Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association

ISSN: 0002-2470 (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uawm16

Characteristics of Maximum Concentrations

W. Alan Bowman

To cite this article: W. Alan Bowman (1983) Characteristics of Maximum Concentrations, Journal
of the Air Pollution Control Association, 33:1, 29-31, DOI: 10.1080/00022470.1983.10465544

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00022470.1983.10465544

Published online: 12 Mar 2012.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 192

Citing articles: 1 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=uawm16
 Characteristics of Maximum Concentrations
W. Alan Bowman
Applied Meteorology, Incorporated
Houston, Texas
Characteristics of maximum short-term ground level concentra-
tions from an elevated point source, namely, the effective plume
height, the critical wind speed, the distance to the point of maximum
concentration, and the maximum concentration, are derived from the
gaussian plume model. Both phases of plume development—before
and after it has reached its final height—are considered. The plume
rise treatment includes both thermal buoyancy and momentum ef-
fects. Certain limitations on critical wind speed are discussed. The
dispersion model whose basis is established in this paper should be
especially useful in applications where on site meteorological data
are unavailable.
The gaussian plume model1 in the form
X= ~ exp(-/i 2 /2<r z 2 ) (1)
TT(Jy(XzU
describes the functional relationship between short-term
(3-10 min) centerline ground level concentration x> source
emission rate Q, effective plume height h, wind speed u, and
lateral and vertical dispersion coefficients ay and az. The
dispersion coefficients determine how much the plume is
dispersed or spread out, in the lateral or cross-wind direction
y, and in the vertical direction z, as it is transported along the
downwind direction x; <xy and az vary with the independent
variable x and with atmospheric stability conditions (i.e.
stability class). Likewise, x varies with x and stability class.
X Dependency upon u
As a buoyant plume rises from its source, the effect of the
wind is to bend it over until it becomes level at some distance
from the source Xf. Mathematically, wind speed enters into
the calculation of ground level concentration in Eq. 1 through
two terms having opposite effects, viz., x is proportional to
1. u~1, i.e. u appears in the denominator of Eq. 1 such that
the lighter the wind, the larger is x> a n a " vice versa.
Physically, this linear term represents the effect of plume
dilution along x.
2. exp[—h2(u)/2az2], i.e. u appears in the exponential term
of Eq. 1 as part of the expression of plume height h. Spe-
cifically, h is inversely proportional to u, such that the
lighter the wind, the more vertical is the plume shape; on
the other hand, the stronger the wind, the more bent over
is the plume shape. Consequently, the lighter the wind,
January 1983 Volume 33, No. 1
the smaller is x*> a n d vice versa. Physically, this expo-
nential term represents the effect of the plume's prox-
imity to the ground.
The critical wind speed uc that optimizes these two effects and
maximizes x> has been derived by Roberts.2
X Dependency upon x
Eq. 1 demonstrates the existence of a similar % dependency
upon the vertical dispersion coefficient az; viz., <yz (and
coincidentally oy) appears in the denominator of Eq. 1 and
also in the exponential term. The x dependency, likewise, is
a function of downwind distance x, since <xz is an increasing
function of JC, for any stability class.
For the special case of neutral or slightly unstable atmo-
spheric conditions, Gifford3 derived an expression for the
maximum concentration and showed that it would occur at
the distance downwind, where h2 = 2az2.
X Dependency upon Both u and x
The similarity of the x dependency upon u and JC , and the
results of Roberts2 and Gifford3, suggest that perhaps one
could simultaneously find the critical wind speed uc and the
distance to the point of maximum concentration, i.e. the
critical distance xc. Having obtained these, one could then
proceed to find the corresponding plume height hc and the
maximum concentration Xc- Let us call hc,uc,xc, and Xc the
characteristics of maximum concentrations or simply the
characteristics.
Physically, as u increases to uc, the plume height decreases
(h decreases to hc) and x increases to Xo here, the exponential
term in Eq. 1 is dominant over the linear term. As u passes uc,
the plume height decreases further (h decreases below hc) and
X falls below Xc', here, the linear term in Eq. 1 is dominant over
the exponential term.
For the special case of the plume that has reached its final
height (x > Xf) under neutral and unstable atmospheric
conditions, Ragland4 considered x dependency upon u and
x and found the characteristics of maximum concentra-
tions.
This paper presents the mathematical derivation of the
characteristics of maximum concentrations for all stability
classes—unstable, neutral, and stable—and for both phases
of plume development—level and bent over. Certain limita-
tions of the mathematics, and their practical implications for
dispersion model development, are discussed.
Copyright 1983-Air Pollution Control Association
29
Mathematical Derivation which expresses the critical wind speed; for a given stability
class, uc is a function of hs and B only. Next, Eq. 3,5, and 8 are
General Equation for Critical Wind Speed combined to obtain critical distance
Effective plume height may be written, in general, as a2b{b 6
Y = 2 2 U I/O (10)
\a [a(b + d) - b} \ s

