The presence of buildings and obstacles in urban environment can modify the velocity and spatial concentration fields of gaseous pollutants emitted by a source, therefore affecting the dispersion of the plume. The dispersion of the pollutants can be analytically approximated by using Briggs’ coefficients limited by the lack of detailed geometrical information of the obstacles. In the work, similarity Theory (MOST) for the entire vertical Atmospheric Boundary Layer profile under non-neutral stability conditions has been included as an accurate inlet boundary condition in the framework ofthe Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) approach. The effectiveness of the Shear Stress Transport (SST) variant of the k-ω model has been highlighted as the appropriate turbulence closure model to be used for the dispersion of cloud in urban environment. The geometry used in the numerical simulation was inspired by an urban agglomeration and refinement regions were strategically set to accurately capture the flow field and plume transport near obstacle surfaces, close to the ground, and around the chimney. Comparisons between Gaussian plume and CFD-based models are reported showing differences and asymmetries especially at shorter distance. Numerical results have been obtained by considering different stability atmospheric conditions and comparisons and differences with Huber approximation are presented and discussed.

1. M. Pantusheva, R.Mitkov, P.O. Hristov, D. Petrova- Antonova, “Air Pollution DispersionModelling in Urban Environment Using CFD: A Systematic Review”, Atmosphere, vol. 13, 1640, 2022.
   https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos13101640
2. Y. Kong, J. Zhang, S. Zhang, Y. Jiang, B. Wang, “CFD Numerical Simulation of Wind Field and Pollutant Dispersion in Valley Cities”, Gansu Key Laboratory, Lanzhou University, Northwest Regional Climate Center.
3. M. Pullia, “Status report on the centro nazionale di adroterapia oncologica (cnao)”, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 16, no. 2, pp 1708-1711, 2006.
   https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9822-5
4. P.J Richards, R.P Hoxey, “Appropriate boundary conditions for computational wind engineering models using the k−ϵ turbulence model”, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn., vol. 46-47, pp. 145-153, 1993.
   https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6105(93)90124-7
5. F.R. Menter, M. Kuntz, R. Langtry, “Ten years of industrial experience with the SST turbulence model”, Turbul Heat Mass Transf, 2003.
   Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228742 295 Ten vears of industrial experience with th e SST turbulence model
6. F. Pasquill, “Atmospheric Diffusion”, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1974.
7. G.A. Briggs, “Diffusion Estimation for Small Emissions”, Air Resources Atmospheric Turbulence and Diffusion Laboratory, NOAA Oak Ridge, Tennessee. G.A. Briggs, Preliminary report, United States.
   https://doi.org/10.2172/5118833
8. G.A. Briggs, “Plume rise and buoyancy effects, Atmospheric Science and Power Production”, ed. Randerson D., DOE/TIC 27601, Springfield, Department of Commerce, USA, 1984.
9. A.H. Huber, “Evaluation of a method for estimating pollution concentrations downwind of influencing buildings”, Atmos. Environ., vol. 18, no. 11, pp. 2313-2338, 1967.
   https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-6981(84)90003-9
10. A.H. Huber, W.H. Snyder, “Buildings wake effects on short stack effluents”, Reprint Volume for the Third Symposium on Atmospheric Diffusion and Air Quality, AMS, 1976.
11. A.S. Monin, A.M. Obukhov, “Basic laws of turbulent mixing in the surface layer of the atmosphere”, Originally published in Tr. Akad. Nauk SSSR Geophiz. Inst., vol. 24, no. 151, pp. 163-187, 1954.
    Retrieved from: https://gibbs.science/efd/handouts/monin obukh ov 1954.pdf
12. Ansys® ANSYS FLUENT 12.0 User's Guide, 7.3.2 Using Flow Boundary Conditions release 12.0, ANSYS.Inc. 2009-01-29.
13. “Screening Models for Releases of Radionuclides to Atmosphere, Surface Water”, and Ground, NCRP Report No. 123 I, 1996.
14. G. Giannattasio, A. Castorrini, A. D'Angola, M. Ferrarini, F. Bonforte, “Three-dimensional Computational Fluid Dynamics investigation of the dispersion of radioactive cloud”, RAD Conf. Proc., vol. 7, pp. 79-85, 2023.
    https://doi.org/10.21175/radproc.2023.15
15. A. Sogachev, M. Kelly, M.Y. Leclerc, “Consistent two-equation closure modeling for atmospheric research: buoyancy and vegetation implementations”, Bound-Lay Meteorol,, vol. 145, no. 2, pp. 307-327, 2012.
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-012-9726-5
16. A. Castorrini, S. Gentile, E. Geraldi, A. Bonfiglioli, “Investigations on offshore wind turbine inflow modelling using numerical weather prediction coupled with local-scale computational fluid dynamics”, Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev., vol. 171, 113008 2023.
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.113008
17. A.J. Dyer, “A review of flux-profile relationships”, Boundary-Layer Meteorol., vol. 7. pp. 363-372, 1974.
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00240838
18. D. Golder, “Relations among stability parameters in the surface layer”, Boundary Layer Meteorology, vol. 3, pp. 47-58, 1972.
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00769106
19. M. Carestia et al., “Use of the "Hotspot" code for safety and security analysis in Nuclear Power Plants: A Case Study”, Environ. Eng. Manage. J., vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 905-912, 2016.
    https://doi.org/10.30638/eemj.2016.098
20. F. Bonforte, M. Ferrarini, A. D'Angola, E. Giroletti, D. Introini, “Heavy-ions shielding data for hadrontherapy application with Monte Carlo methods”, Radiat. Prot. Dosim., vol. 199, no. 17, pp. 2061-2075, 2023.
    https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncad207
21. T. Lorenzon, F. Bonforte, L. Codispoti, S. Agosteo, M. Ferrarini, “Monte Carlo implementation of a Gaussian plume model for submersion dose calculation at short downwind distances”, Radiat. Prot. Dosim, vol. 201, no. 1, pp. 41-47, 2024.
    https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncae218

Giuseppe Giannattasio, Alessio Castorrini, Michele Ferrarini, Francesco Bonforte, Antonio D'Angola, "A three-dimensional CFD-based approach for the dispersion of radioactive cloud in urban environment", RAD Conf. Proc., vol. 8, 2024, pp. 110-116; https://doi.org/10.21175/RadProc.2024.20