\



.

\

A
o
o
2 2
* Equation 2.4
 Conservation of Momentum
1. Vertical Momentum:
( ) ( )
2 2 2
*
*
R V
dt
d
WE
T
T
g R V W R V
dt
d
p p
a
p p p p
o +


.

\

A
= Equation 2.6
2. Horizontal Momentum:
( ) ( ) ( )
p a
V
x d x p p
Sin R V U C U V R V
dt
d
u / /
2 2
= Equation 2.6
15
2.4: TIME  SERIES MODELS
Timeseries models have been developed to take advantage of the availability of time
linked (hourly, daily, monthly), sitespecific concentration data. The concentration at
time, t is related to past concentrations at the same site, and to present and past
meteorological conditions and source strengths
711
.
2.5 INTRAURBAN MODELS.
Some studies focus on the spatial distribution of concentrations, their distance decay, and
their relation to population density. Using intraurban model, Hewitt (1991)
12
showed
that there is an apparent distance decay of NO
2
concentration in the urban area of
Lancaster, U.K, from the city. Anderson and Greenberg (1981)
13
used the discriminate
analysis to assess the impact of 21 landuse categories on particulate concentration at 30
monitoring sites in New Jersey. Geographical Information systems (GIS) models belong
to this model category, though it makes use of a GIS to interrelate various spatial data
sets.
2.6 BOX MODELS
This is a simple model used to get an initial estimate of concentration values. It is based
on the mass conservation of a pollutant in a box. The reference frame is Eulerian, that is,
fixed frame, rather than Lagrangrian, which reference frame is moving with the velocity
of the pollutant. The box volume may represent a city or an industrial region. The plan
area over a city or region is represented by and is the vertical dimension of the airside.
2.7: AIR POLLUTION INDEX MODELLING
16
Air pollution index modeling is typically based on a function (B). Which is ascribed a
number indicating good, satisfactory, unhealthy or hazardous quality. The index (B) is
called the polluted to a specific parameter like hydrocarbon emission or to a group of
related parameters.
This modeling approach take the weighted values of the pollutant parameter measured at
spatial point and compare it to the single number in the air quality standard. The index
(B), which is a nondimensional number, can be obtained for corresponding pollutant
concentration as:
( )
i
i i
i i
i
C C
C C
+ =
+
+
1
1
 
  Equation 2.7
The air quality and concentration are illustrated in Table 2.1.
TABLE 2.1: BREAK POINTS FOR PSI
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHOD
3.1: POINT SOURCE MODEL FOR BTEX EMISSION
Shortterm BTEX emission from point source, such as stacks and isolated vents is
modeled using equations of mass conservation. For each source and hour, the origin of
POLLUTION
STANDARD INDEX
(PSI)
DESCRIPTION CONCENTRATION
(ppm)
<50 Good Quality <0.05
50 Satisfactory 0.015
150 Unhealthy 0.5
250 Hazardous Alert 0.7
350 Hazardous Warning 0.8
450 Hazardous Emergency 0.8
550 Hazardous Serious
harm
1.0
17
the sources coordinate system will be placed at the ground surface at the base of the
stack. The xaxis is assumed positive in the downwind direction, the yaxis will be
crosswind (normal) to the xaxis and the zaxis will be extended horizontally. This is
represented as a hypothetical box as depicted in Figure 3.1 below.
FIGURE 3.1: HYPOTHETICAL REPRESENTATION OF BTEX EMISSION
SOURCE
The mass in this hypothetical box will be viewed as conserved through reflection at the
surfaces and concentration in the box being constant. The wind speed and direction taken
to be constant with height.
To conserve mass for a continuous elevated source, it is assumed that turbulences is
homogenous and there is a solid boundary at the ground level. Assuming the a effective
source height to be an elevated height, h, the mass conservation is defined as:
   
