Sensitivity of the Industrial Source Complex Model to Input Deposition Parameters

Donna B. Schwede Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division, Air Resources Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina

Search for other papers by Donna B. Schwede in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
and
James O. Paumier Pacific Environmental Services, Incorporated, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina

Search for other papers by James O. Paumier in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Abstract

The Industrial Source Complex model has recently been revised to include algorithms for estimating dry and wet deposition of particles in addition to air concentration. This study examines the sensitivity of the maximum model predictions to changes in input parameters controlling deposition, such as the shape of the particle size distribution, resolution of the size distribution, and scavenging coefficients. The modeled deposition values are more sensitive than the concentrations to changes in these parameters. The model is particularly sensitive to the use of the plume depletion option, with deposition values lowered by up to 40% when the depletion option is selected. Changes in the specification of the particle size distribution affected the highest deposition values by as much as 25%. Neither concentration nor deposition seem particularly sensitive to the use of gridded terrain data.

* Current affiliation: National Exposure Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

Corresponding author address: Donna B. Schwede, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, MD-80, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711.

Abstract

The Industrial Source Complex model has recently been revised to include algorithms for estimating dry and wet deposition of particles in addition to air concentration. This study examines the sensitivity of the maximum model predictions to changes in input parameters controlling deposition, such as the shape of the particle size distribution, resolution of the size distribution, and scavenging coefficients. The modeled deposition values are more sensitive than the concentrations to changes in these parameters. The model is particularly sensitive to the use of the plume depletion option, with deposition values lowered by up to 40% when the depletion option is selected. Changes in the specification of the particle size distribution affected the highest deposition values by as much as 25%. Neither concentration nor deposition seem particularly sensitive to the use of gridded terrain data.

* Current affiliation: National Exposure Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

Corresponding author address: Donna B. Schwede, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, MD-80, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711.

Save
  • Byun, D. W., and R. Dennis, 1995: Design artifacts in Eulerian air quality models: Evaluation of the effects of layer thickness and vertical profile correction on surface ozone concentrations. Atmos. Environ.,29, 105–126.

  • Horst, T. W., 1983: A correction to the Gaussiansource-depletion model. Precipitation Scavenging, Dry Deposition and Resuspension, Vol. 2, H. R. Pruppacher, R. G. Semonin, and W. G. N. Slinn, Eds., Elsevier, 1205–1218.

  • Pleim, J., A. Venkatram, and R. Yamartino, 1984: ADOM/TADAP model development program. Vol. 4, The dry deposition module. ERT Document P-B980-520, 110 pp. [Available from Environmental Research and Technology, Inc., 696 Virginia Road, Concord, MA 01742.].

  • Radke, L. F., P. V. Hobbs, and M. W. Eltgroth, 1980: Scavenging of aerosol particles by precipitation. J. Appl. Meteor.,19, 715–722.

  • Schwede, D. B., and J. S. Scire, 1994: Improvements in indirect exposure assessment modeling: A model for estimating air concentrations and deposition. Proc. 87th Annual Meeting of the Air and Waste Management Association, Cincinnati, OH, Air and Waste Management Association.

  • Scott, B. C., 1978: Parameterizations of sulfate removal. J. Appl. Meteor.,17, 1375–1389.

  • Slinn, W. G. N., 1982: Predictions for particle deposition to vegetative canopies. Atmos. Environ.,16, 1785–1794.

  • U.S. Department of Commerce, 1987: Local climatological data annual summary with comparative data. [Available from U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Services, National Climatic Data Center, Federal Building, Asheville, NC 28801.].

  • ——, 1993: Solar and Meteorological Surface Observation Network (SAMSON). National Climatic Data Center, CD-ROM.

  • U.S. EPA, 1992: User’s guide for the Industrial Source Complex (ISC2) dispersion models. Vol. II, Description of model algorithms. EPA-450/4-92-008b, 82 pp. [NTIS PB-92-232446.].

  • ——, 1995a: User’s guide for the Industrial Source Complex (ISC3) dispersion models. Vol. II, Description of model algorithms (draft). EPA-454/B-95-003b, 120 pp. [NTIS PB-95-222758.].

  • ——, 1995b: PCRAMMET user’s guide. EPA-454/B-96-001, 98 pp. [NTIS PB-97-147912.].

  • ——, 1996a: Meteorological Processor for Regulatory Models (MPRM). User’s guide. EPA-454/B-96-002, 200 pp. [NTIS PB-96-180518.].

  • ——, cited 1996b: Meteorological data and associated programs. [Available on-line from http://134.67.104.12/html/scram/scram.html#SC08.].

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 252 57 6
PDF Downloads 66 26 2