Validation of ADMS against wind tunnel data of dispersion from chemical warehouse fires

Comparisons are presented of the predictions of the atmospheric dispersion modelling system (ADMS) and wind tunnel data for plume dispersion from chemical warehouse fires. The focus of the comparisons is dispersion from structurally intact buildings with open roofs and dispersion of plumes flush with the ground without obstacles, however, dispersion from building shells and doors is also considered. Both buoyancy driven and momentum driven flows are treated, although emphasis is on buoyancy driven flows as these are generally more likely to occur in warehouse fires. The study shows that the ADMS building module is able to reproduce many of the features of dispersion observed in the wind tunnel. These include a recirculating region behind the building in which material may be trapped, a main wake which brings material down towards the surface, and appropriate sensitivity to the buoyancy and momentum of the emitted material, and the location of sources on the building roof. The comparisons suggest that the ADMS building model can be used to predict dispersion from the stages of fire development studied. The precise level of agreement depends (but not in a systematic way) on the buoyancy flux parameter F-B, the momentum flux parameter F-M and the number of roof lights. There are some significant differences between the wind tunnel boundary layer and the simulated atmospheric boundary layer in ADMS which have to be considered when making wind tunnel model comparisons. These relate mainly to the near surface where the wind tunnel underestimates turbulent velocities, the boundary layer height which in the wind tunnel corresponds to an atmospheric boundary layer depth of 82.5 m (atmospheric boundary layers are frequently an order of magnitude deeper), and the boundary layer top where the ADMS boundary layer is capped by an inversion and has low turbulence levels whereas the wind tunnel boundary layer has higher levels of turbulence and no capping inversion. (C) 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.