    box the within generated t pollu of Rate box the leaving t pollu of Rate
box the entering t pollu of Rate box the in t pollu of change of Rate
tan tan
tan tan
+
=
Equation 3.0
C
in
l
h
C
out
w
x
z
18
Equation 3.0 can be mathematically expressed as:
( )
g out in
A
zr y x C C U z y yQ x
t
C
z y x A A A + A A A + A A =
c
c
A A A Equation 3.1
Making the following implicit assumptions:
1. There is neither generation nor decay.
2. The continuous emission or emission times equal to or greater than travel times to the
downwind position of interest so that the diffusion in the direction of travel is
negligible.
3. The material diffused is a suitable gas aerosol (<20m diameter), which remain
suspended in the air long period of time.
4. Mass is conserved through reflection at surfaces.
5. There is constant wind speed and constant wind direction with height.
6. The wind shear effect on the horizontal diffusion is negligible (effect becomes larger
after ~ 10km).
7. There is constant concentration through out the box.
8. The dispersion parameters are independent of z and function of x (and hence wind
speed alone).
9. The averaging times of all quantities (wind speed U, dispersion parameters o
y
o
z
and
pollutant concentration C) are the same.
Thus the generation term r
g
= 0, which reduces Equation 3.1 to:
( )
out in
A
C C zU y yQ x
t
C
z y x A A + A A =
c
c
A A A Equation3.2
Dividing across with AxAyAz, yields
19
( )
out in
A
C C
x
U
z
Q
t
C
A
+
A
=
c
c
Equation3.3
As concentration through out the box is assumed constant,
, C C
out
=
Thus Equation3.3 becomes:
( ) C C
x
U
z
Q
t
C
in
A
A
+
A
=
c
c
Equation 3.4
With notation from Figure 3.1, Az = mixing height h, Ax = length of the box L.
Substituting these into Equation 3.4 yields:
( ) C C
L
U
h
Q
t
C
in
A
+ =
c
c
Equation 3.5
Expanding Equation 3.5 yields:
C
L
U
C
L
U
h
Q
t
C
in
A
+ =
c
c
Equation 3.6
By rearrangement Equation 3.6 becomes:

.

\

+
=
c
c
C
Uh
UhC QL
L
U
t
C
in A
Equation 3.7
Let
( )
Uh
UhC QL
b
and
L
U
a
in
+
=
= ,
Equation 3.8
Substituting Equation 3.8 into Equation 3.7 gives:
( ) c b a
t
C
A
=
c
c
Equation 3.9
Rearranging Equation 3.9 gives:
20
( )
t a
c b
C
A
c =
c
Equation 3.10
Integrating from t = 0 to t = t, we have:
at
c b
c b
n =
(
I
0
Equation 3.11
By rearrangement, we have:
( )
at at
e c e b c
+ =
0
1 Equation 3.12
Imposing Equation 3.12 into Equation 3.7 gives:
( )


.

\

+
+
=

.

\


.

\

t
L
U
t
L
U
in
e C e
Uh
UhC QL
t C
0
1 Equation 3.13
Expanding Equation 3.13 will yield:
( )

.

\


.

\

+


.

\

+ =
t
L
U
t
L
U
in
e C e C
Uh
QL
t C
0
1 Equation 3.14
But
t
1
=
L
U
Equation 3.15
And by dimensionless quantification:
t
u
t
= Equation 3.16
Substituting Equations 3.15 and 3.16 into Equation 3.14 yields:
( ) ( ) ( )   u u t u +
(
+ = exp exp 1
0
C C
h
Q
C
in
Equation 3.17
Introducing a dimensionless length,
21
R
R
ZL whereL
L
L
Z
=
=
Equation
3.18
into Equation 3.14 and expanding it will give:
( )
(
(


.

\



.

\

+


.

\



.

\

(
+ = t
ZL
U
C t
ZL
U
C
Uh
QZL
t C
R R
in
R
exp exp 1
0
Equation 3.19
Knowing that:
R
R
U
L
t = Equation 3.20
And introducing it into equation 3.19 gives:
( )
(


.

\


.

\

+


.

\


.

\

(
+ =
R R in R
Z
C
Z
C
h
Q
Z Z C u u t
1
exp
1
exp 1
0
Equation 3.21
Equations 3.17 and 3.21 are the modeled Equations for point source BTEX emission with
respect to time and length. The model Equations are subject to the boundary conditions:
22
( )
( ) ( )
( )
( ) ( ) 1
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
C Z C
AtZ
Z C
AtZ
C C
At
C
At
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
u
u
u
u
The model equation for stack emission considers the effect of time, stack height and
diameter on dispersion of BTEX pollutants. The developed model will be applied to
estimating concentration of pollutant from stack emission of a manufacturing plant
involved in machining, heat treatment, welding and spraying. Comparing results obtained
from the model equation to plant will validation the model.
3.1: MATHEMATICAL METHOD FOR SOLVING THE MODEL EQUATIONS.
A simple, accurate and practical solution for the model equation 3.17 and 3.22, is by
reducing them to a set of N coupled first order differential Equations for the functions y,
( )
( )
. .., ,......... 1
, ,......... ,
1
N i
y y x f
dx
x dy
n i
i
=
=
23
To solve for initial value problems using the RungeKutta method of fourthorder
formula for which the derivative is evaluated four times: once at the initial point, twice at
trial mid points

.

