EAS rd Scored Assignment (20%) Due: 7 Apr. 2016

Similar documents
EAS 572 Assignment 3 (25%) 2012

Footprints: outline Üllar Rannik University of Helsinki

Computing the Flux Footprint

Wind and turbulence experience strong gradients in vegetation. How do we deal with this? We have to predict wind and turbulence profiles through the

Logarithmic velocity profile in the atmospheric (rough wall) boundary layer

BOUNDARY LAYER STRUCTURE SPECIFICATION

Multichoice (22 x 1 2 % = 11%)

EAS471, Atmospheric Modelling Exam 15 April, 2014

A critical examination of the random displacement model of turbulent dispersion

MLCD: A SHORT-RANGE ATMOSPHERIC DISPERSION MODEL FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE CONTRACT REPORT. Thomas Flesch, John Wilson, and Brian Crenna

IN THE PRESENCE OF A GRADIENT IN

1 Introduction to Governing Equations 2 1a Methodology... 2

A THREE-DIMENSIONAL BACKWARD LAGRANGIAN FOOTPRINT MODEL FOR A WIDE RANGE OF BOUNDARY-LAYER STRATIFICATIONS. 1. Introduction

An intercomparison of two turbulence closure schemes and four parameterizations for stochastic dispersion models (*)

ADMS 5 Flat Terrain Validation Kincaid, Indianapolis and Prairie Grass

17th International Conference on Harmonisation within Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling for Regulatory Purposes 9-12 May 2016, Budapest, Hungary

ROTATION OF TRAJECTORIES IN LAGRANGIAN STOCHASTIC MODELS OF TURBULENT DISPERSION

Spring Semester 2011 March 1, 2011

PLUME RISE MODEL SPECIFICATION

A simple operative formula for ground level concentration from a point source

Part III: Modeling atmospheric convective boundary layer (CBL) Evgeni Fedorovich School of Meteorology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, USA

Development and validation of an operational model for air quality predictions SIRANE Salizzoni P., Garbero V., Soulhac L.,

Fluid Dynamics Exercises and questions for the course

The effect of turbulence and gust on sand erosion and dust entrainment during sand storm Xue-Ling Cheng, Fei Hu and Qing-Cun Zeng

350 Int. J. Environment and Pollution Vol. 5, Nos. 3 6, 1995

Pounding Nails with Shoes to Decide Which Shoes to Buy. By John S. Irwin Retired NOAA (2004)

Local flow structure and Reynolds number dependence of Lagrangian statistics in DNS of homogeneous turbulence. P. K. Yeung

Effects of Forcing Scheme on the Flow and the Relative Motion of Inertial Particles in DNS of Isotropic Turbulence

Lagrangian statistics in turbulent channel flow

Performance of Steady-State Dispersion Models Under Low Wind-Speed Conditions

Tutorial School on Fluid Dynamics: Aspects of Turbulence Session I: Refresher Material Instructor: James Wallace

(Wind profile) Chapter five. 5.1 The Nature of Airflow over the surface:

DETECTION OF ATMOSPHERIC RELEASES

Latest thoughts on stochastic kinetic energy backscatter - good and bad

User-Oriented Measures of Effectiveness for the Evaluation of Transport and Dispersion Models

Atm S 547 Boundary Layer Meteorology

A Real-Time Atmospheric Dispersion Modeling System

Parallel Plate Heat Exchanger

The Atmospheric Boundary Layer. The Surface Energy Balance (9.2)

2D.4 THE STRUCTURE AND SENSITIVITY OF SINGULAR VECTORS ASSOCIATED WITH EXTRATROPICAL TRANSITION OF TROPICAL CYCLONES

Supporting Information for The origin of water-vapor rings in tropical oceanic cold pools

Boundary Layer Meteorology. Chapter 2

Lecture 3. Turbulent fluxes and TKE budgets (Garratt, Ch 2)

Turbulent Flows. g u

Observations and Modeling of Heavy Particle Deposition in a Windbreak Flow

V (r,t) = i ˆ u( x, y,z,t) + ˆ j v( x, y,z,t) + k ˆ w( x, y, z,t)

