Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
337
editor@iaeme.com
1. INTRODUCTION
Air pollution models have generally failed to accurately predict concentration of
pollutants (Lolymer, 2011). Most of these failures have been attributed to
environmental conditions for which these models were not developed to handle.
Literature has recorded different models which have been developed for different
environmental configuration. Some of these models have shown improvement when
compared to Gaussian models (Henricheen, 1986; Stull, 1988).
Most of the existing air pollution models can be classified as follows :(i)Those
that have incorporated wind speed and vertical eddy diffusivity as a power function of
vertical height (Seinfeld, 1986; Lin and Hildemann, 1996); (ii) Those that have
incorporated wind speed as a function of height and eddy diffusivity as a function of
downwind distance (Sharan and modani, 2006); (iii) Models that have incorporated
wind speed as a function of vertical height and vertical eddy diffusivity as a function
of both vertical height and downwind distance from the source (Sharan and Kumar,
2009); and (iv) Models that have incorporated low wind and unbounded region
(Anikender and Goyal, 2013).Obstructions from artificial and natural facilities have
also been attributed to failures of dispersion models in predicting pollutant
concentration. These obstructions impede the flow from the direction of the source.
Works have been carried out on different aspects of obstruction to pollutant
dispersion.
Works of Zhao-Lin and others (2011) considered street canyons as the obstruction
and concentrated on the effect on uneven heights of buildings given that earlier works
had considered even heights. Works of Yucong and others (2014) also considered
street canyons but tried to use different street canyon configurations. Flow pattern
inside the street canyon has been studied to be controlled by flow wind velocity,
building shapes, atmospheric instability and height of building (Xie and others, 2005;
Niachou and others, 2008; Hang and others, 2010; Baik and others, 2000; Ahmad and
others, 2005). As a result of these obstructions poor air quality has been recorded at
pedestrian levels. Air recirculation has been seen to be the major reason why
pollutants do not move in the wind ward direction (Depaul and Sheih, 1986;
Oke,1988).Many methods have been used to investigate obstruction of pollutants
dispersion where mostly street canyons have been used as the obstruction. These
widely used methods are the in-situ measurements (Depaul and Sheih, 1986; Kumar
and others, 2009; Li and others, 2007) and the computational fluid dynamic (CFD)
simulations (Baik and others, 2000; Yang and shao, 2008; Murena and others, 2009;
Gu and others, 2010; Balczo and others, 2009).Works of Harisankar and Paruthuraj
(2010) used a hill slope as the obstruction to flow and results also showed pollutant
recirculation but at the summit of the hill and this grows intense with steeper slopes.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
338
editor@iaeme.com
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
339
editor@iaeme.com
Figure 1 Study area showing observation point and weather station point
Equipment
Military compass
Weather station
Solar radiation meter
Aeroqual gas monitor
Number
1
1
1
4
Purpose
To determine the direction of the poles
To measure meteorological parameters
To measure solar radiation
To measure pollutant gases
2.3. Procedure
A total of four locations were established for observation of ozone gas. Two of these
locations are inside the Choba park premises by the fence and the other two outside
the park premises by the fence. Both inside and outside locations comprise of ground