\

2
h
, and once at a trial endpoint.
( )
n n n n
y x hf y y ,
1
+ =
+
Where h is the interval.
For the input: Initial values, x
0
, y
0
, at step size h, number of steps N.
For the output:
( )
( )
4 3 2 1
5 4 3 2 1
1
2 2
6
1
0
6 3 3 6
K K K K y
h
K K K K
y y
n
n n
+ + + + =
+ + + + + =
+
For n = 0, 1, 2, 3,N1 do:
( )
n n
y x hf K ,
1
=
( )
h x x
K y h x hf K
K
y
h
x hf K
K
y
h
x hf K
n n
n n
n n
n n
+ =
+ + =

.

\

+ + =

.

\

+ + =
+1
3 4
2
3
1
2
,
2
,
2
2
,
2
The model equations were solved using this method in Visual Basic Program shown in
Appendix A.
24
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 RESULTS
Air quality modeling is an acceptable technique for analyzing the impact of emission
from industrial source. In this work, the air quality impact of manufacturing plant, PZ
Industries PLC, Aba in Abia State of Nigeria was studied using the modeled equations.
The Industry manufactures electronics (such as refrigerators, televisions), drugs and
household consumables such as detergents, soaps, toothpastes, balms, etc. The
manufacturing process involves unit operations such as machining, heat treatment,
welding and spraying. The area around the manufacturing plant is generally flat. Land
used in the area is generally agricultural and residential (****find out).
Emissions of potential concern from the plant includes Sulphur dioxide SO
2
, Nitrogen
Oxides NO
x
, Carbon Monoxide CO, Particulate matter, Volatile Organic Compounds
VOCs. An investigation of the plant shows that the process units responsible for the
emission of these pollutants are the paint spray booths, heating furnace and shot blasting.
The air pollutants are emitted from three stacks. Stack parameters obtained from air
pollution permits and plant HSE personnel are presented in Appendix B.
The model equation was used to predict Volatile Organic Compound VOCs, only. The
model prediction of VOCs concentrations from the three stacks and data obtained from
the Plant EPA screening analysis within 2km receptor location is given in Table 4.1.
25
Table 4.1: Model Prediction of VOCs Concentrations and Data from EPA Screening
Analysis
Stack
(Source)
Model Prediction
(g/m
3
)
Plant Data Percentage
Deviation
(%)
S1 655.83 660.74
S2 416.76 402.50
S3 3096.35 3078. 44
Total 4168.94 4141.68
The variation of concentrations of VOCs with respect to time, distance, stack height and
diameter were computed from the model equations and the results are presented in Table
4.2 4.4.
4.2 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
Results of variation of concentration of Volatile Organic Compounds VOCs with time
were computed as showed in Table 4.1. The model prediction of the sum of VOCs
concentrations from the three stacks was 4168.94g/M
3
, while that of EPA screening
analysis for the plant was 4141.68g/M
3
, which gives 0.6% deviation from the model
prediction.
Figure 4.1 showed the relationship between the emitted VOCs concentration with time. It
indicates that the ground level pollutant concentration increases with time.
26
C(tita)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
tita
C
(
t
i
t
a
)
Source #1
Source #25
Source #32
Figure 4.2 relates pollutant concentration with stack height. It indicates that emitted
pollutant concentration decreases as stack height increases.
27
As stack height is raised, the location of maximum concentration on the ground level
moves away from the stack, because the emission will have to travel further and will
disperse before reaching the ground level.
Figure 4.3 relates pollutant concentration with stack diameter. It showed that decrease in
stack diameter decreases pollutant concentration within the stack vicinity.
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
delta
C
(
d
e
l
t
a
)
Source #1
Source #25
Source #32
Tita = 0.05
28
Reducing the stack diameter causes flow restriction, thereby increasing exit velocity of
emission of pollutant.The resultant narrow jet of pollutant will have a higher plume rise
which spreads out to give additional dilution before reaching the ground.
Figure 4.4 relates pollutant concentration
29
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Z
C
(
Z
)
Source #1
Source #25
Source #32
Tita = 0.05
C(tita)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
tita
C
(
t
i
t
a
)
Source #1
Source #25
Source #32
30
