Characterizing the dispersive state of convective boundary layers for applied dispersion modeling

Estimates from semiempirical models that characterize surface heat flux, mixing depth, and profiles of temperature, wind, and turbulence are compared with observations from atmospheric field studies conducted in Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, and Minnesota. Sodar observations are compared with tower measurements at the Colorado site, for wind and turbulence profiles. The median surface heat flux, as calculated using surface-layer flux-profile relationships and an energy budget model, was consistently overestimated by 20 to 80%. Several mixing-depth models were evaluated: (1) integration of the hourly surface heat flux and friction velocity, (2) solving for the time rate of change of profiles of virtual potential temperature, and (3) an interpolation scheme used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in regulatory dispersion models. For the late afternoon, 80 to 90% of the estimates from the first and third models were within 40% of the observed values. For the morning hours after sunrise, all were less accurate. Temperature estimates from surface-layer flux-profile relationships compared well with observations within the mixed layer, but were too low for the inversion layer aloft. Wind profiles were derived using surface-layer flux-profile relationships, a windprofile power-law based on Pasquill stability category, and sodar measurements. The sodar measurements were superior to both types of model estimates. Turbulence profiles were derived from sodar measurements and from semiempirical similarity relationships based on mixing depth and Obukhov length. The scatter in the comparisons with the sodar observations is twice that seen in the comparisons with empirical profile relationships. Overall, it appears that uncertainty of as low as 20 to 30% in the characterization of the diffusion meteorology is the exception rather than the rule.On assignment from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U. S. Department of Commerce.Disclaimer: Although the research described in this article has been supported by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, it has not been subjected to Agency review and therefore does not necessarily reflect the views of the Agency and no official endorsement should be inferred. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.