194
Air Pollution and Turbulence: Modeling and Applications
A more detailed inspection of Table 7.2 permits to stress that the GILTT simulates
very well the observed concentrations presenting the best values for NMSE, COR,
and FA2.
Table 7.3 shows the statistical evaluation of the solution of the approximated
steady-state, 3D solution for Fickian fl ows, power wind profi le, and the unstable
lateral dispersion parameter described in Section 7.3. The Copenhagen experiment
(3D-dataset) is used to obtain the centerline concentrations. The results obtained with
the GILTT method are compared with the traditional Gaussian model (Degrazia,
1998b) and the GIADMT method (Costa et al., 2006) (3D-solution of the ADMM
model), which consists in the solution of the GITT transformed problem by the
ADMM method.
7.5.2 PRAIRIE-GRASS EXPERIMENT RESULTS
Table 7.4 shows the performance of the solution of the steady-state, 2D advection–
diffusion for Fickian fl ow compared with other models considering similarity wind
profi le. The results obtained are presented and compared with ADMM model
(Mangia et al., 2002). The eddy diffusivity Equation 7.23 was used. The statistical indices of the three tables point out that a good agreement is obtained between
TABLE 7.3
Statistical Evaluation of Model Results for the
Approximated Steady-State, Three-Dimensional
Solution for Fickian Flows, Copenhagen
Experiment (Centerline Concentrations), Eddy
Diffusivity Equation 7.23, and Power Wind Profi le
Model
NMSE
COR
FA2
FB
FS
GILTT
0.33
0.80
0.87
0.28
0.09
Gaussian
0.08
0.88
1.00
0.06
0.07
GIADMT
0.15
0.87
0.96
0.01
−0.09
TABLE 7.4
Statistical Evaluation of Model Results for the
Steady-State, Two-Dimensional Advection–
Diffusion for Fickian Flow Using the PrairieGrass Experiment, Eddy Diffusivity Equation
7.23, and Similarity Wind Profi le
Model
NMSE
COR
FA2
FB
FS
GILTT
0.32
0.90
0.72
0.16
0.33
ADMM
0.25
0.92
0.68
0.03
0.20
© 2010 by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC
Air Pollution and Turbulence: Modeling and Applications
A more detailed inspection of Table 7.2 permits to stress that the GILTT simulates
very well the observed concentrations presenting the best values for NMSE, COR,
and FA2.
Table 7.3 shows the statistical evaluation of the solution of the approximated
steady-state, 3D solution for Fickian fl ows, power wind profi le, and the unstable
lateral dispersion parameter described in Section 7.3. The Copenhagen experiment
(3D-dataset) is used to obtain the centerline concentrations. The results obtained with
the GILTT method are compared with the traditional Gaussian model (Degrazia,
1998b) and the GIADMT method (Costa et al., 2006) (3D-solution of the ADMM
model), which consists in the solution of the GITT transformed problem by the
ADMM method.
7.5.2 PRAIRIE-GRASS EXPERIMENT RESULTS
Table 7.4 shows the performance of the solution of the steady-state, 2D advection–
diffusion for Fickian fl ow compared with other models considering similarity wind
profi le. The results obtained are presented and compared with ADMM model
(Mangia et al., 2002). The eddy diffusivity Equation 7.23 was used. The statistical indices of the three tables point out that a good agreement is obtained between
TABLE 7.3
Statistical Evaluation of Model Results for the
Approximated Steady-State, Three-Dimensional
Solution for Fickian Flows, Copenhagen
Experiment (Centerline Concentrations), Eddy
Diffusivity Equation 7.23, and Power Wind Profi le
Model
NMSE
COR
FA2
FB
FS
GILTT
0.33
0.80
0.87
0.28
0.09
Gaussian
0.08
0.88
1.00
0.06
0.07
GIADMT
0.15
0.87
0.96
0.01
−0.09
TABLE 7.4
Statistical Evaluation of Model Results for the
Steady-State, Two-Dimensional Advection–
Diffusion for Fickian Flow Using the PrairieGrass Experiment, Eddy Diffusivity Equation
7.23, and Similarity Wind Profi le
Model
NMSE
COR
FA2
FB
FS
GILTT
0.32
0.90
0.72
0.16
0.33
ADMM
0.25
0.92
0.68
0.03
0.20
© 2010 by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC