Journals / Atmospheric Pollution Research / 2019 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 5

Assessment of AERMOD modeling system for application in complex terrain in Pakistan

Pages
1492–1497
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Overall, the model under-predicted the ground level concentration within a factor of two (FB=0.63) for this field tracer test.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Atmospheric dispersion models based on Gaussian plume formulation are widely used for regulatory purposes in flat terrain.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this paper, the application of an advanced Gaussian plume modeling system, AERMOD, has been investigated over complex terrain setting through a field tracer test conducted in April 2018 near Islamabad, Pakistan.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Overall, the model under-predicted the ground level concentration within a factor of two (FB=0.63) for this field tracer test.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2018 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Atmospheric dispersion models based on Gaussian plume formulation are widely used for regulatory purposes in flat terrain. In this paper, the application of an advanced Gaussian plume modeling system, AERMOD, has been investigated over complex terrain setting through a field tracer test conducted in April 2018 near Islamabad, Pakistan. The model was validated through short term (2 h) release from a point elevated non buoyant source of SF6. The hourly averaged concentrations were measured at 47 discrete sampling points. The mesoscale meteorological model, WRF was coupled with AERMOD to provide hourly surface and upper boundary layer meteorological parameters. The statistical evaluation of model was carried out using Fractional Bias (FB) and Normalized Mean Square Error (NMSE). The quantile-quantile (Q-Q) plot was used to assess model's ability to follow the observed concentration distribution. For this field tracer test the model over-predicted ground level concentrations at the receptors close to the source and underestimated at the receptors located in a valley and far away from the source. Moreover, AERMOD overestimated the concentration at receptors which were at the point of direct impaction of plume and ridge. Overall, the model under-predicted the ground level concentration within a factor of two (FB=0.63) for this field tracer test. It was found that the model better simulated the higher concentrations which are of primary interest for regulatory purposes.

🔖

Cite This Article

HAQ, A. U., NADEEM, Q., FAROOQ, A., IRFAN, N., AHMAD, M., ALİ, M. R. (2019). Assessment of AERMOD modeling system for application in complex terrain in Pakistan. Atmospheric Pollution Research, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 5, 1492–1497. https://ajindex.com/articles/161934

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Carruthers, D.J., Holroyd, R.J., Hunt, J.C.R., Weng, W.S., Robins, A.G., Apsley, D.D., Thomson, D.J., Smith, F.B., 1994. UK-ADMS: a new approach to modelling dispersion in the earth's atmospheric boundary layer. J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerod. 52, 139–153.
  2. Chang, J.C., Hanna, S.R., 2004. Air quality model performance evaluation. Meteorol. Atmos. Phys. 87 (1–3), 167–196.
  3. Cimorelli, A.J., Perry, S.G., Venkatram, A., Weil, J.C., Paine, R.J., Wilson, R.B., Lee, R.F., Peters, W.D., Brode, R.W., 2005. AERMOD: a dispersion model for industrial source applications. Part I: general model formulation and boundary layer characterization. J. Appl. Meteorol. 44, 682–693.
  4. Dresser, A.L., Huizer, R.D., 2011. CALPUFF and AERMOD model validation study in the near field: Martins Creek revisited. J. Air Waste Manag. Assoc. 61 (6), 647–659.
  5. Hanna, S.R., Egan, B.A., Purdum, J., J.W., 2001.
  6. Evaluation of the ADMS, AERMOD, and ISC3 dispersion models with the OPTEX, Duke forest, Kincaid, Indianapolis and Lovett field datasets. Int. J. Environ. Pollut. 16, 301–314.
  7. Kesarkara, A.P., Dalvia, M., Kaginalkara, A., Ojha, A., 2007. Coupling of the Weather Research and Forecasting Model with AERMOD for pollutant dispersion modeling. A case study for PM10 dispersion over Pune, India. Atmos. Environ. 41 (9), 1976–1988.
  8. Kumar, A., Dikshit, A.K., Fatima, S., R.S.P., 2015. Application of WRF model for vehicular pollution modelling using AERMOD. Atmos. Clim. Sci. 05 (02), 57–62. NCEP, 2000. NCEP FNL Operational Model Global Tropospheric Analyses, Continuing from July 1999. Available online at: Research Data Archive at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, Computational and Information Systems Laboratory, Boulder, CO National Centers for Environmental Prediction/National Weather Serice/ NOAA/U.S. Department of Commerce. Available at: http://rda.ucar, Accessed date: 22 April 2018. http://rda.ucar.edu/datasets/ds083.2.
  9. Perry, S.G., 1992. CTDMPLUS: a dispersion model for sources in complex topography. Part I: technical formulations. J. Appl. Meteorol. 31, 633–645.
  10. Perry, S.G., Cimorelli, A.J., Paine, R.J., Brode, R.W., Weil, J.C., Venkatram, A., Wilson, R.B., Lee, R.F., Peters, W.D., 2005. AERMOD: a dispersion model for industrial source applications. Part II: model performance against 17 field study databases. J. Appl. Meteorol. 44 (5), 694–708.
  11. Rzeszutek, M., Szulecka, A., Oleniacz, R., M.B., 2017. Assessment of the AERMOD dispersion model over complex terrain with different types of meteorologi