and a four metre height point. The weather station was installed at 10 metres from the
ground level. The observation of ozone was carried out for five days with a time
interval of two hours. The solar radiation was measured hourly from sun rise at about
6.00 am to 9.00 pm for the 5-day duration.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
340
editor@iaeme.com
Variable
Symbol
1
2
3
4
5
Height
Wind speed
Solar radiation
Temperature at ground level
Temperature at four metre height above
ground
Pollutant concentration at ground level
H
v
I
TGL
TH
Dimensions
LMT
L
LT-1
MT-3
CGL
ML-3
CH
ML-3
6
7
F(
As a typical example,
is evaluated by substituting the applicable dimensions
(from Table 1) to Equation (3), to obtain Equation (6):
=
.Equation (6)
.. Equation (7)
Adopting similar procedure we obtain the following results for Equations (4) and (5),
respectively
=
Equation (8)
...Equation (9)
341
editor@iaeme.com
=
or
=
Equation (11)
Let
Y=
; x1 =
and x2 =
That is, Y=
or
Ln Y = a Ln
+ b Ln
+ K..Equation (12)
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
342
editor@iaeme.com
DAY
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
MON
TUE
WED
THUR
FRI
TEMP
@ GL
25
28
31
34
37
33
29
27
26
25
28
31
34
37
33
29
27
26
24
27
30
35
30
27
27
26
26
25
25
25
36
30
29
27
26
26
24
27
36
30
31
32
29
TEMP
@ 4m
29
28
32
31
34
33
28
26
26
29
28
32
31
34
33
28
26
26
24
27
30
33
29
26
26
26
25
24
25
26
26
28
29
26
26
25
23
26
29
35
36
32
30
SR
WS
CGL
C4M
x1
x2
Lnx1
Lnx2
LnY
0
280
350.9
413.8
1220
600
14
0
0
0
280
350.9
413.8
1220
600
14
0
0
0
240.6
151.2
1025
83
37.8
12.4
0
0
0
14.1
21.9
102
250
170.1
16
0
0
0
60.2
341
1092
639
422.5
79.2
0
4.8
9.7
8
11.3
12.9
4.8
1.6
1.6
0
4.8
9.7
8
11.3
12.9
4.8
1.6
1.6
1.6
4.8
4.8
6.4
12.9
6.4
1.6
0
0
0
0
1.6
0
4.8
3.2
1.6
0
1.6
0
0
1.6
0
4.8
3.2
1.6
0
0
0.26
0
0
0
0.01
0
0.28
0.3
0.26
0.25
0.37
0.31
0.34
0.29
0.27
0.29
0.25
0.25
0.28
0.29
0.39
0.3
0.3
0.21
0.25
0.26
0.31
0.3
0.3
0.33
0.27
0.25
0.23
0.22
0.22
0.38
0.3
0.37
0.43
0.36
0.33
0
0.28
0.28
0.32
0
0.25
0.02
0.32
0
0.27
0.28
0.3
0.4
0.32
0.35
0.35
0.29
0.3
0.24
0.25
0.29
0.25
0.4
0.29
0.29
0.27
0.26
0.27
0.31
0.27
0.27
0.36
0.29
0.26
0.27
0.29
0.3
0.31
0.38
0.4
0.46
0.36
0.35
#DIV/0!
0
0.676247
0
0
0
0.078994
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
0.102693
0.650237
0.457806
0.366638
1.216457
2.290834
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
0.114913
0.2048
0.074168
10.08685
2.080508
0.099097
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
0
0.05611
0
0.145981
0.052013
0.064
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
0
0.003604
0
0.07442
0.027921
0.017067
1.16
1
1.032258
0.911765
0.918919
1
0.965517
0.962963
1
1.16
1
1.032258
0.911765
0.918919
1
0.965517
0.962963
1
1
1
1
0.942857
0.966667
0.962963
0.962963
1
0.961538
0.96
1
1.04
0.722222
0.933333
1
0.962963
1
0.961538
0.958333
0.962963
0.805556
1.166667
1.16129
1
1.034483
#DIV/0!
0.110592
0.728266
0.39594
0
0.894454
0.157989
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
0.110592
0.780285
0.494925
0.378465
1.252235
2.7648
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
0.114913
0.212114
0.063938
10.34549
2.011158
0.095794
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
0
0.050499
0
0.159252
0.055865
0.06656
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
0
0.004564
0
0.079612
0.027921
0.018101
#DIV/0!
#NUM!
-0.3912
#NUM!
#NUM!
#NUM!
-2.53838
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
-2.27602
-0.43042
-0.78131
-1.00338
0.195943
0.828916
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
-2.16358
-1.58572
-2.60143
2.311233
0.732612
-2.31166
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#NUM!
-2.88045
#NUM!
