Wind and Diffusion Modeling for Complex Terrain

Robert M. Cox National Defense University, Fort McNair, Washington, D.C.

Search for other papers by Robert M. Cox in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
John Sontowski Science Applications International Corporation, Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

Search for other papers by John Sontowski in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Richard N. Fry Jr. Defense Group Incorporated, Alexandria, Virginia

Search for other papers by Richard N. Fry Jr. in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Catherine M. Dougherty Science Applications International Corporation, Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

Search for other papers by Catherine M. Dougherty in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Thomas J. Smith Defense Special Weapons Agency, Alexandria, Virginia

Search for other papers by Thomas J. Smith in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Abstract

Atmospheric transport and dispersion over complex terrain were investigated. Meteorological and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) concentration data were collected and used to evaluate the performance of a transport and diffusion model coupled with a mass consistency wind field model. Meteorological data were collected throughout April 1995. Both meteorological and plume location and concentration data were measured in December 1995. The meteorological data included measurements taken at 11–15 surface stations, one to three upper-air stations, and one mobile profiler. A range of conditions was encountered, including inversion and postinversion breakup, light to strong winds, and a broad distribution of wind directions.

The models used were the MINERVE mass consistency wind model and the SCIPUFF (Second-Order Closure Integrated Puff) transport and diffusion model. These models were expected to provide and use high-resolution three-dimensional wind fields. An objective of the experiment was to determine if these models could provide emergency personnel with high-resolution hazardous plume information for quick response operations.

Evaluation of the models focused primarily on their effectiveness as a short-term (1–4 h) predictive tool. These studies showed how they could be used to help direct emergency response following a hazardous material release. For purposes of the experiments, the models were used to direct the deployment of mobile sensors intended to intercept and measure tracer clouds.

The April test was conducted to evaluate the performance of the MINERVE wind field generation model. It was evaluated during the early morning radiation inversion, inversion dissipation, and afternoon mixed atmosphere. The average deviations in wind speed and wind direction as compared to observations were within 0.4 m s−1 and less than 10° for up to 2 h after data time. These deviations increased as time from data time increased. It was also found that deviations were greatest during inversion dissipation.

The December test included the release and tracking of atmospheric tracers. The MINERVE–SCIPUFF modeling system was used to direct remote sensing equipment. Posttest analyses were performed to determine model reliability. It was found that plume centroid position as determined by the models was within 10% of the observed plume centroid.

* Current affliliation: Science Applications International Corporation, Orlando, Florida

Corresponding author address: Dr. Robert M. Cox, Science Applications International Corporation, 12479 Research Parkway, Suite 600, Orlando, FL 32826.

Abstract

Atmospheric transport and dispersion over complex terrain were investigated. Meteorological and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) concentration data were collected and used to evaluate the performance of a transport and diffusion model coupled with a mass consistency wind field model. Meteorological data were collected throughout April 1995. Both meteorological and plume location and concentration data were measured in December 1995. The meteorological data included measurements taken at 11–15 surface stations, one to three upper-air stations, and one mobile profiler. A range of conditions was encountered, including inversion and postinversion breakup, light to strong winds, and a broad distribution of wind directions.

The models used were the MINERVE mass consistency wind model and the SCIPUFF (Second-Order Closure Integrated Puff) transport and diffusion model. These models were expected to provide and use high-resolution three-dimensional wind fields. An objective of the experiment was to determine if these models could provide emergency personnel with high-resolution hazardous plume information for quick response operations.

Evaluation of the models focused primarily on their effectiveness as a short-term (1–4 h) predictive tool. These studies showed how they could be used to help direct emergency response following a hazardous material release. For purposes of the experiments, the models were used to direct the deployment of mobile sensors intended to intercept and measure tracer clouds.

The April test was conducted to evaluate the performance of the MINERVE wind field generation model. It was evaluated during the early morning radiation inversion, inversion dissipation, and afternoon mixed atmosphere. The average deviations in wind speed and wind direction as compared to observations were within 0.4 m s−1 and less than 10° for up to 2 h after data time. These deviations increased as time from data time increased. It was also found that deviations were greatest during inversion dissipation.

The December test included the release and tracking of atmospheric tracers. The MINERVE–SCIPUFF modeling system was used to direct remote sensing equipment. Posttest analyses were performed to determine model reliability. It was found that plume centroid position as determined by the models was within 10% of the observed plume centroid.

* Current affliliation: Science Applications International Corporation, Orlando, Florida

Corresponding author address: Dr. Robert M. Cox, Science Applications International Corporation, 12479 Research Parkway, Suite 600, Orlando, FL 32826.

Save
  • Bass, A., 1980: Modeling long-range transport and diffusion. Second Joint Conf. on Application of Air Pollution Meteorology, New Orleans, LA, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 193–215.

  • Brier, G. W., 1990: A historical and personal perspective of model evaluations in meteorology. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,71, 349–351.

