4.

1 Introduction

The atmospheric dispersion of air pollutants has been rigorously

studied by many researchers in various ways. Various methods of
solution and approximation approaches have been used in the past to deal
with the dispersion of air pollutants. Some of them are given below:

Ermark (1977) has presented an atmospheric transport and

deposition model for air pollutants emitted from an elevated point source
over flat terrain. The model is analytical and treats gravitational settling
and dry deposition in a more physically-realistic manner than the source
depletion approach.

Moreira et al. (2006) have given an analytical solution for the non
stationary two dimensional advection-diffusion equations to simulate the
pollutant dispersion in the planetary boundary layer. They solved the
advection–diffusion equation by the use of the Laplace transform
technique and the solution of the resulting stationary problem by the
generalized integral Laplace transform technique.

Cassol et al. (2009) have presented an analytical solution for the

transient two- dimensional atmospheric pollutant dispersion problem.
They used the double generalized integral transform technique, the
Laplace transform and the matrix diagonalization to find the solution.

John(2011) have given a detailed look at the basic mathematics

behind atmospheric dispersion modelling , based on Gaussian plume
approximations to the advection-diffusion equation with a continuous
plume source .

77
 Chandra et al. (2011) developed a mathematical model for
transport of air pollutant emitted from a point source considering settling
of particles and dry deposition. They applied the wind speed and vertical
eddy diffusivity as the function of height.

Moreira et al. (2013) have given a solution of the two- dimensional

steady state advection-diffusion equation that considers dry and wet
deposition, settling velocity, first order chemical reactions and can be
applied for describing the turbulent dispersion of many scalar quantities
such as air pollution, radioactive material and heat.

Goncalves et al. (2013) have presented an analytical solution in

series expansion using the well-known GILTT method to solve the two-
dimensional advection-diffusion equation. A Strum-Liouville problem
carrying more information of the original problem given by Bessel
functions is considered.

Kumar and Sharma (2015) proposed a two- dimensional analytical

dispersion model for the crosswind integrated concentrations released
from continuous point sources in the atmospheric surface layer with
deposition to the ground surface. They considered the variability of the
wind speed and eddy diffusivity as the power law functions of the vertical
height above the ground surface.

Moreira et al. (2016) have presented a semi- analytical solution for

the atmospheric diffusion equation considering wind speed as a function
of both downwind distance from a pollution source and vertical height.
Their solution suggested that mesoscale winds have an effect on
contaminant dispersion.

78
 In this chapter, a mathematical model for dispersion of air
pollutants with settling of particles and dry deposition is developed. The
wind velocity, removal mechanism and vertical eddy diffusivity with
varying height have been taken into account. The Generalized Integral
Laplace Transform Technique is used to solve the mathematical model
which is given below:

4.2 Mathematical Model

The two dimensional steady-state dispersion model for air

pollutants emitted from a point source with settling of particles and dry
deposition is described as follows:

C C   C 
U z  ws   KZ    zC (4.1)
x z z  z 

The following boundary conditions are taken into account:

C
KZ  ws C  vd C , z0 (4.2)
z
C
KZ 0 , zh (4.3)
z

alongwith the following continuous source condition:

U  z  C  0, z   Qp  z  H s  (4.4)

where 𝐶 is the concentration of air pollutants and ws is the settling

velocity, U  z  is the mean wind velocity in 𝑥 direction, K Z is the vertical

eddy diffusivity, vd is the deposition velocity, Q p is the strength of point

source ( emission rate), H s is the planetary boundary level height
(effective height of the source) ,  is the Dirac-delta function and   z  is
the rate of removal of pollutants due to some natural mechanism.
79
 Generally, it is said that component of wind velocity in the 𝑥 -
direction is very large in comparison to component in the z- direction and
so 𝐾𝑧 ≫ 𝐾𝑥 . Therefore, the effect of dispersion in the 𝑥 - direction can be
neglected as compared to advection in 𝑥 - direction, while in the z-
direction advection can be neglected as compared to dispersion.