-1.92428
-2.95627
-2.74887
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#NUM!
-5.62584
#NUM!
-2.59803
-3.57839
-4.07063
0.14842
0
0.03175
-0.0924
-0.0846
0
-0.0351
-0.0377
0
0.14842
0
0.03175
-0.0924
-0.0846
0
-0.0351
-0.0377
0
0
0
0
-0.0588
-0.0339
-0.0377
-0.0377
0
-0.0392
-0.0408
0
0.03922
-0.3254
-0.069
0
-0.0377
0
-0.0392
-0.0426
-0.0377
-0.2162
0.15415
0.14953
0
0.0339
#DIV/0!
-2.20191
-0.31709
-0.92649
#NUM!
-0.11154
-1.84523
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
-2.20191
-0.2481
-0.70335
-0.97163
0.22493
1.016968
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
-2.16358
-1.55063
-2.74985
2.336551
0.698711
-2.34556
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#NUM!
-2.98581
#NUM!
-1.83726
-2.88481
-2.70965
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#NUM!
-5.38946
#NUM!
-2.53059
-3.57839
-4.01179
SR- Solar Radiation; WS-Wind Speed; CGL Pollutant Concentration At Ground Level;
C4M- Pollutant Concentration At Four Metre Height Level
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
343
editor@iaeme.com
S/N
TEMP
@ 4m
SR
WS
PGL
P4M
X1
X2
LnX1
LnX2
LnY
31
32
350.9
9.7
0.26
0.28
0.67625
1.032
0.728266
-0.3912
0.031749
-0.31709
29
28
14
4.8
0.01
0.02
0.07899
0.966
0.157989
-2.5384
-0.03509
-1.84523
28
28
280
4.8
0.26
0.28
0.10269
0.110592
-2.276
-2.20191
31
32
350.9
9.7
0.25
0.3
0.65024
1.032
0.780285
-0.4304
0.031749
-0.2481
34
31
413.8
0.37
0.4
0.45781
0.912
0.494925
-0.7813
-0.09237
-0.70335
37
34
1220
11.3
0.31
0.32
0.36664
0.919
0.378465
-1.0034
-0.08456
-0.97163
33
33
600
12.9
0.34
0.35
1.21646
1.252235
0.19594
0.22493
29
28
14
4.8
0.29
0.35
2.29083
0.966
2.7648
0.82892
-0.03509
1.016968
27
27
240.6
4.8
0.25
0.25
0.11491
0.114913
-2.1636
-2.16358
10
30
30
151.2
4.8
0.28
0.29
0.2048
0.212114
-1.5857
-1.55063
11
35
33
1025
6.4
0.29
0.25
0.07417
0.943
0.063938
-2.6014
-0.05884
-2.74985
12
30
29
83
12.9
0.39
0.4
10.0869
0.967
10.34549
2.31123
-0.0339
2.336551
13
27
26
37.8
6.4
0.3
0.29
2.08051
0.963
2.011158
0.73261
-0.03774
0.698711
14
27
26
12.4
1.6
0.3
0.29
0.0991
0.963
0.095794
-2.3117
-0.03774
-2.34556
15
25
26
21.9
1.6
0.3
0.27
0.05611
1.04
0.050499
-2.8804
0.039221
-2.98581
16
30
28
250
4.8
0.33
0.36
0.14598
0.933
0.159252
-1.9243
-0.06899
-1.83726
17
29
29
170.1
3.2
0.27
0.29
0.05201
0.055865
-2.9563
-2.88481
18
27
26
16
1.6
0.25
0.26
0.064
0.963
0.06656
-2.7489
-0.03774
-2.70965
19
36
29
341
1.6
0.3
0.38
0.0036
0.806
0.004564
-5.6258
-0.21622
-5.38946
20
31
36
639
4.8
0.43
0.46
0.07442
1.161
0.079612
-2.598
0.149532
-2.53059
21
32
32
422.5
3.2
0.36
0.36
0.02792
0.027921
-3.5784
-3.57839
22
29
30
79.2
1.6
0.33
0.35
0.01707
1.034
0.018101
-4.0706
0.033902
-4.01179
0.996011
0.992037
0.991199
0.168763
22
ANOVA
Regression
Residual
Total
df
2
19
21
SS
67.41776
0.54114
67.9589
Intercept
LnX1
LnX2
Coefficients
0.055953
0.993589
-0.38145
Standard
Error
0.051002
0.020575
0.548898
MS
33.70888
0.028481
F
1183.555
Significance
F
1.15E-20
t Stat
1.097082
48.29019
-0.69493
P-value
0.286316
2.4E-21
0.495509
Lower 95%
-0.05079
0.950524
-1.5303
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
344
Upper
95%
0.162702
1.036653
0.767409
Lower
95.0%
-0.05079
0.950524
-1.5303
Upper
95.0%
0.162702
1.036653
0.767409
editor@iaeme.com
From Table 5, the parameters of Equation (12) are thus, substituted to yield
Equation (13) as:
Equation (13a)
OR
Equation (13b)
Substituting the terms of Equation (11) into Equation (13) yields Equation (14) as:
Equation (14a)
OR
..
