EPA-450/3-74-049
JULY 1973
             CARBON MONOXIDE
                  MEASUREMENTS
                 IN THE VICINITY
           OF SPORTS STADIUMS
     U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        Office of Air and Waste Management
     Office of Air Qualify Planning and Standard**
     Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711

-------
                               EPA-450/3-74-049
    CARBON  MONOXIDE
       MEASUREMENTS
      IN  THE  VICINITY
  OF  SPORTS  STADIUMS
                  by

   W. D. Bach, B. W. Crissman, C. E. Decker,
J. W. Minear, P.P. Rasberry, and J. B. Tommerdahl

          Research Triangle Institute
      Research Triangle Park, N. C.  27709
           Contract No. 68-02-1096
                Task No. 1
         Program Element No. 2AC129
    EPA Project Officer:  Edwin L. Meyer, Jr.
               Prepared for

     ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
       Office of Air and Waste Management
   Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
      Research Triangle Park, N. C. 27711

                July 1973

-------
This report is issued by the Environmental Protection Agency to report
technical data of interest to a limited number of readers.  Copies are
available free of charge to Federal employees, current contractors and
grantees, and nonprofit organizations - as supplies permit - from the Air
Pollution Technical Information Center, Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; or, for a fee, from the
National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield,
Virginia 22151.
This report was furnished to the Environmental Protection Agency by
Research Triangle Institute,  Research Triangle Park, N.  C. , in fulfillment
of Contract No. 68-02-1096.   The contents of this report are reproduced
herein as received from Research Triangle Institute.  The opinions,
findings, and conclusions expressed are those of the author and not
necessarily those of the Environmental Protection Agency. Mention of
company or product names is not to be considered as an endorsement
by the Environmental Protection Agency.
                        Publication No. EPA-450/3-74-049
                                      11

-------
                           ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS





     RTI wishes to acknowledge the cooperation of the staff and personnel




of Three Rivers Stadium, Pittsburgh, and Atlanta Stadium.  In particular,




we wish to thank Mr. Charles Portman, Executive Director of Three Rivers




Stadium Authority; Mr. Charles McSwigan, Jr., Operations Manager at Three




Rivers Stadium; Mr. Sidney Scarborough, Executive Secretary,  Atlanta Stadium




Authority; and Mr. Joe Shirley, Operations Manager, Atlanta Stadium.




Their cooperation and counsel made our job easier and more productive.
                                iii

-------
                          TABLE OF CONTENTS                         ,,
                                                                    Page
1.0  INTRODUCTION                                                    1
     1.1  Purpose and Objective                                      1
     1.2  Method of Approach                                         1
2.0  CARBON MONOXIDE MEASUREMENTS                                    3
3.0  DATA ACQUISITION                                                4
     3.1  Continuous Monitoring                                      4
          3.1.1  Site Selection and Description                      4
          3.1.2  CO Analyzer Setup                                   8
          3.1.3  Calibration Procedures                             12
          3.1.4  Span and Zero Gas Checks                           13
     3.2  Grab Samples                                              14
          3.2.1  Sampling Plan                                      14
          3.2.2  Site Locations                                     14
          3.2.3  Apparatus                                          15
          3.2.4  Analysis                                           15
     3.3  Traffic Counting                                          20
     3.4  Meteorological Data                                       22
4.0  DISCUSSION OF RESULTS                                          26
     4.1  Pittsburgh                                                26
          4.1.1  Continuous Monitoring                              26
          4.1.2  Stadium Activities                                 31
          4.1.3  Grab Samples                                       32
          4.1.4  Traffic Count                                      32
          4.1.5  Wind Characteristics                               33
     4.2  Atlanta                                                   38
          4.2.1  Continuous Monitoring                              38
          4.2.2  Grab  Samples                                        41
          4.2.3  Traffic Count                                       42
          4.2.4  Wind  Characteristics                               45

-------
                     TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd)
                                                                  Page
5.0  CONCLUSIONS                                                   47
6.0  REFERENCES                                                    48
APPENDIX A - SAROAD FORMS
APPENDIX B - GRAB BAG ANALYSIS FORMS
APPENDIX C - FIELD CALIBRATION FORMS
APPENDIX D - INSTRUMENT DRIFT STATISTICS
APPENDIX E - THEORETICAL COMPUTATION OF CO CONCENTRATION FOR
             TRAFFIC AT PITTSBURGH STADIUM
                                   VI