FLACS CFD Model Evaluation with Kit Fox, MUST, Prairie Grass, and EMU L-Shaped Building Data

Predicting concentration fluctuations with a puffparticle

ELEC9712 High Voltage Systems. 1.2 Heat transfer from electrical equipment

Wind Flow Modeling The Basis for Resource Assessment and Wind Power Forecasting

3-Fold Decomposition EFB Closure for Convective Turbulence and Organized Structures

1 The Richardson Number 1 1a Flux Richardson Number b Gradient Richardson Number c Bulk Richardson Number The Obukhov Length 3

Nicola Bodini et al. Correspondence to: Nicola Bodini

Part I: Dry Convection

EVALUATION OF BACKWARD LAGRANGIAN STOCHASTIC DISPERSION MODELLING FOR NH3: INCLUDING A DRY DEPOSITION ALGORITHM

Sergej S. Zilitinkevich 1,2,3. Division of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Helsinki, Finland

Effects of different terrain on velocity standard deviations

The Use of Large-Eddy Simulations in Lagrangian Particle Dispersion Models

Obukhov Length Computation using simple measurements from weather stations and AXYS Wind Sentinel Buoys

Nonlinear Waves: Woods Hole GFD Program 2009

Probability density function (PDF) methods 1,2 belong to the broader family of statistical approaches

Analysis of offshore turbulence intensity comparison with prediction models. Karolina Lamkowska Piotr Domagalski Lars Morten Bardal Lars Roar Saetran

Stable Boundary Layer Parameterization

LECTURE NOTES ON THE Planetary Boundary Layer

Pollutant dispersion in urban geometries

The applicability of Monin Obukhov scaling for sloped cooled flows in the context of Boundary Layer parameterization

Characteristics of the night and day time atmospheric boundary layer at Dome C, Antarctica

Turbulent Kinetic Energy Dissipation in the Surface Layer

Exponential Growth and Filamentary Structure of Nonlinear Ballooning Instability 1

Measuring the flux of dust from unpaved roads John M. Veranth and Eric Pardyjak University of Utah

Chapter 9: Statistical Mechanics

Physics of the Convective Boundary Layer based on Radar/Lidar Profiler measurements and simulation

Daniel J. Jacob, Models of Atmospheric Transport and Chemistry, 2007.

Convective Mass Transfer

The parametrization of the planetary boundary layer May 1992

Introduction to Turbulence and Turbulence Modeling

A mechanistic model for seed dispersal

Effects of Forcing Scheme on the Flow and the Relative Motion of Inertial Particles in DNS of Isotropic Turbulence

Modelling diabatic atmospheric boundary layer using a RANS-CFD code with a k-ε turbulence closure F. VENDEL

The Role of Splatting Effect in High Schmidt Number Turbulent Mass Transfer Across an Air-Water Interface

Strategy in modelling irregular shaped particle behaviour in confined turbulent flows

OFFLINE APPROACH FOR HIGHER ORDER CONCENTRATION MOMENTS Andrea Bisignano 1, Luca Mortarini 2, Enrico Ferrero 1, Stefano Alessandrini 3

Analysis of Near-Surface Oceanic Measurements Obtained During CBLAST-Low

Signature: (Note that unsigned exams will be given a score of zero.)

THE EFFECT OF STRATIFICATION ON THE ROUGHNESS LENGTH AN DISPLACEMENT HEIGHT

October 1991 J. Wang and Y. Mitsuta 587 NOTES AND CORRESPONDENCE. Turbulence Structure and Transfer Characteristics

Eulerian models. 2.1 Basic equations

Refining an Inverse Dispersion method to Quantify Gas Sources on Rolling Terrain

ADAPTATION OF THE REYNOLDS STRESS TURBULENCE MODEL FOR ATMOSPHERIC SIMULATIONS

Numerical study of stochastic particle dispersion using One-Dimensional-Turbulence

Math 114: Make-up Final Exam. Instructions:

Turbulence Solutions

Lecture 2. Turbulent Flow

Fall Colloquium on the Physics of Weather and Climate: Regional Weather Predictability and Modelling. 29 September - 10 October, 2008

3D experiments with a stochastic convective parameterisation scheme

Gyrotactic Trapping in Laminar and Turbulent shear flow

Lecture 3: 1. Lecture 3.