(2) which, for a given stability class, depends only upon hs. Note,
for Eqs. 8-10 to be of use, a{b + d) must not be less than b.
where, for a given source, the stack height hs and the thermal Finally, the maximum concentration Xc/Q is obtained by
buoyancy or momentum factor A are both constants; a is also substituting az,<Ty,h, a, and x found in Eqs. 5,6,8,9, and 10
constant. According to this formulation by Briggs,5-6 con- into Eq. 1.
veniently summarized by Turner and Novak,7 the plume rises For the level plume, Ragland4 has previously found hc,uc,
as it travels downwind until it reaches its final height at some and xc for neutral and unstable atmospheric conditions, where
distance Xf. For the level plume, a = 1 for neutral and unstable a = 1. The present derivation of Eqs. 8-10 extends the solu-
atmospheric conditions, and a = V3 for stable conditions. For tions to stable atmospheric conditions. Next, the solutions are
the bent over plume, a = 1. extended further, to the case of the bent over plume.
Subject to h given by Eq. 2, it can be shown that the con-
centration given by Eq. 1 achieves its maximum value for h
= h(u') where Table I. Wind speed limits.
ft _ * i ± & ! (3) Wind speed range (m/sec)
2 14 a Stability class Lower Upper
This equation is to be compared with Gifford's3 finding: h2 A 0 (0.5)a 2.6
= 2crz2. The negative root in this and subsequent equations B 0 (0.5) 4.6
applies when the receptor height is higher than the stack C 0 (2.0) unlimited (15)
height h. D 0(0.5) unlimited (20)
Eqs. 2 and 3 mathematically establish the wind speed u' for E 2.0 5.2
which the maximum occurs; that such values have magnitudes F 0 (2.0) 3.1
expected of wind speed at plume height, for all types of sources a
Values in ( ) are limits presented in PTMAX.11
and all stability conditions, remains to be seen.
Let us now consider two cases: where the plume has reached
its final height and where it has not. Characteristics for the Plume That Has Not Reached Its Final
Height

Characteristics for the Plume That Has Reached Its Final Height Before the plume reaches its final height, effective plume
height is given by Eq. 2, with a = 1. Repeating the procedure
At, and beyond the point Xf, where the plume reaches it used above, Eqs. 2 and 3 are combined to obtain
final height, h becomes independent of x, or dh/dx = 0. Ef-
fective plume height h may then be written
(11)
h = hs + — (4)