-------
 1.0  INTRODUCTION




 1.1  Purpose and Objective




     In order to obtain background data which could be useful for gauging




 the impact of proposed sports complexes on ambient air quality, the




 Monitoring and Data Analysis Division of the Environmental Protection




 Agency  (EPA) requested that the Research Triangle Institute  (RTI) perform




 two short-term studies to determine the contribution of sports stadiums




 to ambient carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations.  To identify possible




 terrain effects, one study was conducted in an area of essentially




 flat terrain (Atlanta) with the other in a valley (Pittsburgh).  The




 objective of the study was to obtain CO concentrations and attendant




 meteorological data at these sports stadiums over a period of several




 days when ball games were played.




 1.2  Method of Approach




     To meet the study objective, RTI proposed a plan to continuously




 monitor carbon monoxide at three sites about each stadium complex;




 obtain and analyze grab samples of ambient air just prior to and after




 each ballgame;  obtain traffic flow and traffic count data; determine




 the length of time for randomly selected vehicles to enter and exit




parking lots; and to measure meteorological variables pertinent to the




study.




     To accomplish the tasks set forth, EPA provided six CO analyzer




systems (a CO analyzer and a pump/dryer), four strip chart recorders, two




20-foot AVION trailers, and one Dodge motorized van for transport of




the equipment and housing for continuous monitoring instrumentation.




RTI provided the necessary field personnel and other equipment to




accomplish the  goals.

-------
     The study plan called for monitoring during three baseball games




(2 night, 1 day) in Pittsburgh in three days, June 22 through 24,  and for




eight games — four night games, a daytime double-header, and an evening




double-header — in six days, June 30 through July 5, in Atlanta.

-------
2.0   CARBON MONOXIDE MEASUREMENTS

      Carbon monoxide was  continuously  monitored using Mine Safety

Appliance Model 202 Non-Despersive  Infrared (NDIR) Analyzers.  Operation,

maintenance and calibration procedures specified by  the Quality Assurance

and Environmental Monitoring Laboratory Division, Environmental Protection

Agency were adhered to.   A block diagram depicting the MSA NDIR analyzer

and the  data display system utilized in this study is shown in Figure 1.

      Analyzers and associated equipment were housed  in environmentally

controlled shelters (i.e.  2 AVION trailers and a Dodge Camper).
    SAMPLE  INTRODUCTION SYSTEM
        SAMPLE INTAKE PORT
          SECOND STAGE
                                       ANALYZER SYSTEM
                                   INFRARED  BEAM
                                   SO'JWCE   CHOPPER
                                           1 COMPARISON CELL

                                            fILTEH Y\ SAMPLE
                                            I CELL M CELL
                                          ROTAMETEft -\
                                                     SAFE
                                                    EXHAUST
DATA RECORDING
    AND
DISPLAY SYSTEM
                                                                  ANALYZER
                                                                  INDICATOR
                                                                 STRIP CHART
                                                                        CONTINUOUS
                                                                        MONITORING
                                                                        CRAB SAMPLE
                                                                         ANALYSIS
      Fig.  i.  Sampling,  analysis and  data recording system.

-------
3.0  DATA ACQUISITION




     The sampling program in both cities consisted of four main parts:




     1)  Continuous monitoring of ambient CO concentrations at three




         sites.




     2)  Collection of 15 minute grab samples at four locations




         within the parking lot stadium complex before and after




         each game.




     3)  Counting of vehicular traffic before and after the game




         with representative ingress and egress times for selected




         cars and people.




     4)  Continuous monitoring of wind speed and direction with




         unscheduled measurements of ambient temperature and




         relative humidity.




3.1  Continuous Monitoring




     3.1.1  Site Selection and Description




            Three continuous monitoring sites were chosen in the




vicinity of the stadium complex in  both Pittsburgh and Atlanta.




The primary criterion was to locate the sites approximately in a




straight line along the axis of the anticipated prevailing wind




to define the ambient concentration upwind and downwind of the




stadium area and, thereby, to indicate the contribution of the stadium




and the associated activities to background CO concentrations.   By




coincidence the resulting configuration lay along the major axis of the




parking lot-stadium complex in both cities.  Availability of space to




park the trailers, electrical power for the stations and demography




of the area also influenced the site selections.