Note the diverse scales of eddy motion and self-similar appearance at different lengthscales of the turbulence in this water jet. Only eddies of size

Introduction to Statistics and Data Analysis

SMR/ Summer College on Plasma Physics. 30 July - 24 August, Introduction to Magnetic Island Theory.

Transcription:

EAS 471 3 rd Scored Assignment (0%) Due: 7 Apr. 016 Option A: Lagrangian Simulation of Project Prairie Grass In the Project Prairie Grass tracer gas dispersion trials (Barad, 1958; Haugen, 1959), sulphur dioxide was released continuously from a nozzle at height z = h s = 0.46 m over a flat prairie, and the resulting 10-min mean concentrations of gas were observed on downstream arcs at radii x = (50, 100, 00, 400, 800) m. Here we will focus on the concentrations observed at x = 100 m, where six 0 m towers sampled mean concentration at multiple heights, providing sufficient information to compute the vertical profile of crosswind-integrated mean concentration χ(100, z) = π c(x, θ, z) r dθ. (1) θ= π Earlier analyses suggest that absorption of SO by the dry prairie grass can be considered negligible. We shall assume the wind statistics to be consistent with Monin-Obukhov Similarity Theory (MOST), and that the underlying probability density function g a (w) for the Eulerian vertical velocity is a Gaussian, with zero mean and a known standard deviation σ w. Let X(t) (X, Z) represent the coordinates of a fluid element, and U (U, W ) its velocity on the radial (i.e. downstream, x) and vertical axes. We shall perform two-dimensional simulations of these experiments, making the approximations that (i) radial motion occurs at the local mean cup wind speed; and (ii) the Lagrangian vertical velocity can be simulated using the (unique) one-dimensional, first-order Lagrangian stochastic (LS) trajectory model for Gaussian inhomogeneous turbulence. By computing trajectories in the (x, z) plane, compute the vertical profiles of crosswindintegrated concentration at x = 100 m for each of the Project Prairie Grass dispersion experiments documented in Tables (1, ). Compare the simulated and measured concentration profiles graphically. More specifically, please perform a total of 7 simulations: Simulate Run 57 repeatedly, comparing outcomes for three values of the universal constant C 0, viz. C 0 = (1, 3.1, 10) with the parameter µ = 0.1 (showing the impact of choice of C 0 1

Run a fourth simulation of Run 57 with C 0 = 3.1, µ = 0.0 (showing the impact of the choice of time step, if any) Simulate each of Runs (33, 50, 59) with C 0 = 3.1, µ = 0.1 Each simulation should use a large enough ensemble (particle count N P ) to give statistically reliable outcome. Before embarking on your final simulations, you should experiment with increasing the particle count. A fourfold increase in N P will halve the statistical uncertainty (irregularity) in your computed concentration profiles. (Note: Figure () of Wilson (015) gives comparable simulations of PPG runs 57 & 50.) Further details of the LS model Assume particle position (X, Z) evolves in time with velocity (U, W ) where U = u(z(t)) () and where W evolves in time according to the unique, 1-d, first-order, well-mixed model for Gaussian inhomogeneous turbulence, ie. dw = a dt + b dξ. (3) Here dw is the increment in particle velocity over timestep dt (computed as indicated below), and dξ is a Gaussian random variate with dξ = 0, (dξ) = dt. The conditional mean acceleration and the coefficient b of the random forcing are: a = C 0 ϵ(z) σ w (z) W + 1 σ w z ( ) W σ + 1, w b = C 0 ϵ(z), (4) where C 0 is a universal coefficient introduced by Kolmogorov, and ϵ is the turbulent kinetic energy (TKE) dissipation. The MO profile for the mean wind speed u is u(z) = u k v [ ln z ( z ) ψ m z 0 L ( z0 ) ] + ψ m (5) L

