1,720,992 research outputs found
An intercomparison of two turbulence closure schemes and four parameterizations for stochastic dispersion models
Full text linkTwo Lagrangian particle models, developed by Luhar and Britter (Atmos. Environ., 23 (1989) 1191) and Weil (J. Atmos. Sci., 47 (1990) 501), satisfying the “well-mixed” condition as prescribed by Thomson (J. Fluid. Mech., 180 (1987) 529), are compared. They differ in the closure scheme used in calculating the probability density function of the random forcing in a convective boundary layer. Four different turbulent parameterizations were used as input to both models. Their performances are evaluated against one of the well-known Willis and Deardorff water tank experiments (Atmos. Environ., 12 (1978) 1305). Predicted and measured ground-level concentrations (g.l.c.), maximum g.l.c. distance, mean plume height and plume vertical spread are presented and discussed
Simulating Pollutant Dispersion from Accidental Fires with a Focus on Source Characterization
Full text linkBackground. Storage tanks in oil and gas processing facilities contain large volumes of flammable compounds. Once the fuel-air mixture is ignited, it may break out into a large fire or explosion. The growing interest in monitoring air quality and assessing health risks makes the evaluation of the consequences of a fire an important issue. Atmospheric dispersion models, which allow for simulation of the spatial distribution of pollutants, represent an increasingly widespread tool for this type of evaluations. Objectives. The present study discusses the set up and results of a modeling study relevant to a hypothesized fire in an oil refinery. Methods. After choosing the most suitable dispersion models, i.e. the Lagrangian model SPRAY and the puff model CALPUFF, estimation of the required input data is discussed, focusing on the source variables, which represent the most uncertain input data. The results of the simulations were compared to regulatory limits to effectively evaluate the environmental consequences. Finally, a sensitivity analysis was employed to identify the most influential variables. Results. The simulation results revealed that ground concentration values were far below the cited long-term limits. However, the most interesting outcome is that depending on the dispersion model and the source type modeled, different results may be obtained. In addition, the sensitivity study indicates that the source area is the most critical variable, since it determines a significantly different behavior depending on the modeled source types, producing, in some cases, variability in the pollutant ground concentrations on selected receptors up to +/- 60%. Conclusions. Depending on the selected model and the algorithms available to describe the physics of emission, the results showed a different sensitivity to the input variables. Although this can be explained from a mathematical point of view, the problem remains of choosing case by case the option that best approximates the real behavior of the incidental source under investigation. Competing Interests. The authors declare no competing financial interests
A simple way of computing buoyant plume rise in a lagrangian stochastic model for airborne dispersion
No full textSensitivity of Spray and Calpuff models to source characteristics when simulating dispersion from fires
Full text link
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Comparison between Puff and Lagrangian Particle Dispersion Models at a Complex and Coastal Site
No full textA comparison between a puff atmospheric dispersion model (hereafter: PuM) and a Lagrangian particle model (hereafter: LPM) was conducted for a real case of emissions from an industrial plant, in the context of a complex and coastal site. The PuM’s approach is well-known and widely adopted worldwide, thanks to the authoritative suggestions by the US-EPA for regulatory use as, according to the definitions included in its guidelines, an “alternative” to “preferred” models; LPMs are more advanced models and have gained reliability over the last two decades. Therefore, it is of interest to provide insights into the decision to adopt or recommend, in the field of atmospheric impact assessment, a more advanced, but more knowledge- and resource-intensive, modeling tool, rather than an established albeit less accurate one. An inter-comparison of the two approaches is proposed based on the use of various statistical and comparative parameters with the goal of studying their differences in reproducing maps of ground-level ambient concentration statistics for assessment purposes (annual means, hourly peaks). The models were tested under a year-long simulation. The dispersion from both a point and a volume source, belonging to an existing industrial plant, was analyzed separately. The inter-comparison was performed through the analysis of 2D ground concentration maps, scatterplots, and three classical indices from the 2D maps of annual concentration statistics. To correlate the differences among models with site characteristics, the statistics were analyzed not only globally, but also according to distance from the source, the elevation, and the land-use classification. The analysis shows that around-its-axis plume dispersion in LPM is lower than in PuM over all the land-use types except water surfaces, in agreement with the theoretical basis provided by the models. Because of its more advanced theoretical formulation, e.g., in the interaction of the plume with the complex terrain and the three-dimensional wind field, an LPM used as a comparison term allowed us to highlight the weaknesses of a more traditional approach, such as PuM, in reproducing effects such as plume up-sloping, deflection, channeling, confinement, and wind shear diffusion
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
- …