-------
     Pittsburgh




     Three Rivers Stadium stands along the north bank of the Allegheny




River at its point of confluence with the Monongahela River  to form




the Ohio River.  Immediately to the north of the stadium a bluff rises




three to four hundred feet as does the topography along the south




bank of the Ohio River.  A study of the wind speed and direction,




prior to the construction of the stadium, showed a prevailing westerly




wind direction up the river valley, with speeds greater than observed at




Greater Pittsburgh Airport occurring 17 percent of the time with the average




speed increase of 4 miles per hour.    Figure 2 shows a plan view




of  the immediate vicinity of the stadium, the location of the




sampling sites, and the traffic flow.  Representative photographs




of these sites are shown in Figure 3.




     Station Cl, located to the west of the stadium, is relatively




free of obstruction to the prevailing up-river air flow.  Station C2,




just to the south of the stadium served as the base of operations.




Although, proximity to the stadium structure influenced the air flow




and CO concentration there, it appeared less influenced than other




possible near-stadium sites.  Station C3 to the east, except for the




stadium, had few major obstructions to up-river flow.  However, a one-




story building forty feet east of it perturbed the predominantly down-




wind air flow to some extent.




     The flow of automotive traffic about the stadium is almost




exclusively in a counter clockwise manner.   Consequently, station




Cl is relatively unaffected by traffic, C2 is affected more than Cl

-------

-------

-------
but less than at C3 where almost all traffic must pass and stop


intermittently for a traffic light.


     Atlanta


     The Atlanta stadium is situated in an area of old one-and two-story


homes and buildings.  The land slopes from north to south, falling


about 50 feet between Fulton Street and Georgia Avenue with lesser


slopes east and west of Capitol Avenue (See Figure 4).  Topography


influences the wind flow region about Atlanta Stadium minimally.


Southwest winds occur in Atlanta during July more frequently than

                                                               2
any other direction but westerly and easterly winds are common.


Continuous monitoring stations were placed in private parking lots


to the southwest and northeast of the stadium and in a central


location east of the stadium but in the stadium-operated parking


lots (See Figures 4 and 5).


     Traffic flow on the streets about the Atlanta Stadium area


is normally local two-way traffic.  Capitol Avenue and Georgia


Avenue are principal north-south and east-west thoroughfares,


respectively, for local traffic.  The expressways north and west


of  the stadium (see Figure 7)  carry the principal through traffic


and the downtown-suburbs traffic.


     3.1.2  CO Analyzer Setup


            Each continuous monitoring site was equipped with two


CO analyzers, two pump/dryers and at least one strip-chart recorder.


For routine operations in the trailer stations, both analyzers were


turned on, but only one pump/dryer was operated.  In this configuration,


the spare analyzer was warmed up (the initial warm up requiring from

-------
tiiiu1
Tir
p-r-prij
    1  I  I L-=M    K -  •--	I  xj
,.^,.^ ^ -[-_---]- —""< -": v;._' '-:-• \  r 1  ^i-
      200  '"600
    Fig.  4.   Atlanta  Stadium location map.

-------

-------
12 to 24 hours) and readily available if any difficulties arose with




the online analyzer.  Parallel operations of two analyzers sampling




the same air were not feasible at all sites since only four strip chart




recorders were available.




     Ambient air was drawn into the analyzer system through an inverted




plastic funnel approximately three feet above the trailer top (12 ft




above ground) which was connected to the pump/dryer with polyethylene




tubing (0.125 in ID) about 15 feet in length.




     At the central location at each stadium, both of the analyzer




systems were operated. One analyzer was designated for continuous




monitoring and the second for grab sample analysis.  Ambient air for




the continuous monitoring instrument was drawn through an inverted glass




funnel about 10 feet above the ground (^6 inches above the roof




line of the vehicle) by a blower unit into a one-inch ID glass




manifold about three feet in length.  Polyethylene tubing (0.125 in ID)




was used to connect the pump of the analyzer to this manifold.




     In Pittsburgh, the grab sample analyzer was connected to the




spare strip chart recorder and operated in parallel with the other




unit when grab samples were not being analyzed.  Ambient air was




drawn from the same manifold.  Differences in the strip chart




records of the two analyzers noted during these periods were less




than  0.5  ppm.