4.3 Method of Solution

To solve the problem, we construct the auxiliary Strum-Liouville

problem associated to the original problem and expand the pollutants
concentration in a truncated series, having as base functions the
eigenfunctions of the Strum-Liouville problem. The transformed
equation is obtained from the eigen functions orthoganality properties,
multiplying by the eigenfunctions and integrating over range of z. This
procedure leads to a set of differential equations which are solved by the
use of generalized integral Laplace transform techniques. To find the
eigenfunctions of the associated Strum-Liouville problem, we discuss the
solution of the problem in following two cases:

Case I: When settling velocity is equal to deposition velocity i.e.

ws  vd

In this case, the associated Strum-Liouville problem and the

respective boundary conditions become:

i''  z   i2i'  z   0 , 0 zh (4.5)

i'  z   0 , z  0, h (4.6)

The analytical solution of equation (4.5) is given by

i  z   A cos(i z )  B sin(i z ) (4.7)

80
 Differentiating (4.7) with respect to z, we get

 '  z    Ai sin(i z )  Bi cos(i z )

i
(4.8)

Using the boundary conditions (4.6) in (4.8), we get

0  0  Bi which gives 𝐵 = 0 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝜆𝑖 ≠ 0 (4.9)

and 0   Ai sin i  h   Bi cos i  h  (4.10)

Using the value B  0 from equation (4.9) we get

0   Ai sin i (h) or Ai sin i (h)  0, asi  0

Again, if we take A  0, then equation (4.7) gives i  z   0, which is

not an Eigen function. Therefore, for the existence of the Eigen function,
we take A  0. Thus, we have

or sin i h  0 , since A and i  0

Therefore, we can write sin i h  sin i

i
which gives i h  i or i 
h

Thus, the required solution of equation (4.5) is given by

i
i  z   A cos(i z ) , where i  , 0  0
h

Taking A  1 , the above solution can be written as

i  z   cos(i z ) (4.11)

81
Case II: When settling velocity is not equal to deposition velocity i.e.
ws  vd

In this case, the associated Strum-Liouville problem and respective

boundary conditions become:

i''  z   i2i'  z   0, , 0 zh (4.12)

K Z i'  z   wsi  z   vdi  z  , z  0 (4.13)

i'  z   0 , zh (4.14)

The analytical solution of equation (4.12) is given by

i  z   A cos(i z )  B sin(i z ) (4.15)

Differentiating equation (4.15) with respect to z, we get

 '  z    Ai sin(i z )  Bi cos(i z )

i
(4.16)

At z  0 , equation (4.15) gives i  0   A

At z  h , equation (4.16) gives  '  h    Ai sin i  h   Bi cos i  h 

i

Using equation (4.14) in it, we get 0   Ai sin i h  Bi cos i h

B
or Ai sin i h  Bi cos i h  0 which gives  tan i h (4.17)
A

B
Using this value of in equation (4.15), we get
A

B
i  z   A[cos i z  sin i z ]
A

A
or i  z   A[cos i z  tan i h.sin i z ] or i  z   cos i  h  z 
cos i h

82
 Now, using equations (4.15) and (4.16) in (4.13), we get

K Z   Ai sin i z  Bi cos i z   ws  A cos i z  B sin i z   vd  A cos i z  B sin i z 

Again, at z  0 , the above equation reduces to

K Z  0  Bi   ws  A  0   vd  A  0 

(vd  ws ) A
or K z Bi  ws A  vd A which gives Bi 
Kz

B (vd  ws )
 i  , where K z is evaluated at z0 .
A K z  z0 

B
Now, using the value of  tan i h in the above equation, we get
A

(vd  ws )
i tan i h 
K Z  z0 

Thus, the solution of equation (4.12) is given by

A (vd  ws )
i  z   cos i  h  z  , where i tan i h 
cos i h K Z  z0 

A
 i  z   cos i  h  z  , by taking 1 (4.18)
cos i h

The functions i  z  are known as Eigen functions corresponding to

the Eigen values i associated with the Strum-Liouville problem.

Now, equation (4.1) can be put in the following form:

C  2C C k z C
U z  K Z 2  ws    zC
x z z z z

83
 C  2C K C
or U  z  K Z 2  ( ws  z )   zC (4.19)
x z z z

Let i ( z) be orthonormal Eigen functions associated with the

Strum-Liouville problem and let us take the solution of equation (4.1) i.e.,
equation (4.19) in the form