Equation (14b)
Equation (14c)
OR
Equation (15)
OBSERVED
PREDICTED
0.272334763
DIFF IN
ERROR
5.88E-05
PERCENTAGE
ERROR (%)
0.02098425
0.28
0.02
0.010893837
8.29E-05
0.414611
0.28
0.279004013
9.92E-07
0.000354282
0.3
0.261926201
0.001449614
0.483204667
0.4
0.407361415
5.42E-05
0.0135476
0.32
0.340771576
0.000431458
0.134830625
0.35
0.359114913
8.31E-05
0.0237376
0.35
0.30917434
0.001666734
0.476209714
0.25
0.268079786
0.000326879
0.1307516
10
0.29
0.299139094
8.35E-05
0.028801034
11
0.25
0.318925135
0.004750674
1.9002696
12
0.4
0.411666754
0.000136113
0.03402825
13
0.29
0.320356599
0.000921523
0.317766552
14
0.29
0.326670352
0.001344715
0.463694828
15
0.27
0.318378615
0.00234049
0.866848148
16
0.36
0.362744786
7.53E-06
0.002092736
17
0.29
0.291001258
1.00E-06
0.000345697
18
0.26
0.272989405
0.000168725
0.064894231
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
345
editor@iaeme.com
S/N
OBSERVED
PREDICTED
0.35719472
DIFF IN
ERROR
0.000520081
PERCENTAGE
ERROR (%)
0.136863421
19
0.38
20
0.46
0.436747523
0.000540678
0.117538696
21
0.36
0.38955228
0.000873337
0.242593611
22
0.35
0.353615691
1.31E-05
0.0037352
MSE =
Equation (16)
predicted concentration.
y = 0.9436x + 0.025
R = 0.9059
Linear (PREDICTED)
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
observed concentration.
