Comparison of ALOHA and EPIcode for Safety Analysis Applications

被引:26
作者
Thoman, D. C. [1 ]
O'Kula, K. R. [1 ]
Laul, J. C. [2 ]
Davis, M. W. [1 ]
Knecht, K. D. [1 ]
机构
[1] Washington Safety Management Solut LLC, 2131 S Centennial Ave SE, Aiken, SC 29803 USA
[2] Los Alamos Natl Lab, Safety Basis Div, Los Alamos, NM 87545 USA
来源
JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL HEALTH & SAFETY | 2006年 / 13卷 / 06期
关键词
D O I
10.1016/j.jchas.2006.02.003
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
EPIcode (version 7.0) and ALOHA (version 5.2.3) are two of the designated toolbox codes identified in the Department of Energy's Implementation Plan for DNFSB Recommendation 2002-1 on Software Quality Assurance issues in the DOE Complex. Both have the capability to estimate evaporation rates from pools formed from chemical spills and to predict subsequent atmospheric transport and dispersion. This report provides an overview of the algorithms used by EPIcode and ALOHA to calculate evaporation rates and downwind plume concentrations. The technical bases for these algorithms are briefly discussed, and differences in the EPIcode and ALOHA methodologies highlighted. In addition, sample calculations are performed using EPIcode and ALOHA for selected chemicals under various environmental conditions. Side-by-side comparisons of results from sample calculations are analyzed to illustrate the impact that the different methodologies used by EPIcode and ALOHA have on predicted evaporation rates and downwind concentrations. It is recommended that the safety analyst explicitly evaluate the strengths and limitations of any code before selecting it for a specific application. User skill and expertise can often outweigh most of the differences between ALOHA and EPIcode. Recognizing that EPIcode is inherently a scoping tool, while ALOHA is based on more detailed models, the user is recommended to perform a parameter sensitivity study to determine major dependences in the applied model and to check code output with independent techniques, such as a hand calculation, alternative computer code application, or spreadsheet techniques. A multi-tiered approach of this type will provide better confidence in overall results than to unilaterally use one code alone without questioning.
引用
收藏
页码:20 / 33
页数:14
相关论文
共 18 条
  • [1] Briggs G., 1973, DIFFUSION ESTIMATION, V79, P64, DOI [10.1016/j.ref.2017.11.001, DOI 10.1016/J.REF.2017.11.001]
  • [2] Chanin D. I., 1998, NUREGCR6613 SAND US, V1
  • [3] Craig D. K., 2000, WSRCMS92206
  • [4] DOE, 2006, DOESTD300994 US DEP
  • [5] DOE, 2004, DOEEH4213 ALOHA US D
  • [6] DOE, 2003, REP
  • [7] EPA, 1999, 550B990009 EPA US EN
  • [8] EPIcode, 2003, EPICODE VERS 7 0 US
  • [9] Hanna S. R, 1982, HDB ATMOSPHERIC DISP
  • [10] Perspectives on chemical hazard characterization and analysis process at DOE
    Laul, J. C.
    Simmons, Fred
    Goss, James E.
    Boada-Clista, Lydia M.
    Vrooman, Robert D.
    Dickey, Rodger L.
    Spivey, Shawn W.
    Stirrup, Tim
    Davis, Wayne
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL HEALTH & SAFETY, 2006, 13 (04): : 6 - 39