     In Atlanta, the spare strip chart recorder was used at the




trailer locations.  Consequently, a strip chart comparison of the




two analyzers at the central location was not made.  On occasions,
                                   11

-------
the grab bag analyzer system was connected to the intake manifold and




the output voltages read on a digital voltmeter for comparison with




those from the continuous analyzer.  Differences were always less than




.5 ppm and generally negligible.




     In Atlanta parallel operation of the two analyzers at C3 was




initiated soon after arrival.  Two days of data showed the primary




analyzer reading significantly lower than the spare.  A sample of zero




and span gas was analyzed by both systems and by the grab sample analyzer




located at Cl.  The spare unit and the grab sample unit agreed.




Thus, the spare unit was designated as the primary unit and used at C3




for the remainder of the Atlanta survey.  For the duration of the study




the analyzer appeared to function normally.




     The primary analyzer at C2 began exhibiting a square wave pattern




with a 30-to 40-minute period soon after Atlanta operations began.  The




spare was placed in parallel operation after the extra strip chart




recorder became available and that configuration continued through the




study.  The spare functioned well and was designated as primary.  The




square wave appeared and disappeared from time to time on the strip chart




of the malfunctioning unit.




     3.1.3  Calibration Procedures




            Upon arrival at a site, all analyzers were turned on and left




to run and stabilize for 18 to 24 hours before a calibration was made.




Thereafter, the trailer units were calibrated daily when a zero and span




were performed on the active units according to established calibration




procedures and the strip chart record was removed for analysis.  Visual




checks for proper operation of the instruments were made each day.
                                   12

-------
     Additional  calibration checks on  the central station analyzers were




made.




     Span and zero point drift statistics are given in Appendix D for




the five analyzers used in continuous  monitoring.




     3.1.4  Span and Zero Gas Checks




            Zero and span gases were obtained from Scott Research




Laboratories on  June 15, 1973 for calibration of the analyzers.  One




cylinder of zero and span gas was provided at each of the three continuous




monitoring sites.  An independent check of the span gases and one zero




gas was made prior to the Atlanta study at RTI using a Beckman 6800




Gas Chromatography CO analyzer using zero and span gases certified to




contain < .1 ppm and 95.9 ppm + 2% ppm CO.  The technician performing




the tests was unaware of the sample concentrations.




     The results of this check are summarized in Table I and show that




there was no significant difference from the concentration as specified




by the manufacturer.









          Table  I.  COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF CO CALIBRATION GASES
Cylinder
Number
MH-1755
MH-1317
A-3576
A-11782
A-6693
A-8338
Manufacturer
Analyses
25.4 ppm + 2%
25.7 ppm + 2%
24.9 ppm + 2%
<0.5 ppm + 2%
<0.5 ppm + 2%
<0.5 ppm + 2%
Analyses at RTI
25 June 1973
25.14 ppm
25.94 ppm
25.21 ppm
N/A
N/A
-0.05 ppm
                                    13

-------
3.2    Grab Samples




       3.2.1  Sampling Plan




       Grab samples were taken for five 15-minute periods beginning one




hour before each ballgame and for five 15-minute periods beginning at




the end of the game.  For the two "double-header" games in Atlanta an




additional 15-minute sample was made at the completion of the first: game.




       3.2.2  Site Locations




       Grab sample sites were chosen to satisfy as many of the following




criteria as possible:




       1)  Obtain samples in the vicinity of major exits and




           entrances to parking lots;




       2)  Obtain samples in areas in and outside the stadium




           where people may congregate;




       3)  Give as extensive coverage as possible to the




           statium area;




       4)  Provide an advantageous position to perform other




           duties.




       In Pittsburgh, grab sampling was carried out at the six locations




shown in Figure 2.  Throughout the period (June 21 to June 24) locations




Gl and G2 remained unchanged.     Position G3  was in a sheltered area




behind the second tier of seats in the stadium, 25 feet from a concession




area.   G4 was in the upper deck of the center field seats.  Those two




positions were chosen to examine contrasts within the stadium.  These




locations were changed to G5  and G6  at game's end on June 22, to better




conform to the objectives of the grab sample program.




