Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association

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

Derivation of the Gaussian Plume Model

Wm. J. Veigele & James H. Head

To cite this article: Wm. J. Veigele & James H. Head (1978) Derivation of the Gaussian
Plume Model, Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, 28:11, 1139-1140, DOI:
10.1080/00022470.1978.10470720

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00022470.1978.10470720

Published online: 14 Mar 2012.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 3039

Citing articles: 3 View citing articles

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

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=uawm20
Table II. Summary of size distribution and mass concentration References
measurements.
1. W. E. Wilson, et al., "General Motors sulfate dispersion experi-
Chamber number ment: summary of EPA measurements," J. Air Poll. Control
1 2 3 4 Assoc. 27: 46 (1977).
2. P. T. Roberts and S. K. Friedlander, "Photochemical aerosol
CMD ± std. 0.032 ± 0.044 ± 0.035 ± 0.036 ± formation SO2,1-heptene, and NOX in ambient air," Environ. Sci.
dev. [/um] 0.004 0.007 0.001 0.007 Technol. 10: 573 (1976).
irg ± std. dev. 1.8 ± 0.10 2.1 ± 0.32 1.8 ± 0.21 1.8 ± 0.17 3. S. Clary, D. P. Y. Chang, and O. G. Raabe, "Diffusion Battery
Mass con- . 1.23 ± 1.25 1.13 ± 1.19 ± Measurements of Sulfuric Acid Aerosol Growth," Presented at
centration 0.25 ±0.27 0.23 0.24 the American Industrial Hygiene Association Conference, Los
± std. dev. Angeles, May, 1978.
4. Task Group on Lung Dynamics, "Deposition and retention
(mg/m3) models for internal dosimetry of the human respiratory tract,"
Health Physics 12:173 (1966).
5. V. K. La Mer, E. C. Y. Lin, and I. B. Wilson, "The methods of
chamber was slightly smaller. The difference was estimated forming, detecting and measuring the size and concentration of
to be =^0.002 jim less as determined by varying the length of liquid aerosols in the size range of 0.01 to 0.25 microns diameter,"
the tubing joining the two chambers. Cascade impactor J. Coll. Sci. 5: 471 (1950).
measurements using a seven-stage ARIES impactor with an 6. B. Y. H. Liu, University of Minnesota, Personal Communication,
1978.
effective cut-off aerodynamic diameter of 0.23 nm on the final 7. G. J. Doyle, "Self-nucleation in the sulfuric acid-water system,"
stage showed that about 70-90% of the mass was on the after J. Chem. Phys. 35: 795 (1961).
filter, the remainder being on the final stage. 8. M. Itoh, K. Takahashi, and M. Kasahara, "The temperature de-
Chamber mass concentrations were monitored with daily pendence of nucleation of sulfuric acid-water mixture in air," J.
Aerosol Sci. 8:183 (1977).
filter samples over a period of 164 days. These are tabulated 9. A. O. Reif, "Aerosols: Physical Properties, Instrumentation and
in Table II. The mean coefficient of variation for the four Techniques," in Aviation Medicine Selected Reviews, Pergamon
chambers was 0.21. We estimate that about half of the varia- Press, Oxford, 1958, p. 212.
tion could be attributed to the chemical analysis rather than 10. S. K. Friedlander, Smoke, Dust and Haze, Fundamentals of
Aerosol Behavior, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1977, pp.
to fluctuations in the generator's output. 175ff.
11. D. P. Y. Chang and B. K. Tarkington, "Experience with a high
Conclusions output sulfuric acid aerosol generator," Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J.
38:493 (1977).
12. S. K. Friedlander; Smoke, Dust and Haze, Fundamentals of
The generator described above may be useful in long-term Aerosol Behavior, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1977, pp.
exposure chamber studies involving nuclei-mode sulfuric acid 72ff.
aerosols. There are no critical design parameters other than 13. D. Sinclair, R. J. Countess, B. Y. H. Liu, and D. Y. H. Pui, "Ex-
to insure constant temperature of the generator, dry carrier perimental verification of diffusion battery theory," J. Air Poll.
Control Assoc. 26:661 (1976).
gas, and adequate dilution of the aerosol as it is being formed. 14. O. G. Raabe, "A General Method For Fitting Size Distributions
Mass concentration, chamber residence time, and relative to Multicomponent Aerosol Data Using Weighted Least
humidity will determine the approximate size and geometric Squares," Environ. Sci. Technol. (in press).
standard deviation of the aerosol formed. Reasonably stable
aerosols can be produced for periods ranging up to half a year
without having to recharge the aerosol generator. Dr. Chang is an Assistant Professor of Civil Engineering at
the University of California, Davis, involved in collaborative
health effects studies with the UCD Health Effects of Air
Acknowledgments Pollutants Research Team. Mr. Tarkington is Chief Expo-
sure Chamber Technician and Mr. Duvall is a Staff Research
Ms. Pam Rodgers assisted in the analyses of sulfuric acid Associate at the Exposure Facility, California Primate Re-
filter samples. This research was done at the California Pri- search Center, University of California, Davis, CA 95616.
This was Paper No. 78-39.4 presented at the 71st Annual
mate Research Center, University of California at Davis, Meeting of the Air Pollution Control Association, June 25-
under the sponsorship of the U.S. Environmental Protection 30,1978, Houston, TX.
Agency, Contract #68-02-2496.