C  x, z    Ci  x  i ( z ) (4.20)
i 0

Substituting the value of C  x, z  in equation (4.19), we get

  2  K  
U  z  [ Ci  x  i ( z )]  K Z 2 [ Ci  x  i ( z )]  ( ws  Z ) [ Ci  x  i ( z )]
x i0 z i0 z z i0

  z   Ci  x  i ( z )
i 0

 
K Z 
U  z   Ci  x  i ( z )  K Z  Ci  x  i ( z )  ( ws  ) Ci  x  i' ( z )
' ''

i 0 i 0 z i0


  z   Ci  x  i ( z )
i 0

Now, we multiply the above equation by  j ( z ) and integrating

from 0 to h with respect to z, we get

 h  h

 Ci  x  u  z  i ( z ) j ( z )dz   Ci  x  K Z  i ( z ) j ( z )dz
' ''

i 0 0 i 0 0


K Z '
h
  Ci  x   ( ws  ) i ( z ) j ( z )dz
i 0 0
z

 h
 Ci  x     z  i ( z ) j ( z )dz
i 0 0

 h
  ( Ci ( x))  K Z  i ( z )  j ( z ) dz
i
2

i 0 0

84
 
K Z '
h
  Ci  x   ( ws  ) i ( z ) j ( z )dz
i 0 0
z

 h
 Ci  x     z  i ( z ) j ( z )dz
i 0 0

 h  h

 Ci  x  u  z  i ( z ) j ( z )dz   Ci ( x)[i2  K Z i ( z ) j ( z )dz

'

i 0 0 i 0 0

K Z '
h h
  ( ws  ) i ( z ) j ( z )dz     z  i ( z ) j ( z )dz  0 (4.21)
0
z 0

Now, taking Y ( x)  {ci ( x)}, H  E 1F and E  {eij }, where

h
eij   u  z  i ( z ) j ( z ) dz and F  { f ij }, where
0

h h
K z ' h
f ij    K z  i ( z ) j ( z )dz   ( ws 
2
) i ( z )  j ( z )dz     z  i ( z )  j ( z )dz
z
i
0 0 0

The equation (4.21) can be written as Y ' ( x){eij }  Y ( x){ fij }  0

or Y ' ( x) E  Y ( x) F  0 or Y ' ( x)  E 1FY ( x)  0

or Y ' ( x)  HY ( x)  0, by using H  E 1F (4.22)

Using the boundary condition (4.4) in equation (4.20), we get


U ( z )C (0, z )  Q p ( z  H s ) or U ( z ) Ci  0  i ( z )  Q p ( z  H s )
i 0

Multiplying it by  j ( z ) and integrating from 0 to h w. r.t. z, we get

h  h

 U  z  Ci  0  i ( z ) j ( z )dz   Qp ( z  H s ) j ( z )dz

0 i 0 0

 h h

or  ( U  z  i ( z ) j ( z )dz )Ci  0   Q p   ( z  H s ) j ( z )dz

i 0 0 0

85
 Qp  j ( H s )
 Ci  0   h
for i  j (4.23)
 U  z 
2
i ( z )dz )
0

Qp  i ( H s )
Thus, we have Ci  0   h
for i  0 (4.24)
 U  z 
2
i ( z )dz )
0

Qp  0 ( H s )
For 𝑖 = 0 ,we get C0  0   h
for i  0 (4.25)
 U  z 
2
0 ( z )dz )
0

Taking Laplace transform of equation (4.22), we get

PY ( P)  Y (0)  HY ( P)  0 or ( P  H )Y ( P)  Y (0)  0 (4.26)

where Y ( P ) is the Laplace transform of Y ( x ) . The matrix H can be

decomposed into Eigen vectors and Eigen values as

H  XDX 1 (4.27)

where X is the matrix of the Eigen vectors and D is the diagonal matrix of
Eigen values of H . From equation (4.26), we can write

Y ( P)  ( P  H ) 1Y (0)  ( P  XDX 1 )1Y (0)  [ X ( PX 1  DX 1 )]1Y (0)

 ( PX 1  DX 1 )1 X 1Y (0)

 [( PI  D) X 1 ]1 X 1Y (0)

 [ X ( PI  D)1 X 1 ]Y (0)

Y ( P)  [ X ( PI  D) 1 X 1 ]Y (0) (4.28)

where I is the identity matrix.

