收藏切换
Comparison of two atmospheric dispersion models in Small-Scale dispersion modeling at nuclear power plant sites
收藏切换
Zhao-yang WANG1, Xin-wen DONG2, Li YANG1, Yu-han XU2, Sheng FANG2, Xin-peng LI1, *, Yi-xue CHEN1
China Environmental Science | 2025, 45(7) : 3667 - 3680
Less
收藏切换
China Environmental Science | 2025, 45(7): 3667-3680
• Air Pollution Control •
Comparison of two atmospheric dispersion models in Small-Scale dispersion modeling at nuclear power plant sites
Full
Zhao-yang WANG1, Xin-wen DONG2, Li YANG1, Yu-han XU2, Sheng FANG2, Xin-peng LI1, *, Yi-xue CHEN1
Affiliations
  • 1.School of Nuclear Science and Engineering, North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, China
  • 2.Institute of Nuclear and New Energy Technology, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
Published: 2025-07-20
Outline
收藏切换

This study evaluated the small-scale atmospheric dispersion performance of the Micro-SWIFT SPRAY (MSS) model and the GPU-accelerated QES model (GPU-QES) in the complex environment of a nuclear power plant site. Based on wind tunnel experimental data from the Sanmen Nuclear Power Plant, two typical wind direction dispersion scenarios were simulated by both models, and the results were compared in terms of wind field and concentration field predictions, including horizontal ground-level wind and concentration fields, as well as vertical wind speed and concentration profiles. The results indicated that GPU-QES outperformed MSS in wind speed prediction, especially in the areas between buildings, where the underestimation of wind speed is reduced by about 53%. Furthermore, GPU-QES simulated the three-dimensional wind field 450times faster than MSS, generating wind data over a 9km2 area with 35million grid points in just 4s. In plume dispersion prediction, high-concentration areas were effectively reproduced by both models, but GPU-QES showed higher consistency with actual values in low-concentration regions. Statistical analysis revealed that both models meet internationally accepted model criteria. However, higher simulation accuracy was demonstrated by GPU-QES in most metrics, especially in the building ground area, where the fraction of predictions within a factor of two of the observations (FAC2) was 4.5% higher than that of MSS. Additionally, due to differences in the dispersion behavior behind buildings between MSS and GPU-QES, simulation accuracy was improved by averaging the results of both models (FAC2reached 71.8%). On the other hand, due to differences in concentration calculation methods, GPU-QES generated the plume approximately 48times faster than MSS. Therefore, a clear advantage was shown by GPU-QES over MSS in nuclear emergency response scenarios that required rapid and accurate predictions.

MSS model  /  GPU-QES model  /  Lagrangian particle dispersion  /  wind tunnel experiment  /  3D wind field and concentration field prediction  /  small-scale modeling
王朝阳, 董信文, 杨力, 徐宇涵, 方晟, 李新鹏, 陈义学. 两种大气扩散模型在核电厂址小尺度扩散建模中的对比. 中国环境科学, 2025 , 45 (7) : 3667 -3680 .
Zhao-yang WANG, Xin-wen DONG, Li YANG, Yu-han XU, Sheng FANG, Xin-peng LI, Yi-xue CHEN. Comparison of two atmospheric dispersion models in Small-Scale dispersion modeling at nuclear power plant sites[J]. China Environmental Science, 2025 , 45 (7) : 3667 -3680 .
Year 2025 volume 45 Issue 7
60
18
Cite this Article
BibTeX
Article Info
  • Receive Date:2024-12-20
  • Online Date:2026-10-08
  • Published:2025-07-20
Article Data
Affiliations
History
  • Received:2024-12-20
Funding
Affiliations
    1.School of Nuclear Science and Engineering, North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, China
    2.Institute of Nuclear and New Energy Technology, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
References
Share
https://castjournals.cast.org.cn/joweb/zghjkx/EN/
Share to
QR

Scan QR to access full text

Cite this article
BibTeX
Citations
表12种不同金属材料的力学参数
科
Family
属数
Number of
genus
种数
Number of
species
占总种数比例
Percentage of
total species (%)
属
Genus
种数
Number of
species
占总种数比例
Percentage of total
species (%)
鹅膏菌科Amanitaceae 2 11 5.26 鹅膏菌属 Amanita 10 4.78
小菇科 Mycenaceae 2 12 5.74 丝盖伞属 Inocybe 5 2.39
多孔菌科 Polyporaceae 8 14 6.70 蜡蘑属 Laccaria 5 2.39
红菇科 Russulaceae 3 23 11.00 小皮伞属 Marasmius 6 2.87
小菇属 Mycena 11 5.26
光柄菇属 Pluteus 5 2.39
红菇属 Russula 17 8.13
栓菌属 Trametes 5 2.39
关闭全屏
  • BibTeX
  • EndNote
  • RefWorks
  • TxT