       The eight sampling locations around Atlanta Stadium are identified




in Figure 4.  Locations Gl  to G4 , in the vicinity of ticket booths





                                      14

-------
on the outer perimeter of the stadium proper, were well exposed (see


Figure 6).  Beginning with the game on July 3, the locations were changed


to G5 to G8 which are more closely associated with major traffic arteries.


Representative grab sample sites are shown in Figures 6 and 7.


     3.2.3  Apparatus

            The grab sample apparatus used for this study is shown in


Figure 6.  Ambient air is drawn into a foot operated bellows-like pump


through a 0.125 inch ID polyethylene tube.  The air is then forced into a


Tedlar bag of approximately 30—liters capacity through a shorter length of


the same type of tubing.  Check valves placed in the intake and output


connections to the pump prevent recycling of the same air.   The pressure
            ^-
drop through the intake tube regulated the intake flow rate so that 25 seconds


was required to fill the bellows.  At a rate of about two pumps per minute,


the bags could be completely inflated in 15 minutes.  The intake tube was


taped to available support at a height of four to seven feet above the

ground.


     Five bags were placed in a two-foot cube cardboard box for

protection.  When full, each bag was labeled to indicate the site number,

the sample number and the time that the sample began.  Screw-lock values

on the Tedlar bags were closed to seal the bag.

     3.2.4  Analysis


            Upon completion of the sampling period, the samples were


returned to the central station for analysis.  Following the completion of


the games, an interim pick up of the bags would usually be made by an


available person to shorten the time reuqired to complete analysis.  All of

the samples were analyzed within three hours after they were taken.
                                    15

-------
                                         Grab Sample Site G2 at Atlanta Stadium
     Grab Sample Site G6 at
       Pittsburgh Stadium
Grab Sample Site G6 at Atlanta Stadium
                                                     Grab Sample Site Gl at
                                                       Pittsburgh Stadium
                   Fig. 6.  Grab sample locations

                                     16

-------
    •H
 0) 13
 4-i  n)
•rl 4-1
w c/i

 0)  cd
tH 4J
 a.  e
 6  cd
 CO rH
 t-i
O
                                                                                               3
                                                                                               CO

                                                                                               §
                                                                                              •H
                                                                                               4J
                                                                                               n)
                                                                                               a
                                                                                               o
                                                                                              -§
                                                                                               M
                                                                                              a
                                                                                               60
                                                                                              •H
o

 QJ
•H
to
 a)
r-l
                                                                                          •H
                                                                                          T3
                                                                                          CO
                                                                                          4-1
                                                                                          tn

                                                                                          cd
                                                                                          4J
                                                                                      B
                                                                                      cd
                                                                                     C/O   4-1
                                                                                      cd
                                                                                      M
                                                                                     O
   17

-------
       Some modifications were made to the pump/dryer system to shorten

the time required for analysis of the grab samples.   After some

experimentation and assurance that the pump/dryer was operating effec-

tively, the water trap was removed for grab-sample analyses only.  This

reduced the time reouired to purge the analyzer system and shortened the

response and stabilization times of the analyzer to a new sample.

       A digital voltmeter (DVM) was attached in parallel with the strip

chart recorder to get a digital display of the output voltages (in

Atlanta only the DVM was used).  The zero gas calibration was set at

+ 1.0 mv.   With the span gas and analyzer settings used, one mv on the

DVM corresponded to .5 ppm CO.  The analyzer was calibrated one to two

hours pregame and an unadjusted zero and span was performed immediately

after all grab samples were analyzed.  There was negligible drift in

span and zero points (see Calibration Record in Appendix C).

       With this configuration, the grab sample analysis proceeded as

follows:

       1)   Remove bag label and record on the Grab Sample

           Analysis Sheet.

       2)   Connect (via a five-foot polyethylene tube with a

           screw valve attachment) the bag to the pump

           with control valves in the SAMPLE position.

       3)   Allow 2 to 3 minutes for analyzer output to

           stabilize.

       4)   Observe the DVM for one minute and record the

           eyeball average.

       5)   Set dryer/pump control values to CALIBRATE

           position and evacuate the bag.   Air flow is much

           greater in the CALIBRATE position.
                                    18

-------
     6)  Disconnect bag, closing the valve on the bag.




     7)  Reset valves to SAMPLE position.