  • Byers, M. E., J. K. Hodge, and R. M. Cox, 1995: Hazard Prediction and Assessment Capability (HPAC). Proc. Fifth Topical Meeting on Emergency Preparedness and Response, Savannah, GA, Amer. Nuclear Soc., 150–156.

  • Chang, J. S., R. A. Brost, L. S. A. Isaksen, S. Madronich, P. Middleton, W. R. Stockwell, and C. J. Walcek, 1987: A three-dimensional Eulerian acid deposition model: Physical concepts and formulation. J. Geophys. Res.,92, 14 681–14 700.

  • Cox, R. M., J. Sontowski, R. N. Fry, and C. M. Dougherty, 1995: Atmospheric transport over White Sands Missile Range. Proc. 1995 Battlefield Atmospheric Conf., White Sands Missile Range, NM, U.S. Army Research Laboratory, 114–125.

  • Donaldson, C. du P., 1973: Atmospheric turbulence and its dispersal of atmospheric pollutants. Workshop on Micrometeorology, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 313–390.

  • Finardi, S., G. Brusasca, M. G. Morselli, F. Trombetti, and F. Tampieri, 1993: Boundary layer flow over analytical two-dimensional hills:A systematic comparison of difference models with wind tunnel data. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,63, 259–291.

  • Gassmann, F., and D. Buerki, 1987: Experimental investigations of atmospheric dispersion over the Swiss plain—Experiment SIESTA. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,41, 295–307.

  • Geai, P., 1987: Methode D’Interpolation et de Reconstitution Tridimensionnelle d’un Champ de Vent: Le code d’analyse objective MINERVE. Electricite De France Rep. ARD-AID: E34-E11, 177 pp.

  • Herrnberger, V. R. D., P. Doria, and G. Prohaska, 1992: Atmospheric dispersion of radioactivity in complex terrain: Model evaluation and selection for real time emergency applications. Proc. Seminar on Environmental Impact of Nuclear Installations, Fribourg, Switzerland.

  • Lewellen, W. S., 1977: Use of invariant modeling. Handbook of Turbulence, W. Frost and T. H. Moulden, Eds., Plenum Press, 237–280.

  • Sontowski, J., and C. M. Dougherty, 1994: Multiscale Environmental Dispersion Over Complex Terrain—The MEDOC models. U.S. Defense Nuclear Agency Tech. Rep. DNA-TR-94-180, 87 pp.

  • ——, R. Cox, J. Hodge, J. Moussafir, and C. Dougherty, 1995a: Multiscale Environmental Dispersion over Complex Terrain–The MEDOC Models. Proc. Fifth Topical Meeting on Emergency Preparedness and Response, Savannah, GA, Amer. Nuclear Soc., 447–451.

  • ——, ——, C. M. Dougherty, and R. N. Fry, Jr., 1995b: Validation of a mass consistency wind model at White Sands Missile Range. Proc. 1995 Battlefield Atmospheric Conference, White Sands Missile Range, NM, U.S. Army Research Laboratory, 64–76.

  • Sullivan, T. J., J. S. Ellis, C. S. Foster, K. T. Foster, R. L. Baskett, J. S. Nasstrom, and W. W. Schalk III, 1993: Atmospheric release advisory capability: Real-time modeling of airborne hazardous materials. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,74, 2343–2361.

  • Sykes, R. I., W. S. Lewellen, and S. F. Parker, 1984: A turbulent-transport model for concentration fluctuations and fluxes. J. Fluid Mech.,139, 193–218.

  • ——, ——, and ——, 1986: A Gaussian plume model of atmospheric dispersion based on second-order closure. J. Climate Appl. Meteor.,25, 322–331.

  • ——, ——, ——, and D. S. Henn, 1988: A hierarchy of dynamic plume models incorporating uncertainty. Vol. 4: Second-order closure integrated puff. EPRI Rep. EPRI EA-6095, Project 1616–28, 99 pp.

  • ——, S. F. Parker, D. S. Henn, and W. S. Lewellen, 1993: Numerical simulation of ANATEX tracer data using a turbulence closure model for long-range dispersion. J. Appl. Meteor.,32, 929–947.

  • Venkatram, A., P. Karamchandani, and P. K. Misra, 1988: Testing a comprehensive acid deposition model. Atmos. Environ.,22, 737–747.

  • Williams, M., and T. Yamada, 1990: A microcomputer-based forecasting model: Potential applications for emergency response plans and air quality studies. J. Air Waste Manag. Assoc.,40, 1266–1274.

  • Wolfe, D., and Coauthors, 1995: An overview of the Mobile Profiler System: Preliminary results from field tests during the Los Angeles free-radical study. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,76, 523–534.

  • Yamada, T., and T. Henmi, 1994: HOTMAC: Model performance evaluation by using the project WIND phase I and II data. Mesoscale Modeling of the Atmosphere, Meteor. Monogr., No. 47, 123–136.

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 1402 802 48
PDF Downloads 269 75 7