where, again, hs is constant; the buoyancy factor B assumes

one of several different constant values (none equal to A) Subject to az, ay, h, and u given by Eqs. 3,5,6, and 11, it can
depending upon atmospheric stability conditions. be shown that the concentration given by Eq. 1 achieves its
Let us set largest or critical value for h = hc, whence, Eq. 3 reduces to
36 + 3d + 2
az=axb (5) hc = (12)
3d+ 2
d
oy = cx (6) and Eq. 11 becomes
where the constants a,b,c, and d depend upon stability class. (3d + 2) A 3b{3b + 3d + 2)l/3b />s-(36-2)/36
The remaining derivation is applicable to time periods and Uc. =
distances from the source for which a, b, c, and d are pre- 36 O2(3d + 2)2
scribed; e.g., values given by TACB8 are applicable to a 10 min Again, for a given stability class, uc is a function of hs and A,
averaging time and to distances beyond 100 m. only.
Combining Eqs. 3 and 4, yields Next, Eqs. 3,5, and 12 are combined to obtain critical dis-
tance
-1/0
3b (3b + 3d +
(7) Xr - (14)
a a2(3d
B which, for a given stability class, depends only upon hs. Fi-
nally, the maximum concentration Xc/Q is obtained by sub-
Eq. 7 is equivalent to Roberts2 Eq. 4. stituting az,(xy, h, u, and x found in Eqs. 5,6,12,13, and 14 into
Subject to cz, dy, h, and u given by Eqs. 5,6,3, and 7, it can Eq. 1.
be shown that the concentration given by Eq. 1 achieves its
largest or critical value for h = hc, whence, Eq. 3 reduces to Discussion

Hr = Limitations on uc
a(b + d)-b
and Eq. 7 becomes It was described in the introduction how u enters into x
through two terms: one linear and one exponential, having
(9) opposite effects. Also, it was shown that x is maximized for
u given by Eq. 9 or 13.