86
 The elements of the diagonal matrix ( PI  D ) have the form { p  di } ,
where di are the Eigen values of the matrix H . Now, since the inverse of a
diagonal matrix is the inverse of their elements, therefore, the diagonal
1
elements of ( PI  D)1 are , whose inverse Laplace transform is e  di x .
( p  di )

If A( x ) is the diagonal matrix with elements e  d x , then the solution of the

i

equation (4.28) is given by

Y ( x)  {Ci ( x)}  XA( x) X 1Y (0) (4.29)

Therefore, the final solution is given by


C ( x, z )   XA( x) X 1Y (0)  i ( z ) (4.30)
i 0

4.4 Results and Discussion

To find the value of concentration C, the wind velocity, the vertical

eddy diffusivity and rate of removal of pollutants are expressed as a
function of height and are represented by the power laws with power
index p, n and r respectively as given below [Van Uden (1978), Haung
(1979), Prashant et al (2011)]:

U (z) = u1 zp , Kz(z) = K1 zn and  ( z )  1 z r where u1 , k1 and 1 are

constants.

The diffusion parameters and meteorological conditions are taken

as follows:

Wind speed u1 = 5 ms -1 at a height of 10m; the power law indexes are p

= 0.15, n = 1and r=1.

87
 The change in concentration (C* = C/Q) profiles with respect to
vertical distance z and downward distance 𝑥 is shown in Fig.4.1.

110
100
x=1000
Series2
90 x=2000
Series3
80 x=3000
Series4
Vertical distance z

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Concentration c*

Fig. 4.1 Vertical profiles of concentration (C*) for various downward

distances.

It is verified the traditional behaviour of pollution dispersion,

larger value of concentration for short distance, which become smaller
with increase in the downward distance. For stable flow, the value of C*
first increases with the increasing value of z and becomes maximum at
some height and then decreases with increasing value of z and finally
tends to zero for large value of z, which fits good with natural behavior of
pollutant dispersion.

Relation between ground surface concentration and source height

is shown in Fig.4.2. The concentration near to the source decreases with
the increase in source height .This shows that concentration with nearby
areas of source is more and then gradually decreases with distance. The
ground level concentration is quite sensitive to source height.

88
 6

Hs=10
Series1
5 Hs=20
Series2
Hs=40
Series3
4
Concentration

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Downwind Distance x

Fig. 4.2 Ground surface concentration curves with downward distance

for various source heights.

Therefore, in order to dispose air pollutants over a large area, large

value of source height should be considered.

The effect of settling of particles on the ground-level concentration

is shown in Fig. 4.3. With increase in settling velocity the ground-level
concentration increases upto some distance and after that it changes its
pattern. This is because of the fact that as the settling velocity increases,
then after some downwind distance only light particles left in the smoke
and gravitational force becomes almost ineffective on these particles.

89
 3.6
3.4
3.2 ws=0.03
3.0 ws=0.01
2.8
2.6
2.4
Concentration c*

2.2
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Downwind Distance x

Fig. 4.3 Variation of ground level downward concentration for different settling
velocities.

There is a decrease in concentration near the ground surface when

deposition is considered as shown in Fig.4.4,

120
Vd=0
100 Vd=0.3

80
Vertical height z

60

40

20

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Concentration c*

Fig. 4.4 Vertical profile of concentration with deposition

and non deposition at 𝒙=500m.

90
since dry deposition by trees, leaves, plants and buildings etc. clearly
decreases the ground level concentration.

Fig. 4.5 shows the variation of downward ground-level

concentration for various dry deposition velocities. Ground level
concentration decreases with the increasing value of deposition velocities
at the same downward distance.

3.5 vd=0

3.0 vd=0.1
vd=0.3
Concentrationc*

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
Downwind Distance x

Fig. 4.5 Variation in ground level concentration with downwind

for different deposition velocities.

In Fig. 4.6, we have shown the numerical convergence of the

proposed solution for the concentration by GILTT at x=4000 m and H s =
10 m, with the increasing number of eigenvalues.

91
 3.0
x=4000
2.5
c*

2.0
Concentration

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0
0 20 40 60 80
Eigen Values

Fig. 4.6 Convergence of the model for ground level concentration.

This results that we can reach up to a prescribed accuracy by

varying the number of eigenvalues.

4.5 Conclusion

In this chapter, the Generalized Integral Laplace Transform

Technique is used for the modelling of air pollutant dispersion by
considering settling of particles and dry deposition. It is found that the
ground level concentration C increases first with the increment of height
z and settling velocity and after that it changes its pattern. Similarly, after
some distance, the ground level concentration decreases with increasing
the value of deposition velocity. The detail results are presented
graphically for showing the effect of settling of particles and dry
deposition on the ground level concentration.

92