     After the two-to three-minute stabilization period for the grab bags,




the DVM output fluctuated less than .5 mv over the next minute of obser-




vation.  This corresponds to a CO concentration fluctuation of less than




.25 ppm, which is within the limits of the CO analyzer accuracy.




Grab Bag Experiments




     The grab bags were reused after being exhausted.  Before adopting this




procedure, a bag was filled with span gas and analyzed using the grab sample




analysis procedure.  The bag was reinflated with zero gas and the procedure




repeated.  No trace of the span gas could be identified indicating that




the exhausting procedure was sufficient to prevent sample contamination.




     Four experiments were conducted to investigate the possibility that




the sample might deteriorate between the times of its acquisition and ana-




lysis.  The results of those experiments, set forth in Table II, showed no




deterioration of the samples.




            Table II.  GRAB SAMPLE DETERIORATION EXPERIMENTS
Experiment
1
2
3

4

Date
6/21/73
6/22/73
6/21/73
6/22/73
7/4/73
7/4/73
7/5/73
7/4/73
7/4/73
7/5/73
Time
1230
1335
1235
1340
0015
2135
0200
0120
2130
0155
Type
Ambient
Ambient
Mixture
of
Zero
and
Span

Ambient

DVM Reading
2.8 mv
2.6 mv
3.1 mv
3.1 mv
20.6 mv
19.0 mv
19.0 mv
73.2 mv
72.3 mv
72.3 mv
                                  19

-------
3.3  Traffic Counting

     Traffic counting was accomplished using hand counters and pneumatic

vehicle-activated counters on the streets.  The counting plan varied

with the traffic patterns in each city and evolved by trial and error.

In both cities, before a game, the parking lots filled slowly over a two-

to three-hour period, but more rapidly near game time.  Within thirty to

forty minutes following a game, the lots were practically empty.

     Total cars parked in the main stadium lots, areal extent of the

lots, and attendance for the ballgames at Pittsburgh and Atlanta are given

in Table III.


           Table III.  ATTENDANCE AND TOTAL NUMBER OF CARS
                       IN STADIUM PARKING LOTS
PITTSBURGH

June 21
June 22
June 23
June 24


ATTENDANCE
10,099
21,129
24,399
20,000


CARS
1421
2226
2858
2182


ATLANTA

June 30
July 1
July 2
July 3
July 4
July 5
ATTENDANCE
17,333
18,450
6,950
22,894
13,500
5,340
CARS
3067
3602
1765
3618
3139
1791
         Total Area of Pittsburgh Stadium Lots is 1,349,400 ft2
         Total Area of Atlanta Stadium Lots is 1,523,200 ft2

Pittsburgh

     The traffic  flow around Three Rivers Stadium does not change when  an

event is scheduled.  Generally, all of the traffic south of Reedsdale (east-

west street just  north of  the stadium, in Figure 2) is related to the

stadium.  The entrance to  Parking Lots 1, 2 and 3 are all from Allegheny
                                     20

-------
Avenue between  Shore Drive  and North  Shore Drive.  The  entrance  to  Lot  4




is  from North Shore Drive while  access  to Lot  5  is from Reedsdale.   The




usual pattern is  for Lots 2 and  3  to  fill first  followed by Lots 1,  5,




and  finally, 4.   Public buses enter and leave  through the  roadway shown




as  "PAT BUSES"  which encircles the stadium.




       Entrances  also function as  exits.  Additional exits are:   Lot 1




onto Sproat Way;  Lot 2 onto Stadium Drive West;  and Lot 5  near the  east




end  onto Reedsdale.




       For the  first two days, personnel operating at Gl,  counted




traffic coming  into Lots 2  and 3,  all of which had to pass him.   Later,




pneumatic traffic counters  were  placed  across  Allegheny Avenue  north




of  Shore Drive  (Tl) and just north of North Shore Drive  (T2). These  counters




were read at 10-to 15-minute intervals.  Traffic on Stadium Drive West




was hand counted  from position G5  (T3).




       Traffic  into and out of Lot 5  was hand  counted by the man  at  G2.




However, his visibility was often restricted by  the passing buses and his




counts were admittedly inaccurate.  After sampling at G6  was initiated,




traffic counting was transferred to this site.




       The pneumatic counters were found to be inaccurate  in counting




very slow moving traffic.   Adjustments and repairs were  necessary during




the study.




