Evaluation of TAPM, a prognostic meteorological and air pollution model, using urban and rural point-source data

Atmospheric Environment

Volumn 37, Issue 20, 2003, Pages 2795-2810

  Luhar, Ashok K ^a   Hurley, Peter J ^a  

^a CSIRO   (Australia)

Author keywords

Data assimilation; Indianapolis data; Kincaid data; Mesoscale models; Model evaluation; Regulatory modelling; The Air Pollution Model; Turbulent diffusion

Indexed keywords

FLUID DYNAMICS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; METEOROLOGY; THERMAL PLUMES; WIND;

POINT-SOURCE PLUME DISPERSION;

AIR POLLUTION;

ATMOSPHERIC POLLUTION; DATA ASSIMILATION; MESOSCALE METEOROLOGY; MODEL VALIDATION; THREE-DIMENSIONAL MODELING; URBAN ATMOSPHERE;

AIR POLLUTION; ARTICLE; ATMOSPHERIC TRANSPORT; CIRCADIAN RHYTHM; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER MODEL; DYNAMICS; EVALUATION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; METEOROLOGY; NIGHT; PERFORMANCE; PLUME DISPERSION; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RURAL AREA; URBAN AREA; WIND;

INDIANA; INDIANAPOLIS; UNITED STATES;

NEPTUNIA;

EID: 0038201492     PISSN: 13522310     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1352-2310(03)00204-8     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Bowne, N.E., Londergan, R.J., Murray, D.R., Borenstein, H.S., 1983. Overview, Results and Conclusions for the EPRI Plume Model Validation Project: Plains Site. EPRI Report EA-3074, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA.
2. CERC, 1999. ADMS3 Validation Summary. Cambridge Environmental Research Consultants, Cambridge, UK, 16pp.
3. Cox W.M., Tikvart J.A. A statistical procedure for determining the best performing air quality simulation model. Atmospheric Environment. 24A:1990;2387-2395.
4. o across different kinds of turbulence. Boundary-Layer Meteorology. 83:1997;207-219.
5. Franzese P., Luhar A.K., Borgas M.S. An efficient Lagrangian stochastic model of vertical dispersion in the convective boundary layer. Atmospheric Environment. 33:1999;2337-2345.
6. Glendening J.W., Businger J.A., Farber R.J. Improving plume rise prediction accuracy for stable atmospheres with complex vertical structure. Journal of Air Pollution Control Association. 34:1984;1128-1133.
7. Hanna S.R. Air quality model evaluation and uncertainty. Journal of Air Pollution Control Association. 38:1988;406-412.
8. Hanna S.R., Chang J.C. Comparison of predictions of the hybrid plume dispersion model with observations at the kincaid power plant. International Journal of Environment and Pollution. 5:1995;323-330.
9. Hanna, S.R., Egan, B.A., Purdum, J., Wagler, J., 1999. Evaluation of ISC3, AERMOD, and ADMS Dispersion Models with Observations from Five Field Sites. HC Report P020, API, 1220 L St. NW, Washington, DC 20005-4070.
10. Hurley P.J. Partpuff-a Lagrangian particle/puff approach for plume dispersion modelling applications. Journal of Applied Meteorology. 33:1994;285-294.
11. Hurley P.J. An evaluation of several turbulence schemes for the prediction of mean and turbulent fields in complex terrain. Boundary-Layer Meteorology. 83:1997;43-73.
12. Hurley, P., 2002. The Air Pollution Model (TAPM) Version 2. Part 1: Technical description. CSIRO Atmospheric Research Technical Paper No. 55. Available at http://www.dar.csiro.au/tapm/ .
13. Hurley P.J., Luhar A.K. The Kwinana coastal fumigation study. III-meteorological and turbulence modelling on selected days Boundary-Layer Meteorology. 94:2000;115-138.
14. Hurley P.J., Blockley A., Rayner K. Verification of a prognostic meteorological and air pollution model for year-long predictions in the Kwinana region of Western Australia. Atmospheric Environment. 35:2001;1871-1880.
15. Hurley P., Manins P., Lee S., Boyle R., Ng Y.L., Dewundege P. Year-long, high resolution, urban airshed modelling. verification of TAPM predictions of smog and particles in Melbourne, Australia Atmospheric Environment. 37:2003;1899-1910.
16. Kalnay E., Kanamitsu M., Kistler R., Collins W., Deaven D., Gandin L., Iredell M., Saha S., White G., Woollen J., Zhu Y., Chelliah M., Ebisuzaki W., Higgins W., Janowiak J., Mo K.C., Ropelewski C., Wang J., Leetmaa A., Reynolds R., Jenne R., Joseph D. The NCEP/NCAR 40-year reanalysis project. Bulletin of American Meteorological Society. 77:1996;437-471.
17. Luhar A.K., Hibberd M.F., Hurley P.J. Comparison of closure schemes used to specify the velocity PDF in Lagrangian stochastic dispersion models for convective conditions. Atmospheric Environment. 30:1996;1407-1418.
18. Manins P., Carras J., Williams D. Plume rise from multiple stacks. Clean Air (Australia). 26:1992;65-68.
19. McHugh, C.A., Carruthers, D.J., Higson, H., Dyster, S.J., 1999. Comparison of model evaluation methodologies with application to ADMS3 and US models. Proceeding of the Sixth International Conference on Harmonisation within Atmos. Dispersion Modelling for Regulatory Purposes, Rouen, France, 11-14 October.
20. Olesen H.R. The model validation exercise at Mol. overview of results International Journal of Environment and Pollution. 5:1995;761-784.
21. Rotach M.W. Simulation of urban-scale dispersion using a Lagrangian stochastic dispersion model. Boundary-Layer Meteorology. 99:2001;379-410.
22. Stauffer D.R., Seaman N.L. Multiscale four-dimensional data assimilation. Journal of Applied Meteorology. 33:1994;416-434.
23. TRC, 1986. Urban Power Plant Plume Studies. EPRI Report EA-5468, EPRI, 3412 Hillview Ave, Palo Alto, CA.