TEMP
@ GL
25
28
TEMP
@ 4M
29
28
9.7
8
350.9
413.8
31
34
5
6
11.3
12.9
1220
600
4.8
1.6
9
10
11
S/N
WS
SR
1
2
0
4.8
PGL
P4M
0
0
0
0.28
3
4
32
31
0.26
0
0.28
0.32
37
33
34
33
0
0
0
0.25
14
29
28
0.01
0.02
27
26
0.32
1.6
26
26
0.28
0
4.8
0
280
25
28
29
28
0.3
0.26
0.27
0.28
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
346
editor@iaeme.com
350.9
413.8
TEMP
@ GL
31
34
TEMP
@ 4M
32
31
11.3
12.9
1220
600
37
33
16
17
4.8
1.6
14
0
18
19
1.6
1.6
20
21
S/N
WS
SR
12
13
9.7
8
PGL
P4M
0.25
0.37
0.3
0.4
14
15
34
33
0.31
0.34
0.32
0.35
29
27
28
26
0.29
0.27
0.35
0.29
0
0
26
24
26
24
0.29
0.25
0.3
0.24
4.8
4.8
240.6
151.2
27
30
27
30
0.25
0.28
0.25
0.29
22
23
6.4
12.9
1025
83
35
30
33
29
0.29
0.39
0.25
0.4
24
25
6.4
1.6
37.8
12.4
27
27
26
26
0.3
0.3
0.29
0.29
26
26
26
0.21
0.27
27
26
25
0.25
0.26
28
25
24
0.26
0.27
29
30
0
1.6
14.1
21.9
25
25
25
26
0.31
0.3
0.31
0.27
31
32
102
36
26
0.3
0.27
4.8
250
30
28
0.33
0.36
33
34
3.2
1.6
170.1
16
29
27
29
26
0.27
0.25
0.29
0.26
35
36
0
1.6
0
0
26
26
26
25
0.23
0.22
0.27
0.29
37
38
0
0
0
60.2
24
27
23
26
0.22
0.38
0.3
0.31
39
40
1.6
0
341
1092
36
30
29
35
0.3
0.37
0.38
0.4
41
42
4.8
3.2
639
422.5
31
32
36
32
0.43
0.36
0.46
0.36
43
1.6
79.2
29
30
0.33
0.35
Regression
Residual
Total
df
2
40
42
SS
0.161106757
0.268883941
0.429990698
Intercept
WS
PGL
Coefficients
0.1371951
0.0034904
0.5203211
Standard
Error
0.032979952
0.003124896
0.106927182
MS
0.080553
0.006722
F
11.98337
Significance
F
8.36E-05
t Stat
4.159956
1.11697
4.866126
P-value
0.000164
0.270672
1.81E-05
Lower 95%
0.07054
-0.00283
0.304213
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
347
Upper
95%
0.20385
0.009806
0.736429
Lower
95.0%
0.07054
-0.00283
0.304213
Upper
95.0%
0.20385
0.009806
0.736429
editor@iaeme.com
Regression Statistics
Multiple R
0.6017704
R Square
Adjusted R
Square
0.3621276
Standard Error
0.0828069
Observations
43
0.3302339
ANOVA
df
SS
MS
Significance F
Regression
0.155711484
0.077855742
11.35423
0.000124359
Residual
40
0.274279214
0.00685698
Total
42
0.429990698
Coefficients
Standard Error
t Stat
P-value
Lower 95%
Upper
95%
Lower
95.0%
Upper
95.0%
Intercept
0.1487193
0.030675323
4.848173089
1.92E-05
0.086722135
0.210716
0.086722
0.210716
SR
2.441E-05
3.6961E-05
0.660493418
0.512723
-5.02885E-05
9.91E-05
-5E-05
9.91E-05
PGL
0.5059721
0.107212431
4.719341636
2.88E-05
0.289287684
0.722656
0.289288
0.722656
0.615835
R Square
0.379252
Adjusted R Square
0.348215
Standard Error
0.081688
Observations
43
ANOVA
df
SS
MS
Significance
F
Regression
0.163075
0.081538
12.21922
7.22E-05
Residual
40
0.266916
0.006673
Total
42
0.429991
Coefficients
Standard
Error
t Stat
P-value
Lower 95%
Upper
95%
Lower
95.0%
Upper
95.0%
Intercept
0.032137
0.102542
0.313402
0.755604
-0.17511
0.239381
-0.17511
0.239381
TEMP @ GL
0.004215
0.003384
1.245708
0.220119
-0.00262
0.011054
-0.00262
0.011054
PGL
0.506045
0.105763
4.784682
2.35E-05
0.292289
0.719801
0.292289
0.719801
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
348
editor@iaeme.com
0.613032
R Square
0.375808
Adjusted R Square
0.344598
Standard Error
0.081914
Observations
43
ANOVA
df
SS
MS
Significance F
Regression
0.161594
0.080797
12.04142
8.06E-05
Residual
40
0.268397
0.00671
Total
42
0.429991
Coefficients
Standard Error
t Stat
P-value
Lower 95%
Upper
95%
Lower
95.0%
Upper 95.0%
Intercept
0.030771
0.111589
0.275749
0.784161
-0.19476
0.2563
-0.19476
0.2563
TEMP @ 4m
0.004393
0.00382
1.149997
0.256974
-0.00333
0.012113
-0.00333
0.012113
PGL
0.500585
0.10616
4.715383
2.92E-05
0.286028
0.715142
0.286028
0.715142
OBSERVED
PREDICTED
DIFF IN ERROR
0.28
0.262292523
0.000313555
PERCENTAGE ERROR
(%)
0.111983929