Atlanta




       The primary entrances and exits to the parking lots around the




stadium are located on both sides of Capitol Avenue (see Figure 4).




Secondary entrances to the south parking lot are from Washington Street




on the west and Georgia Avenue on the south.   The former is a primary exit




for that lot.   Although the lots east of Capitol Avenue have exits to






                                      21

-------
Frazer Street, those remained closed during all of the games.  A




secondary exit to the northeast lot onto Fulton Street was open after




the games.




     For about 90 minutes before a game began, Capitol Avenue was




designated as one-way, southbound.  Placing pneumatic counters north




and south of the parking lot entrances permitted a "net cars parked"




computation.  After the game, cars leaving the northern lots on Capitol




were routed north and those leaving the south routed southbound.  A net




loss of cars could be computed assuming there was no two-way traffic.




     Cars entering and leaving the south parking lot via Washington




Street were manually counted by the man at G3 and later at G7.




3.4  Meteorological Data




     Wind speed and direction were continuously measured at both cities




using a Climet three-cup anemometer and independent wind vane.  Before




going into the field, the system was checked out and calibrated in the




laboratory.  The instruments were mounted on a tee which separated them




by about 4 feet.  Anemometer heights were 21 feet (Figure 3) and 12 feet.




(Figure 5) at Pittsburgh and Atlanta, respectively.




     The wind system was installed at the central location so that it




could be routinely observed.  Undoubtedly, the nearness of the system




to the stadiums affected the wind measurements, but that appeared unavoid-




able.  These wind data and comparisons with airport winds are discussed




in Section 4.0.  A strip chart recording of the speed and direction was




made.  The average speed and direction for the 10 minutes prior to each




hour was digitized from the strip chart records.  This practice roughly
                                   22

-------
conforms to the standard wind reporting practice of first-order weather




stations.




     At random intervals, measurements of wet and dry bulb temperature




were made, approximately six feet above the ground, with a Bendix




Psychrotron.  When appropriate, remarks upon prevailing weather conditions




were recorded.  These measurements and comments are presented in Table IV.
                                  23

-------
§
CO
H
H
C/l

§
W

CO
g
M
O
O


I
o
w
H
>

M



 QJ
 CO

H
13
C
-H
S
QJ
•H
4-1
cO
rH
CU
Pi





fl
rH
3
,0

4-1
QJ
^

























ty Speed
nt) Direction (mph) Comments
•H CU
T3 O
•H M
6 QJ
3 3

W 5
NW 7
NW 3
WNW 10 Good visibility
Broken Cirrus
NW 11 Light thundershower
ended 1630
VRBL 2 Lightning to SE
NW 3
WNW 8

OCN oom o r-~ vOrHcN
p^-in oc .^^
rH CN CO
O4 CN CM
"— - *^ ^-^
^D ^«O ^iO
24
m

vO
p^



0
o
o
r-H

OJ
rH t-l
• o

CN
— ^
VO

CN
CN
rH
O
CO
4J
60
•H
ro
V
1

CN
m









o
.
vO
vO









rH
•
OO




O
0
o-
rH








NNW 10G 15 Light thundershower

0
m









CSI
.
vO
vD









CM
•
OS




0
O
00
rH









-------
                                           O
                                          13
                                           CU
                                           cu
                                           4J
                                           cfl
                                           O
shower
c
•H u-i
rt  1
JC 0
60 O
•H vO
rJ rH
g
sipated)
a en
•H -H
e 13
t-i
O S-i
14-1 0)
4J >,
60 Cfl N
0 rH Cfl
Pn ^ «
0 O 4-1
CO -l Cfl
QJ 0)
£
O

CO

4-1
JZ
60
•H
(-4

60
C
•H
C
4J
J3
60
•H
HJ
lightning
12Kft
rH )
CTJ
(3 4J
o co
•H cfl
en o
Cfl (-1
O 0)
o >
0 0
                 13
                 CU
                 cu  P.
                 a,  6
                                                                 oo
                                                                                oo in
                                                                                           o
                                                                                           r-H CO
                     c
                     o
                    •H
                     4->
                     O
                     CU
                     t-l
                    •H
                    O
                                                                        cj
                                                                 13
                                                                 C/D
              CU  >s 4J
              >  4-1  C
             •H  -H  CU
             4J  T3  O
              cfl  -i-l  »j
             rH  B  CU
              CU  3  ft
              00  CN
                            vo vt  -it
                            to ro  m
                                                                  CN O
                                                                  vD Is*
O
O