Derivation of the Gaussian Plume Model

Wm. J. Veigele
Mission Research Corporation
Santa Barbara, California

James H. Head
U. S. Air Force Academy

The Gaussian plume equation2

In the EPA Guideline1 for the selection and use of air quali-
ty models it is stated that the gaussian plume model is state- C(x,y,z) = (Q/2mioy<rg) exp [-(y -y) 2 /2cr y 2 ]
of-the-art and recommended for inert pollutants over other X {exp \-{z - H)V2az*] + exp [-(2 + tf )2/2cr22]} (1)
than long ranges. It is desirable, therefore, that its genesis be
known and understood and that its assumptions be made is used to calculate the steady state concentration of a pollu-
mathematically clear. Copyright 1978-Air Pollution Control Association

November 1978 Volume 28, No. 11 1139

APCA NOTE-BOOK and

Pl 2 2

which is summed over the roots, P-^h = nir, n = 0 , 1 , 2 , . . . , of

tant at a point (x, y, z) downwind of a point source at (x', y') P 2 tan (P2h) = 13.
with effective height H and mass emission rate Q, reflected The quantities
from the ground, and under the influence of a constant wind
of speed u and standard deviations in concentrations ay {xr
x,y,z= C Kx,yiZ (T - t')dt
— x) and az (x' - x) in the crosswind and vertical directions. •J t'
Confidence in its use obtains because it predicts observed data
well3 and because it is derived from a differential diffusion % =x - I u{x,y,T)dr
equation under appropriate limiting and boundary condi- Jt'
tions.4 The limitations on the diffusion equation and its par- and
ticular solution for a typical urban situation, and the tech-
niques for reducing the solution to the gaussian plume equa- r) = y- I v{x,y,r)dT.
tion are not obvious. To clarify them we present the physical Jt'
assumptions and mathematical techniques for obtaining the For long term (annual) average pollution concentrations,
gaussian plume equation. Our purpose is not to present an it is assumed that u = constant, and /? = 0. Then JC,- = Ki(t —
original derivation, but to clarify essential steps. t') where i = x, y, z, £ = x — u(t — t'), and 77 = y.
Line and area sources can be converted to equivalent point
Solution of the Diffusion Equation sources, thus we need only consider a single point source.7 For
a steady state point source with mass rate of emission Q
Turbulent diffusion of a nonreacting pollutant in the at-
mosphere is described by S(x,y,z,t) = Q8(x- x') 8 (y - y') 8(z - z')
where 5 is the Dirac delta function.
— = V-K-VC - S (2) To neglect downwind diffusion Kx must approach zero.
dt
Using the relation8
where C is the concentration, K is the diffusivity tensor, u is
1
the average wind velocity, and S is a source function. This is hm exp - = S(m- m')
derivable5 from conservation of mass in a bounded volume. m 7
L 2(Xl
Diffusion by turbulent eddies is not strictly Fickian, but Eq.
(2) is applicable with empirically variable coefficients.2-4 and the definition
Boundary conditions4 for Eq. (2), in which the origin of the ot2 = 2Kt(t - tf) = 2Ki ixi Xio)
(4)
right handed coordinate system is at h above the ground with
z positive downward, are and letting Kx -*• 0, Eq. (3) becomes
C (x,y,z,o) = I(x,y,z) Q /nit
C(x,y,z,t) = /—1 T7- 1/0 I-* cos I( -1r - 2
t u o J COS I — 2 I
lim C (x,y,z,t) = 0 l/2
VTrhKy n=o Vh
x,y -* ± oo