0.02
0.010711075
8.63E-05
0.4314205
0.28
0.269104971
0.000118702
0.042393571
0.3
0.252267773
0.002278366
0.759455333
0.4
0.391925614
6.52E-05
0.016298925
0.32
0.325594238
3.13E-05
0.009779844
0.35
0.344685261
2.82E-05
0.008070429
0.35
0.303987423
0.002117157
0.604902
0.25
0.25881985
7.78E-05
0.03111592
10
0.29
0.289667698
1.10E-07
3.80776E-05
11
0.25
0.305061216
0.003031738
1.2126952
12
0.4
0.400168211
2.83E-08
7.0737E-06
13
0.29
0.31298273
0.000528206
0.18214
14
0.29
0.321439907
0.000988468
0.340851034
15
0.27
0.31214063
0.001775833
0.657715926
16
0.36
0.350128921
9.74E-05
0.027066167
17
0.29
0.281574824
7.10E-05
0.024477103
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
349
editor@iaeme.com
predicted
POINTS
OBSERVED
PREDICTED
DIFF IN ERROR
18
0.26
0.268179872
6.69E-05
PERCENTAGE ERROR
(%)
0.025734731
19
0.38
0.344086428
0.001289785
0.339417105
20
0.46
0.419029294
0.001678599
0.364912826
21
0.36
0.374741314
0.000217306
0.060362778
22
0.35
0.343841902
3.79E-05
0.010834914
0.5
0.45
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
y = 0.9436x + 0.025
R = 0.9059
Linear (PREDICTED)
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
observed
3. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
The development of a model to predict ozone concentration in obstruction prone areas
is presented as Equation (15). The model developed is obtained via dimensional
analysis and the multiple linear regression was employed to calibrate it. This model
achieves a correlation coefficient of 0.996 and shows a very high significance in the
x1 term made of wind speed, ground level ozone concentration and solar radiation.
Verification of the model shows a correlation coefficient of 0.905 and MSE of 0.0007
when the observed concentrations were plotted against the predicted.
The maximum ozone gas measured from the Choba study area was 0.45mg/m and
this lies within the range for urban areas (0.3mg/m 3 0.8mg/m3) as stated by the
World Bank group in 1998.
Detailed sensitivity analysis on individual meteorological parameters was carried
out to evaluate the significance of each parameter on the uplifting of ozone. A
summary of the results of significance is presented on Table 13. Because of the
sensitivity in variation of air pollution concentrations 20% level of significance was
selected for critical value of t-statistic. Temperature at ground level is the most
significant meteorological parameter in pollutant uplifting. Though it has been
established that thermal effects result mainly from the variation of solar heating of the
ground (Xie, 2005), surprisingly solar radiation shows no significance in pollutant
uplifting. This is because the process of heating takes time and so the time a high
solar radiation is measured would be different from the time pollutants start showing
significant uplifting (See Figure 5).
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
350
editor@iaeme.com
t-statistic
1.11697
0.66049
1.245708
t-critical (t.80)
0.858
0.858
0.858
0.858
1.149997
comment
Significant
Non-Significant
Significant
Significant
0.45
1400
0.4
1200
0.35
1000
0.3
0.25
800
0.2
600
0.15
400
0.1
SIGNIFICAN
SOLAR RADIATION
OZONE CONCENTRATION
200
0.05
0
0
1
NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS
Figure 6 Plot showing solar radiation against ground level and four metre height ozone
With the information obtained from Table 13, Equation (15) is rewritten with
solar radiation removed and the verification of the modified model shows no
reduction in the correlation coefficient which further confirms the irrelevance of solar
radiation in the developed model.