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
delta
C
(
d
e
l
t
a
)
Source #1
Source #25
Source #32
Tita = 0.05
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Z
C
(
Z
)
Source #1
Source #25
Source #32
Tita = 0.05
Tita = 0.05
Tita = 0.05
31
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
del ta
C
(
d
e
l
t
a
)
Source #1
Source #25
Source #32
Ti ta = 0.05
32
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 CONCLUSION
An air quality modeling based on wellmixed hypothetical cell was carried out for
various sources at PZ Industrial plant, Aba in Abia State to estimate the concentration of
Volatile Organic Compounds VOCs released from the plant manufacturing operations
and to assess the relationships between the concentration of ground level VOCs and stack
parameters namely; height and diameter.
5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
The dispersion or spreading of emitted pollutant into the air is caused by turbulence in the
air. This turbulence involves interactions between large and small air current called
eddies. These interactions are ultimately impossible to estimate or predict in details. Due
to this complexity of dispersion or spreading mechanism, the turbulence in the air was
considered in this work as homogeneous. This may limit the predictive power of the
modeled equations. Therefore further work should be done to characterize and estimate
the dispersion or spreading effect, so as to improve the developed models.
Also the model developed in this work is based on a single cell with 48 hours averaging
time. Further work could expand and estimate models within a multiperiod framework,
which would make the assessment of the effects of timelinked urban factors, such as
traffic flows possible. It is also pertinent to note that other pollutants emitted from the PZ
Industrial plant such as Sulphur dioxide, Particulate Matter, Xylene etc were not
considered in this work. This give room for further work.
33
REFERENCE
EPA, 2000. National Air Pollution Emission Trends, 19001998. Report EPA454/R00
002, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC27711 March.
1. Bowers, J.R., J. R. Bjorklund and C. S. Cheney, 1979: Industrial Source Complex
(ISC) Dispersion Model Users Guide. Volume 11, EPA450/479031, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC27711.
3. Gifford F.A and Hanna S. R., 1973. Modeling Urban Air Pollution,
Atmospheric Environment 7: Pp 131136.
4. Cooke, M. J. and Wadden, R. A., 1981. Atmospheric Factors Influencing Daily
Sulfate Concentrations in Chicago Air, Journal of the Air Pollution Control
Association Vol.31, 11: Pp11971199.
5. Seinfeld, J. H., 1988 . Ozone Air Quality Models, Journal of the Air Pollution
Control Association Vol.38, 5: 616645.
6. Millionis A. E. and Davies T. D., 1994. Regression and Stochastic Models for
Pollution11. Applications and Stochatic Models to Examine the link between
groundLevel Smoke Concentrations and Temperature Inversions, Atmospheric
Environment. Vol.28, 17: 28112822.
7. Lioy P. J., Mallon R. P., Lippmann., Knelp T. J., and Sampson P. J., 1982. Factors
Affecting the Variability of Summertime Sulfate in a Rural Area Using Principal
Component Analysis, Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association Vol.32, 10:
Pp10431047.
8. Asbaugh L. L., 1983, A Statistical Trajectory Technic for Determining Air
Pollution Source Regions, Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association
Vol.33, 11: Pp10961098.
9. Moody, J. L. and Samson, P. J., 1989. The Influence of Atmospheric Transport
on Precipitation of Chemistry at Two Sites in the Midwestern United State.
Atmospheric Environment, Vol. 23, 10:21172132.
34
10. Moy, L. A et al., 1994. Relationship Between Back Trajectories and
Tropospheric Trace Gas Concentrations in Rural Virginia, Atmospheric
Environment, Vol. 28, 17:28112822.
11. Brankov E., Rao S. T., and Porter P. S., 1998. A TrajectoryClustering
Correlation Methodology for Examining the LongRange Transport of Air
Pollutants, Atmospheric Environment, Vol. 32, 9:15251534.
12. Hewitt,C. N., 1991. Spatial Variations in Nitrogen Dioxide Concentrations in an
Urban Area, Atmospheric Environment, 25B, 429434.
13. Anderson R. F. and Greenberg M. R., 1981. The Associations Between Land Use
and Particulate Air Quality in New Jersey, 19731977, Modeling and Simulation
12: 191196.
35