30 Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association

 Recall that our mathematical derivation places no limita-
tions upon the magnitude of uc. If for a given source (i.e. A or
B, and hs fixed), uc is of larger magnitude than is reasonably
to be expected of wind speed at plume height, then the critical
value Xc cannot be achieved. For example, Roberts2 showed
for stable conditions of B = 170 m4/3 sec1/3 and hs = 121.9 m,
that the maximum concentration occurring at x = 10 km
would require uc = 75.6 m/s! Mathematically correct, but not
realistic, as Roberts points out.
Obviously, for the mathematical derivation above to be of
practical value, constraints must be imposed on values of u
for which it is to be applicable, viz., u must be limited at plume
height to values that can reasonably be expected to occur.
Following Roberts, it is noted that the Pasquill-Turner
classification scheme9 prescribes the range of wind speeds at
the 10 m level for each stability class as shown in Table I. Since
uc applies at plume height h, in order to distinguish it from
the value that would be obtained at the 10 m level, let u =
u(10). Such values may be related by
u(10) = u(h) | ^
where s varies with stability class.10
For Classes C and D, where u(10) is unlimited, unless a
reasonable upper bound on wind speed uu(10) can be pre-
scribed from on site data measured with suitable instruments,
it is practical to assign a maximum value to it (PTMAX
prescribes 15 m/sec and 20 m/sec, respectively; see Table I).
Likewise, unless a reasonable lower bound on wind speed
u;(10) can be prescribed from on site data, it is practical to
assign a minimum positive value to it (PTMAX prescribes
either 0.5 m/sec or 2.0 m/sec; see Table I).
Now there is a basis for developing a dispersion model for
estimating maximum short-term ground level concentrations.
The model should be especially useful in applications where
on site meteorological data are unavailable.
Implications for Dispersion Model Development
As long as uc(10) is within the Pasquill-Turner range,
critical wind speed uc and critical distance xc are obtained
from Eqs. 9 and 10 for the level plume, or from Eqs. 13 and 14
for the bent over plume. Specifically, one should use Eqs. 9
and 10 if
s
x
f (16)
~
where Xf, the distance at which the plume reaches its final
height, is a function of plume buoyancy;7 otherwise, one
should use Eq. 13 and 14.
On the other hand, for u c (l0) outside the Pasquill-Turner
range, there is the following:
1. For the plume that has reached its final height, Eq. 1 is
differentiated with respect to x, subject to Eqs. 4,5, and
6 and the result set equal to zero to obtain the critical
distance
I/2b 11/6
a'2(b U) a
where u = uu, if
Uu-[a(b+d)-b]/(b+d) _ Ul-[a{b+d)-b]/(b+d)
h,< B (18)
-Ulb/(b+d)
otherwise, u = u\. (Eq. 18 is derived by forming the ratio
x("()/x("u)> using Eqs. 1, 5,6, and 17; the inequality es-
tablishes whether the ratio is greater than, equal to, or less
than unity.)
Subject to these values of u and xc, Eqs. 5, 6, 4, and 1 can
be solved for oz, ay, h, and x> respectively. This procedure
would also be used when uc might be negative, e.g., a(b + d)
< b as discussed in connection with Eq. 9.
January 1983 Volume 33, No. 1
2. For the plume that has not reached its final height, Eq.
1 is differentiated with respect to x, subject to Eq. 2,5, and
6 and the result set equal to zero, to obtain the critical
distance
/ 2/3\2 / Ax 2/3'
(36 - 2)\h 2h8\h
- 3(6 + d)a2xc2b = 0 (19)
where u is alternately set equal to uu and u\.
Eq. 19 can be solved for xc by the Newton-Raphson
Method (see, e.g., Kunz12). Subject to these values of u
and xc, Eqs. 5,6,2, and 1 can be solved for az,ay,h, and
X, respectively. The value u (i.e., uu or u{) which pro-
duces the largest x is the appropriate wind speed.
Acknowledgment
The author is indebted to Robert J. Henderson for nu-
merous helpful discussions.
(15)
References
1. D. B. Turner, Workbook of Atmospheric Dispersion Estimates,
Office of Air Programs Publication No. AP-26, Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, 1970, p. 84.
2. E. M. Roberts, "Conditions for maximum concentration," JAPCA
30:274 (1980).
3. F. A. Gifford, "Atmospheric dispersion calculations using the
generalized Gaussian plume model," Nucl. Safety 2: 56 (1960).
4. K. W. Ragland, "Worst-case ambient air concentrations from
point sources using the Gaussian plume model," Atmos. Environ.
10: 371 (1976).
5. G. A. Briggs, "Some Recent Analyses of Plume Rise Observation,"
in Proceedings of the Second International Clean Air Congress,
H. M. Englund, W. T. Beery, eds., Academic Press, New York,
NY, 1971, pp. 1029-1032.
6. G. A. Briggs, "Plume Rise Predictions," in Lectures on Air Pol-
lution and Environmental Impact Analysis, D. A. Haugen, ed.,
Amer. Meteorol. Soc, Boston, MA, 1975, p. 296.
7. D. B. Turner, J. H. Novak, User's Guide for RAM, Vol. 1., Algo-
rithm Description and Use, Office of Research and Development
Publication No. EPA-600/8-78-016a, Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC, 1968, p. 60.
8. User's Guide to the Texas Episodic Model, Texas Air Control
Board, Austin, TX, 1979, p. 215.
9. D. B. Turner, "A diffusion model for an urban area," J. Appl.
Meteor. 3: 83 (1964).
10. Recommended Guide for the Prediction of the Dispersion of
Airborne Effluents, M. Smith, ed., Amer. Soc. of Mech. Engrs.,
New York, NY, 1968, p. 55.
11. User's Network for Applied Modeling of Air Pollution (UNA-
MAP), Environmental Protection Agency, Computer Programs
on Tape, NTIS PB 277193, National Technical Information
Service, Springfield, VA, 1974.
12. K. S. Kunz, Numerical Analysis, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY,
1957, p. 381.
(17)
Dr. Bowman is President of Applied Meteorology, Incor-
porated, 9000 Southwest Freeway, Suite 326, Houston, TX
77074. This paper was submitted for review on April 2, 1982;
the revised manuscript was received on September 13,1982.
31