Comparisons of transport and dispersion model predictions of the joint urban 2003 field experiment

被引:24
|
作者
Warner, Steve [1 ]
Platt, Nathan [1 ]
Urban, Jeffry T. [1 ]
Heagy, James F. [1 ]
机构
[1] Inst Def Anal, Alexandria, VA 22311 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1175/2007JAMC1802.1
中图分类号
P4 [大气科学(气象学)];
学科分类号
0706 ; 070601 ;
摘要
For a hazardous material release in a city or densely populated area, effective mitigation requires an understanding of the transport and dispersion of these hazards in the complex urban environment. Improved characterization and understanding of urban transport and dispersion will allow for more robust modeling. The Defense Threat Reduction Agency has developed a Hazard Prediction Assessment Capability (HPAC) that includes features to address hazardous releases within an urban environment. During the summer of 2003, a series of tracer gas releases were carried out in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and extensive meteorological and tracer concentration measurements were collected in a field experiment known as Joint Urban 2003 (JU03). This analysis uses the observations of JU03 to evaluate "Urban HPAC." Twenty sets of simulations, or "predictions," using four Urban HPAC modes and five meteorological input options, were created and compared using a variety of metrics. Strong consistency was found between the conclusions of this study and those of two previously reported Urban HPAC evaluations. For example, improved predictions were associated with the inclusion of a simple empirically based urban dispersion model within HPAC, whereas improvements associated with the inclusion of a more computationally intensive urban wind module were not found. In this study, two new results are reported. First, there was a substantial difference in the performance of Urban HPAC as a function of release time-day or night that was not discovered earlier because the previously examined urban field experiments focused on nighttime releases only. Daytime releases tended to be underpredicted and nighttime releases tended to be overpredicted. Second, and with respect to the under- and overpredictions described above, the inclusion of the new "Micro" Stationary Wind Fit and Turbulence (SWIFT) " SPRAY" (MSS) Urban HPAC mode typically led to less underprediction during the day and less overprediction at night than the other Urban HPAC modes. In addition, predictions that included MSS typically resulted in the least scatter between observations and predictions. These improvements warrant further investigation to determine whether this conclusion can be extended to other urban environments.
引用
收藏
页码:1910 / 1928
页数:19
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparisons of transport and dispersion model predictions of the URBAN 2000 field experiment
    Warner, S
    Platt, N
    Heagy, JF
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED METEOROLOGY, 2004, 43 (06): : 829 - 846
  • [2] Comparisons of transport and dispersion model predictions of the Mock Urban Setting Test field experiment
    Warner, Steve
    Platt, Nathan
    Heagy, James F.
    Jordan, Jason E.
    Bieberbach, George
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED METEOROLOGY AND CLIMATOLOGY, 2006, 45 (10) : 1414 - 1428
  • [3] QUIC transport and dispersion modelling of two releases from the Joint Urban 2003 field experiment
    Brown, Michael J.
    Gowardhan, Akshay A.
    Nelson, Mathew A.
    Williams, Michael D.
    Pardyjak, Eric R.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENT AND POLLUTION, 2013, 52 (3-4) : 263 - 287
  • [4] Evaluations of urban atmospheric transport and dispersion models using data from the joint urban 2003 field experiment
    Urban, Jeffry T.
    Warner, Steve
    Platt, Nathan
    Heagy, James F.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENT AND POLLUTION, 2011, 47 (1-4) : 49 - 59
  • [5] Comparison of the ESTE CBRN Model with the Joint Urban 2003 Experiment
    Ľudovít Lipták
    Eva Fojcíková
    Peter Čarný
    Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 2019, 171 : 439 - 464
  • [6] Comparison of the ESTE CBRN Model with the Joint Urban 2003 Experiment
    Liptak, Ludovit
    Fojcikova, Eva
    Carny, Peter
    BOUNDARY-LAYER METEOROLOGY, 2019, 171 (03) : 439 - 464
  • [7] Comparison of an Analytical Urban Puff-Dispersion Model with Tracer Observations From the Joint Urban 2003 Field Campaign
    Steven Hanna
    Joseph Chang
    Thomas Mazzola
    Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 2019, 171 : 377 - 393
  • [8] Comparison of an Analytical Urban Puff-Dispersion Model with Tracer Observations From the Joint Urban 2003 Field Campaign
    Hanna, Steven
    Chang, Joseph
    Mazzola, Thomas
    BOUNDARY-LAYER METEOROLOGY, 2019, 171 (03) : 377 - 393
  • [9] A Case Study of the Weather Research and Forecasting Model Applied to the Joint Urban 2003 Tracer Field Experiment. Part 2: Gas Tracer Dispersion
    Nelson, Matthew A.
    Brown, Michael J.
    Halverson, Scot A.
    Bieringer, Paul E.
    Annunzio, Andrew
    Bieberbach, George
    Meech, Scott
    BOUNDARY-LAYER METEOROLOGY, 2016, 161 (03) : 461 - 490
  • [10] A Case Study of the Weather Research and Forecasting Model Applied to the Joint Urban 2003 Tracer Field Experiment. Part 2: Gas Tracer Dispersion
    Matthew A. Nelson
    Michael J. Brown
    Scot A. Halverson
    Paul E. Bieringer
    Andrew Annunzio
    George Bieberbach
    Scott Meech
    Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 2016, 161 : 461 - 490