Use of Wind Tunnel Measurements for Mathematical Model Comparison and Validation
In this paper hourly average concentrations obtained by means of several dispersion mathematical models (DIMULA, ISC3, SAFE_AIR and ADMS2) considering their various options for the calculation of dispersion parameters are compared against measurements performed in the wind tunnel of C.R.I.A.C.I.V. (Centro di Ricerca Interuniversitario di Aerodinamica delle Costruzioni ed Ingegneria del Vento) at Prato, Italy. Measurements are referred to diffusion experiments in neutral conditions using a 1:270 small scale model above flat terrain. Different experimental conditions were considered in dependence of height and number of emitting stacks (coupled or single) and wind direction. Wind tunnel simulated emissions were referred to a buoyancy condition using a mixture based on the presence of ethylene (20% vol) and helium (80% vol) in order to have a suitable tracer. The experimental results include ground level concentration (GLC) maps and vertical profiles, covering a distance range of about 1,3 km from the stacks at full scale. A statistical validation procedure was applied using wind tunnel experimental results as data set in order to evaluate model performances.
KeywordsVortex Helium Stratification Corti Vertical Stack
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Boubel RW, Fox DL, Turner DB, Stern AC (1994) Fundamentals of air pollution. Academic Press, Inc.Google Scholar
- Canepa E, Builtjes PJH (1999) Methodology of model testing and application to dispersion simulation above complex terrain. Conference Proceedings on CD-ROM, 6th International Conference on Harmonisation within Atmospheric Dispersion Modeling for Regulatory Purposes, 11–14 October 1999, INSA de Rouen, France, 1999 (in printing on Int. J. Environ. Pollut, 2001)Google Scholar
- Canepa E, Corti A, Contini D, Ratto C (2000) Comparison of the SAFE_AIR code numerical results against wind tunnel measurements on a two-stacks small scale model. ENVIROSOFT 2000, 28–30 June 2000, Bilbao, SpainGoogle Scholar
- Canepa E, Georgieva E, Ratto C, Zannetti P (2000a) SAFE AIR User’s Guide. Release 1.2. Department of Physics — University of Genova (Italy) and FiatLux Publications (Fremont, California) March 2000, Genova 2000Google Scholar
- CERC (1995) Cambridge Environmental Research Consultants Ltd. ADMS 2 User Guide. CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Cirillo MC, Clerici GC, Manzi D (1986) Manuale d’uso del codice DIMULA. ENEA RT2/STUDI/86(2)Google Scholar
- Contini D (1998) Studio di diffusione di inquinanti gassosi su modelli in scala ridotta in galleria del vento. Ph. D. Thesis, Mechanical Engineering, Florence University, 1998Google Scholar
- Corti A, Contini D, Canepa E, Ratto C (2000) Comparison of the performances of several dispersion numerical codes against wind tunnel measurements on a two-stacks small scale model. Presented paper at 6°Convegno Nazionale di Ingegneria del Vento, Genova, June 18–21 2000, ANIV Associazione Nazionale per l’Ingegneria del VentoGoogle Scholar
- Manfrida G, Corti A, Contini D (1999) Comparison between different models with Wind Tunnel small scale measurements. Proceedings of “6th International Conference on Harmonization within Atmospheric Dispersion Modeling for Regulatory Purposes”, 11–14 October 1999, INSA de Rouen, FranceGoogle Scholar
- Robins AG (1980) Wind tunnel modeling of buoyant emissions. Atmospheric pollution 1980, Proceeding of the 14th International Colloquium, Studies in Environmental Science n. 8, France 1980Google Scholar
- Schatzmann M. and B. Leitl, 1999. Quality assurance of urban dispersion models. Proceedings of “6th International Conference on Harmonisation within Atmospheric Dispersion Modeling for Regulatory Purposes”, 11–14 October 1999, INSA de Rouen, FranceGoogle Scholar
- U.S. EPA (1995) U.S. EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Emissions, Monitoring and Analysis Divisions. User’s Guide for the Industrial Source complex (ISC3) Dispersion Models. Research Triangle Park USAGoogle Scholar