and
X
f (£ _ £')l/2
Jo X 8{x - x'- u{t - t')] dt' (5)
^ (x,y,h,t) =
dz
= constant) Now 8[x -xf- u(t - t')] = (1/u) 8[(x - x')/u - (t -1% thus
Eq. (5) integrates to
for initial concentration /, conservation of pollutant, non-
penetrability of an inversion layer at height h, and absorption C{x,y,z) =
at the ground, respectively. Q / U \l/2 » //ITT \ //ITT A
Our derivation builds on the formalism presented by Lamb / - , jr 1/2 ( ;) L cos (—-2 ) cos l-r-z')
and Neiburger4 using a Green's function,6 and considers an virnA v 1 / 2 u \x - xv «=o \h / \h I
urban situation described by the assumptions:
1. No initial concentration [I{x, y, z) = 0], X exp ( (6)
2. Steady state emission from a point source (Q = const.), \h
3. No absorption or generation by the ground (0 = 0),
4. Constant wind in one direction (u = const., v = w = 0),
5. No inversion layer (h —»• °°), which describes a puff of pollutant released at t = t', progress
6. Crosswind and vertical diffusivities vary with downwind of the front of which at x = x' + ut defines a plume. For no
distance only (Ky = Ky (x), Kz = Kz(x)), and are constant inversion layer h —> °°, and using Eq. (4), Eq. (6) becomes
in the diffusion domain. nt \ 2Q 1 - (n-K \ /nir A
7. No downwind diffusion (Kx = 0). C(x,y,z) = —f== E cos ( — 2 ) cos (—- z')
For v = w = 0 and I(x, y, z) = 0, a solution to Eq. (2) is V2Ttuayhn=o \n / \h I

J
* fl /"• ao /*• co /*•
'tE(S-x',y-y,t-t')
Following Joos9 one writes
t')S{xf,y',z',t')dt'dx'dy'dz' (3)
1 00 00 1
X M(z -z',t- — E c o s (n-irz/h) cos {nirz'/h) = £ - / (n/h)
where n n=o n=on
Considering this as a periodic function with period h ex-
tending from —00 to o> and writing the period as an interval
AS one gets

