Journal of Environmental Science International (한국환경과학회지)

The Korean Environmental Sciences Society (한국환경과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A study on the Assessment of the Predictability of the APSM

APSM의 예측능 평가에 관한 연구

  • 박기하 (서울대학교 지구환경과학부 대기환경전공) ;
  • 윤순창 (서울대학교 지구환경과학부 대기환경전공)
  • Published : 2003.03.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The Pasquill-Gifford stability category is a very important scheme of the Gaussian type dispersion model defined the complex turbulence state of the atmosphere by A grade(very unstable) to F grade(very stable). But there has been made a point out that this stability category might decrease the predictability of the model because it was each covers a broad range of stability conditions, and that they were very site specific. The APSM (Air Pollution Simulation Model) was composed of the turbulent parameters, i.e. friction velocity(${\mu}$$\_$*/), convective velocity scale($\omega$$\_$*/) and Monin-Obukhov length scale(Ｌ) for the purpose of the performance increasing on the case of the unstable atmospheric conditions. And the PDF (Probability Density Function)model was used to express the vertical dispersion characteristics and the profile method was used to calculate the turbulent characteristics. And the performance assessment was validated between APSM and EPA regulatory models(TEM, ISCST), tracer experiment results. There were very good performance results simulated by APSM than that of TEM, ISCST in the short distance (<1415 m) from the source, but increase the simulation error(%) to stand off the source in others. And there were differences in comparison with the lateral dispersion coefficient($\sigma$$\_$y/) which was represent the horizontal dispersion characteristics of a air pollutant in the atmosphere. So the different calculation method of $\sigma$$\_$y/ which was extrapolated from a different tracer experiment data might decrease the simulation performance capability. In conclusion, the air pollution simulation model showed a good capability of predict the air pollution which was composed of the turbulent parameters compared with the results of TEM and ISCST for the unstable atmospheric conditions.

Keywords

References

  1. Gifford, F. A. and S. R. Hanna, 1973, Modeling urban air pollution, Atmos Environ., 7, 131- 136. https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-6981(73)90202-3
  2. Turner, D. B., 1979, Atmospheric dispersion modeling, A critical review, JAPCA, 29(5), 502 -519.
  3. Pasquill, F. and F. B. Smith, 1983, Atmospheric Diffusion, John Wiley & Sons.
  4. Weil, J. C. and R. P. Brower, 1984, An updated Gaussian plume model for tall stack, JAPCA, 34, 818-827.
  5. 김용국, 이종범, 1992, 대기안정도와 지형조건에 따른 풍향변동폭의 특성, 한국대기보전학회, 8(2), 138-145.
  6. Irwin, J. S., 1979, Estimating plume dispersion- A recommended generalized scheme, 4th symposium on turbulence diffusion and air pollution, Jan., 15-18, Reno, NV, 62-69.
  7. 박문수, 1998, 복잡한 지형에서 대기 난류의 특성 분석, 서울대학교 대학원 석사학위논문, 71pp.
  8. Turner, D. B., 1997, The long lifetime of dispersion mothods of Pasquill in U.S. regulatory air modeling, J. Appl. Meteor., 36, 1016- 1020. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1997)036<1016:TLLOTD>2.0.CO;2
  9. 박기학, 윤순창, 2001, 난류특성을 이용한 대기오염확산모델의 예측 능에 관한 연구, 한국환경영향평가학회, 10(2), 123-133.
  10. Deardorff, J. W. and G. E. Willis, 1975, A laboratory model of diffusion into the convective planetary boundary layer, Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 102, 427-445. https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49710243212
  11. Wilczak, J. M. and M. S. Phillips, 1986, An Indirect estimation of convective boundary layer structure for use in pollution dispersion models, J. Climate and Appl. Meteor., 25, 1609-1624. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1986)025<1609:AIEOCB>2.0.CO;2
  12. Draxler, R. R., 1987, Accuracy of various diffusion and stability schemes over Washington, D. C., Atmos Envir., 21(3), 491-499. https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-6981(87)90032-1
  13. Venkatram, A., 1983, On dispersion in the convective boundary layer, Atmos Environ, 17, 529-533. https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-6981(83)90126-9
  14. Weil, J. C., 1985, Updating applied diffusion models, Climate and Appl. Meteor. 24(11), 1111-1130. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1985)024<1111:UADM>2.0.CO;2
  15. Baerentsen, J. H. and R. Berkowicz, 1984, Monte Carlo simulation plume dispersion in the convective boundary layer, J. Atmos. Sci., 18(4), 701-712. https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-6981(84)90256-7
  16. Kai, L. Z. and G. A. Briggs, 1988, Simple PDF models for convectively driven vertical diffusion, Atmos., Environ, 22(1), 55-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-6981(88)90299-5
  17. Xu, Q. and C. J. Qiu, 1997, A variational method for computing surface heat fluxes from ARM surface energy and radiation balance systems, J. Appl. Meteor., 36, 3-11. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1997)036<0003:AVMFCS>2.0.CO;2
  18. U.S. EPA, 1995, User's guide for the Industrial Source Complex(ISC) dispersion models, Vol.I, user instruction, Vol. II, description of models algorithms, EPA-454/B-95-003b.
  19. U.S. National Technological Information Ser vice(NTIS), 1979, User's guide for the Texas Episodic Model(TEM).
  20. 이상미, 윤순창, 홍민선, 1998, SF6 추적자 실험을 통한 대기오염확산모델의 검증 평가, 추계대기보전학회 요지집, 55-56.
  21. Manju, M. and T. A. Siddiqui, 1998, Analysis of various schemes for the estimation of a atmospheric stability classification, Atmos Envir., 32(21), 3775-3781. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(98)00109-5