical
Property of Foam Glass Composites Toughened by Mullite Fiber.”
Applied Mechanics and Materials 357–360: 1370–1373. doi:10.4028/
www.scientific.net/AMM.357-360.1370 .
Horpibulsuk, S., A. Wijitchot, A. Nerimitknornburee, S. L. Shen, and
C. Suksiripattanapong. 2014. “Factors Influencing Unit Weight and
Strength of Lightweight Cemented Clay.” Quarterly Journal of
Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology 47 (1): 101–109. doi:10.1144/
qjegh2012-069.
Imteaz, M. A., M. S. Khan, and A. Ahsan. 2019. “Modifications of a Simple
Clogging and Back-washing Efficiency Model for Arsenic Filters.”
Proceedings of ICE - Water Management 172 (6): 284–290.
Imteaz, M. A., N. Altheeb, A. Arulrajah, S. Horpibulsuk, and A. Ahsan.
2017. “Environmental Benefits and Recycling Options for Wood Chips
from Furniture Industries.” Proceedings of ICE - Waste and Resource
Management 170 (2): 85–91.
Jana, P., V. Fierro, and A. Celzard. 2013. “Ultralow Cost Reticulated
Carbon Foams from Household Cleaning Pad Wastes.” Carbon 62:
517–520. doi:10.1016/j.carbon.2013.06.020.
Kua, T., M. A. Imteaz, A. Arulrajah, and S. Horpibulsuk. 2019.
“Environmental and Economic Viability of Alkali Activated Material
(AAM) Comprising Slag, Fly Ash and Spent Coffee Ground.”
International Journal of Sustainable Engineering 12 (4): 223–232.
doi:10.1080/19397038.2018.1492043.
Lee, M., M. Kim, Y. Kim, and M. Han. 2017. “Consideration of Rainwater
Quality Parameters for Drinking Purposes: A Case Study in Rural
Vietnam.” Journal of Environmental Management 200: 400–406.
doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.05.072.
Misapor. 2014. “Technical Data International.” Accessed 23 October
2014. http://www.archiproducts.com/en/products/13344/foam-glass-
gravel-misapor-misapor.html
Neramitkornburi, A., S. Horpibulsuk, S. L. Shen, A. Chinkulkijniwat,
A. Arulrajah, and M. M. Disfani. 2015. “Durability against
Wetting-drying Cycles of Sustainable Lightweight Cellular Cemented
Construction Material Comprising Clay and Fly Ash Wastes.”
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE ENGINEERING 969
Construction and Building Materials 77: 41–49. doi:10.1016/j.
conbuildmat.2014.12.025.
Neto, R. F. M., M. L. Calijuri, I. D. C. Carvalho, and A. D. F. Santiago.
2012. “Rainwater Treatment in Airports Using Slow Sand Filtration
Followed by Chlorination: Efficiency and Costs.” Resources,
Conservation and Recycling 65: 124–129. doi:10.1016/j.
resconrec.2012.06.001.
NHMRC. 1996. Australian Drinking Water Guideline. Canberra: National
Health and Medical Research Council. ISBN 0 642 244626 6.
Pawanawichian, K., W. Thiemsorn, A. Wannagon, and P. Laoarun. 2013.
“Fabrication of Glass Foams from Industrial Wastes Used as Insulating
Board.” Advanced Materials Research 770: 205–208. doi:10.4028/www.
scientific.net/AMR.770.205 .
Phetchuay, C., S. Horpibulsuk, C. Suksiripattanapong,
A. Chinkulkijniwat, A. Arulrajah, and M. M. Disfani. 2014. “Calcium
Carbide Residue: Alkaline Activator for Clay-fly Ash Geopolymer.”
Construction and Building Materials 69: 285–294. doi:10.1016/j.
conbuildmat.2014.07.018.
Ponsot, I., and E. Bernardo. 2013. “Self Glazed Glass Ceramic Foams from
Metallurgical Slag and Recycled Glass.” Journal of Cleaner Production
59: 245–250. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.06.029.
Rahman, M. A., M. A. Imteaz, A. Arulrajah, M. M. Disfani, and
S. Horpibulsuk. 2015. “Engineering and Environmental Assessment
of Recycled Construction and Demolition Materials Used with
Geotextile for Permeable Pavements.” ASCE Journal of
Environmental Engineering 141 (9): 04015019. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)
EE.1943-7870.0000941.
Ratnoji, S. S., and N. Singh. 2014. “A Study of Coconut Shell - Activated
Carbon for Filtration and Its Comparison with Sand Filtration.”
International Journal of Renewable Energy and Environmental
Engineering 2 (3): 201–204.
Reyneke, B., T. Ndlovu, M. B. Vincent, A. Martínez-García, M. I. Polo-
López, P. Fernández-Ibáñez, G. Ferrero, S. Khan, K. G. McGuigan, and
W. Khan. 2020. “Validation of Large-volume Batch Solar Reactors for
the Treatment of Rainwater in Field Trials in sub-Saharan Africa.”
Science of the Total Environment 717: 137223. doi:10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2020.137223.
US EPA. 1999. National primary drinking water standards, EPA-F-94-001.
Washington DC, USA: Environmental Protection Agency.
US EPA. 2010. Method 1103.1: Escherichia coli (E. coli) in Water by
Membrane Filtration Using membrane-Thermotolerant Escherichia
coli Agar (mTEC), EPA-821-R-10-002. Washington DC, USA:
Environmental Protection Agency.
Vieira, A. S., M. Weeber, and E. Ghisi. 2013. “Self-cleaning Filtration: A Novel
Concept for Rainwater Harvestingsystems.” Resources, Conservation and
Recycling 78: 67–73. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2013.06.008.
Wang, G., L. Sha, and F. Jin. 2013a. “Study on the Strength Properties and
Failure Mode of Recycled Sludge Lightweight Soil.” Applied Mechanics
and Materials 275–277: 1281–1284.
Wang, Q., N. Wang, Z. Y. Ding, and T. J. Wu. 2013b. “Influences of Firing
Process System on Foam Glass Properties.” Advanced Materials
Research 721: 258–261. doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.721.258 .
Waso, M., S. Khan, A. Singh, S. McMichael, W. Ahmed, P. Fernández-
Ibáñez, J. A. Byrne, and W. Khan. 2020. “Predatory Bacteria in
Combination with Solar Disinfection and Solar Photocatalysis for the
Treatment of Rainwater.” Water Research 169: 115281. doi:10.1016/j.
watres.2019.115281.
Wu, L., Y. H. Zhao, R. F. Chen, H. Yang, Q. Q. Li, Z. L. Li, and H. F. Lu.
2013. “Effect of Foaming Temperature and Holding Time on Foam
Glass.” Advanced Materials Research 712–715: 897–900. doi:10.4028/
www.scientific.net/AMR.712-715.897.