1140 Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association

 References

1. "Interim Guideline on Air Quality Models," OAQPS No. 1.2-080,

Recognizing that as h —*• °°, AS —> 0, that U.S. EPA, Oct. 1977.
2. F. Pasquill, Atmospheric Diffusion, John Wiley and Sons, New
lim £ f(n,AS)AS= C" f(S)dS York, 1974.
3. D. H. Slade, (Ed.), Meteorology and Atomic Energy, U. S. Atomic
Energy Commission, July 1968.
substituting rnr/h = k,z' = H, using the relation cos (ad) cos 4. R. G. Lamb and M. Neiburger, "An interim version of a generalized
(ac/>) = V2 !cos [a(0 + (/>)] + cos [a{6 - </>)]), and Eq. (4), Eq. (6) urban air pollution model," Atmos. Environ. 5: 239 (1971).
may be written as 5. K. B. Pomeranz, "Conservation laws and the dispersal equations
for chemical and thermal pollution," Amer. J. Phys. 39: 1069
Q (1971).
exp 6. H. S. Carslaw and I. C. Jaeger, Conduction of Heat in Solids, Ox-
2<72 ford, England, 1948.
"-(2
7. D. B. Turner, "Workbook of Atmospheric Dispersion Estimates,"
+ exp (8) U.S. EPA, 1970.
2cr 2 8. M. J. Lighthill, Introduction to Fourier Analysis and Generalized
which is Eq. (1). Functions, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1960, p. 10
9. G. Joos, Theoretical Physics Hafner Publishing Co., New York,
Frequently the assumptions used in its derivation do not 1934, p. 49.
hold. An initial concentration of pollutant may exist. Emis-
sions may vary with time. Pollutants may be absorbed at the
ground. A wind field may change in time and space and vary
with height. Inversion layers may exist. The diffusion con-
stants are not necessarily constant, and those frequently used2
were experimentally determined as 10 min averages over open
flat terrain. And diffusion may occur upwind at low wind
speed close to a source. Because of these conditions which may Dr. Veigele is Director, Environmental and Energy Pro-
differ from those described by the assumptions used in de- grams, Mission Research Corporation, 735 State Street,
Santa Barbara, CA 93101. Dr. Head is with the U. S. Air
riving Eq. (1), care must be exercised in applying the gaussian Force Academy in Colorado.
plume equation.

A Quantitative Assessment of Sulfur Dioxide

Emission from Fossil Fuels in India
C. K. Varshney
Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

J. K. Garg
Space Applications Centre, Ahmedabad, Gujrat, India

The problem of environmental pollution has been steadily over a large territory. The U.S. Environmental Protection
increasing since the industrial revolution. Sulfur dioxide Agency1 has compiled such emission factors for SO2 from the
pollution affects the environment quite significantly and combustion of coal. According to their estimates kilograms
combustion of fossil fuels is one of the major sources of SO2 of SO2 emitted can be calculated from the following equa-
emission into the atmosphere. A quantitative assessment of tion:
the rate of emission of atmospheric pollutants is essential for
designing and enforcing air quality control policies. For proper SO2 emitted (kg) = 19 X sulfur content of coal (%) X
evaluation of the intensity and magnitude of SO2 pollution total weight of coal burned (metric tons)
(in a region or a country) quantitative information on the SO2 Sulfur dioxide emissions from coal burning were calculated
emission is needed. using an average value of 0.5% sulfur for Indian coals.2 Simi-
In this paper an attempt has been made to estimate SO2 larly, estimates for SO2 emissions from petroleum were
emission from the burning of fossil fuels in India during worked out using an emission factor of 60 tons SO2/IOOO tons
1964-1979 and the values are compared with the SO2 emis- crude petroleum.3
sions in the U.S. An accurate way of estimating SO2 emission The results of these calculations are presented in Table I.
would be to determine rates of all individual industrial and Sulfur dioxide emissions in India from fossil fuels during
domestic sources. This is very difficult to accomplish when 1964-1973 increased from 1.14 to about 2.07 million tons at
an emission survey covers a whole country that might contain an average annual rate of less than 10%. According to the
innumerable individual sources. One way to overcome this projected future estimates of coal and petroleum consumption
problem is to use emission factors, which are developed on the the emission of sulfur dioxide from the combustion of coal and
basis of past stack gas sampling data, material balances, and
engineering estimates, for compiling specific gaseous emissions Copyright 1978-Air Pollution Control Association

November 1978 Volume 28, No. 11 1141