Figures 6 and 7 show a plot of the concentrations of ozone at ground level and
four metre height measured on the field with corresponding wind speed and ground
level temperatures. In agreement with the modeling carried out, peak values of wind
speed and temperatures are associated with ground level uplifting (the case where the
4 metre height ozone concentrations are greater than the ground level concentrations).
0.5
0.45
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
wind speed
ozone conct.
S/N
1
2
3
4
OZONE CONC. GL
OZONE CONC. @ 4M
WIND SPEED
0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43
sampling number
Figure 6 Field observations of average wind speed, ground and four metre height ozone
concentrations
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
351
editor@iaeme.com
0.5
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
ozone conct.
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
OZONE CONC. GL
OZONE CONC. @ 4M
temp. @ GL
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43
sampling number
Figure 7 Field observations of ground level temperature, ground and four metre height Ozone
concentrations
High temperatures and wind speed have been seen to facilitate vertical uplifting of
ozone and this agrees with works of Xie (2015), which considered heating of the
earths surfaces with small velocities of 1 & 2 m/s. In this work higher wind velocities
and temperatures have shown increased pollutant uplifting (See to Figures 6 & 7).
Other measured pollutants also confirmed temperature as the most important
meteorological variable in pollutant uplifting when their significance are considered
in relation to pollutant uplifting (See Table 14).
Table 14 T-statistic for other pollutants on relating the significance of pollutant uplifting
S/N
VARIABLES
NO
CO
t-statistic values
2.226274
-1.76596
TSP
t-critical (t.80)
0.858
1.41408
Lastly, efforts to calibrate the general model (Equation 11) for other pollutants
like NO2, CO and TSP measured from the study area failed to produce high
correlation coefficients (See Figures 8-10 and Table 15). This may be taken as an
unexplained variation which can be attributed to the fact that ozone is a secondary
pollutant and can be formed hundreds of kilometers from the source of
emission(World Bank group, 1998) and primary pollutants do not have this property.
The other measured pollutants still show trends of pollutant uplifting during periods
of high temperature and wind speed (See Figures 11 -16).
800
y = 0.5606x + 98.591
R = 0.2345
600
400
200
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
OBSERVED TSP
352
editor@iaeme.com
PREDICTED CO
12
10
y = -0.2187x + 7.7625
R = 0.036
8
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
14
OBSERVED CO
0.25
0.2
y = 0.6825x + 0.0333
R = 0.3362
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
0.2
OBSERVED NO2
40
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
TEMP/CONCT
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
CONCT.
GL TEMP
4 M CO POLLUTANT
GL CO POLLUTANT
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43
SAMPLE NUMBER
Figure 11 Field observations of ground level temperature, ground and four metre height CO
concentrations
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
353
editor@iaeme.com
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
10
50
40
30
20
10
CO CONCT.
CO CONCT/ WS
WS
4 M CO CONCT
GL CO CONCT
0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43
SAMPLE NUMBER
Figure 12 Field observations of average wind speed, ground and four metre height CO
concentrations
14
2.5
12
1.5
NO2 CONCT.
WS
10
WS
GL NO2
CONCT.
4 M NO2
CONCT.
4
0.5
2
0
0
1
9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43
SAMPLE NUMBER
Figure 13 Field observations of average wind speed, ground and four metre height NO2
concentrations
40
2.5
35
TEMP
25
1.5
20
1
15
10
0.5
NO2 CONCT.
30
GL TEMP.
GL NO2 CONCT
4 M NO2 CONCT.
5
0
0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43
SAMPLE NUMBER
Figure 14 Field observations of ground level temperature, ground and four metre height NO2
concentrations
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
354
editor@iaeme.com
1600
14
1400
12
10
1000
800
6
600
WS
TSP CONCT.