where the function ψ m (z/l) is { ( ) ( ) 1 ln 1+ϕ m 1+ϕ + ln m atan ( ϕ ) 1 m + π, L 0 ψ m = 5z/L, L > 0. Wherever needed the MO function ϕ m (dimensionless mean wind shear), is given by { (1 8z/L) 1/4, L 0 ϕ m = 1 + 5 z/l, L > 0. (6) (7) The turbulent kinetic energy dissipation rate ϵ should be obtained from k v z u 3 ( z ) ( z ) ϵ ϕ ϵ = ϕ m z L L L (8) and the velocity standard deviation should be computed as { 1.5 u (1 3z/L) 1/3, L 0 σ w = 1.5 u, L > 0. (9) The timestep should be set as a fixed proportion of the following turbulence timescale T L = σ w (z) C 0 ϵ(z), (10) ie. dt = µ T L (z) where µ 1. The initial vertical velocity should be a random Gaussian number with zero mean and standard deviation σ w. Confining particles (surface reflection Trajectories should be reflected about a surface z r z 0 (in practise it is probably acceptable to set z r 10z 0 ); each time a particle moves below z r it should be bounced back to the same distance above z r, and the sign of the vertical velocity that carried it below z r must be reversed, viz. if(z.lt.zr) then Z=zr+(zr-Z) W=-W endif 3

How is mean concentration derived from computed trajectories? Imagine a mast or vertical axis standing at distance x = 100 m downwind from the source. Divide the vertical axis into layers of depth z, which will define the vertical resolution of your computed concentration profile. Label your layers with index J. Each time a particle passes x = 100 m, increase the count N(J) in the layer it occupies. When you have computed all N P independent trajectories, the ratio N(J)/N P is clearly the probability that a single particle released at the source crosses x = 100 m in layer J. Therefore N(J)/N P is related to the mean horizontal flux F x (J) of particles in that layer, in fact N(J) N P = F x(j) z Q where Q is the real world (physical) source strength. (11) And since we have no horizontal fluctuations u in our treatment, we have F x (J) C(J) U(J) (the streamwise convective flux density is entirely due to the mean velocity), and so by rearrangement C(J) Q = N(J) N P z U(J). (1) Don t make your bins too thin ( z too small) or there will be a very small probability of any trajectory passing through your bins... with the result that unless you release an immense number (N P ) of trajectories, you will have a statistically unreliable (noisy, albeit high resolution) concentration profile. Probably z 0.1 m is satisfactory. References Barad, M.L. 1958. Project Prairie Grass, a Field Program in Diffusion (Vol. ). Tech. rept. Geophysical Research Papers No. 59, TR-58-35(II). Air Force Cambridge Research Center. Haugen, D.A. 1959. Project Prairie Grass, a Field Program in Diffusion (Vol. 3). Tech. rept. Geophysical Research Papers No. 59, TR-58-35(III). Air Force Cambridge Research Center. 4

Table 1: Normalized cross-wind integrated concentration u χ/q [m 1 ] observed at distance x = 100 m from the source (height h s = 0.46 m) in several Project Prairie Grass runs. z [m] Run 57 Run 33 Run 50 Run 59 17.5 1.1E-4 1.3E-4.3E-4 0 13.5 4.5E-4 4.8E-4 7.1E-4 0 10.5 1.08E-3 1.17E-3 1.7E-3 0 7.5.4E-3.80E-3 3.41E-3 0.07E-3 4.5 0.55E- 0.58E- 0.61E- 0.1E-.5 0.86E- 0.9E- 0.85E- 1.05E- 1.5 1.06E- 1.08E- 0.96E- 1.75E- 1.0 1.1E- 1.16E- 1.00E-.14E- 0.5 1.17E- 1.E- 1.07E-.40E- Table : Micro-meteorological parameters for the above Project Prairie Grass runs. Run 57 Run 33 Run 50 Run 59 u [m s 1 ] 0.5 0.55 0.44 0.14 L [m] -39-93 -6 7 z 0 [m] 0.0058 0.0075 0.0033 0.005 Wilson, J.D. 015. Dispersion from an area source in the unstable surface layer: an approximate analytical solution. Q.J.R. Meteorol. Soc., 141(693), 385 396. 5