1200
GL TSP CONCT.
4 M TSP CONCT.
400
WS
200
0
0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43
SAMPLE NUMBER
1600
40
1400
35
1200
30
1000
25
800
20
600
15
400
10
200
GL TEMP.
TSP CONCT.
Figure 15 Field observations of average wind speed, ground and four meter height TSP
concentrations
GL TSP
4 M TSP CONCT.
GL TEMP
0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43
SAMPLE NUMBER
Figure 16 Field observations of ground level temperature, ground and four metre height TSP
concentrations
4. CONCLUSION
From the research carried out, the following conclusions can be drawn;
1. A model has been developed and calibrated for predicting ozone uplifting from
ground level to a maximum of four metre height. The model yielded a correlation
coefficient of 0.996.
2. The process of pollutant uplifting is generally facilitated by ground level temperature
and wind speed velocity.
3. The most important meteorological parameter during ozone uplifting has been
established statistically through test of significance to be ground level Temperature
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
355
editor@iaeme.com
REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
356
editor@iaeme.com
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]
[26]
[27]
[28]
Li, X., Wang, J., Tu, X.,Liu, W. and Huang, Z.(2007):vertical variation of
particle number concentration and size distribution in a street canyon in
Shanghai, China. Science of the Total Environment: 378(3):306-16.
Lin, J. and Hildemann, L. (1996). Analytical solutions of the Atmospheric
Diffusion Equation with multiple sources and height dependent wind
speed and eddy diffusivity. Atmos. Environ. 30:239-254.
Lohmeyer, A. (2001). Comparison of the procedures of different modelers
for air pollutant concentrations prediction in a street canyon- the
podbielski street exercise, http:/www.lohmeyer.de/podbi/.
Murena, F.,Favale, G., Vardoulakis, S. and Solazzo, E. (2009): Modeling
dispersion of traffic pollution in a deep street Canyon: Application of CFD
and operational models. Atmospheric Environment 2009; 43(14):2303-11.
Niachou, K., Livada, I., Santamouris, M. (2008): Experimental study of
Temperature and airflow distribution inside an urban street canyon during
hot summer weather conditions. Part II: air flow analysis. Building and
Environment. 43(8):1393-403.
Oke, T. (1988): Design of urban canopy layer climate. Energy and
Building: 11:103-13.
Stull, R.B. (1988). An Introduction to Boundary layer Meteorology, Kluwer
Academic Publishers
Seinfeld, J. (1986). Atmospheric chemistry and physics of air pollution, Wileyinterscience, New York.
Sharan, M. and Modani, M. (2006): A two-Dimensional analytical model for the
dispersion of air pollution in the atmosphere with a capping inversion. Atmos
Environ. 40:3479 3489.
Sharan, M. and Kumar, P. (2009): An analytical model for crosswind integrated
concentration released from a continuous source in a finite Atmospheric
boundary layer. Atmos Environ. 43:2268 2277.
The World Bank Group (1998)
Xie, X., Huang, Z., Wang, J., and Xie, Z. (2005): The impact of solar radiation
and street layout on pollutant dispersion in street canyon. Science direct. 40
(2005) 201-212.
Yang, Y. and Shao, Y. (2008): Numerical simulations of flow and pollutant
dispersion in urban atmospheric boundary layers. Environmental modeling and
assessment: 23: 906-21.
Yucong, M, Shuhua, L, Yijia, Z., Shu, W., and Yuan, Li. (2014): Numerical
study of Traffic pollutant dispersion within different street canyon configurations.
Advances in meteorology. Volume 2014
Zhao-Lin, G., Yun-Wei, Z., Yan, C., and Shun-Cheng, L. (2011): Effect of
uneven building layout on air flow and pollutant dispersion in non-uniform street
canyons. Building and Environment. 46 (2011) 2657-2665.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp
357
editor@iaeme.com