I
o
w
H


rH
3


cu
3
4—1
cfl /-^
>-i Pn
CU o
ft v —


\O O
• •
00 O\
vD vD


0

CO
vO


CM
•
ON
VO


m in
• •
ON ON
^D ^>O


CM O
• •
CM CM
r~ r~~


0

CM
1 —


m o
• •
CO 00
r-. r~-


co o
• •
CM CO
r^ r**~


m m
• •
rH rH
r^ r-~
CU   0)
>
hH

CU
 Cfl
H
   f-t P
   CU o
   ft -—
   B
   cu
   H
                               o  O
O  O co
I—  ON 00
                                          m  o CM
O  O i-H
oo  o oo
               CO
               as
CM
oo
                                                                       O

                                                                       00
CM
a\
oo
oo
o  m     CM  m

CM  o     r—  o
oo  oo     r-  oo
                           o  m o
                           CM  rH CO
                           o  m o
                           rH  .-I CM
o  o o     m
o  CM o     
-------
4.0  DISCUSSION OF RESULTS




     For the entire study only 24 of 745 hours of continuous monitoring




data were lost due to instrument calibration or malfunction.  This is a




96.5 percent data recovery rate and more hours of continuous monitoring




than were proposed.  Of a possible 408 grab samples of air, 400 were




taken and 394 (96.6 percent) were analyzed.  Only 368 samples were




scheduled.  A temporary malfunction of a strip chart recorder negated




the analysis of six samples.  All wind data taken on-site were




retrieved in addition to copies of the hourly weather observations at




the local airports.  Traffic data were taken but with somewhat limited




success.




4.1  Pittsburgh




     4.1.1  Continuous Monitoring




            The strip chart records at the three locations  (Figure 3)




and the plotted hourly average concentrations (Figure 8) show a general




pattern of very low (<_ 2 ppm) CO concentrations during the daytime at all




locations.  On three of the five nights the CO concentration began increasing




at 2100 hours (before the end of any of the night games) reaching a maximum




value at Midnight and slowly decreasing until near sunrise.  This trend is




most apparent in the strip chart records of location C3, but is present in




equal magnitude at the other two locations. There is also some suggestion that




on Sunday night, June 24-25, a similar pattern tried unsuccessfully to develop.




       A plausible hypothesis for the observed trend of CO concentration may




be as follows:




           Near sunset ('-' 2100) , radiational cooling along the




       ridges above the river valley causes the air to sink




       toward the floor of the valley, bringing CO with it.





                                     26

-------
add

 o
a
D

r n
di
o
a
a
i ' a
o
D
D
j
. • . . ! _ ] ._
1 1 1 i M i II
o
o
1 	 «_
§ o
o
o
:J - - - - - c -

o

o

0 ^


^~
- ' ,,,

a
s
5 o
Q
O
O

•3
- s^-c
(0
3 -~* - - 7f
H i <
' _ <

^
=
3 , o
O
0
0

o
o

0 j ' 1 1  -
0
vi)
o
o
o—
©
0
o
o
0
0
0
0
o
o
0
o
o
o
0
0
.0 -
«)
,p

o
o
- , 0 —
0
0
o
e
0
o-
0
o
o
0
o
— , 	 Q —
0
0
; o
- - o —
0
« tp
©
o
o
Q
0
o
o —
o
o
e"
Q
~ o —
£>
6
o
o
..^
t5ti
o
" o
o
o-
3








	 |:



(


— :

1
1 M i 1 1 1 1 1 1 5
save
                                                                                                          1M10D DldJlftli
                                                 27

-------
       As the valley begins to fill with cooler air, a tempera-




       ture inversion is gradually established which confines




       the vertical mixing depth of the air near the valley




       floor and inhibits further influx of air through drainage.




       At the same time, the air along the valley floor moves up-




       river, bringing down-river CO into the stadium




       area.  (The nighttime wind speeds decrease as the down-




       river drainage reduces the up-river "synoptic" flow.)




            The higher concentrations observed about midnight could




       have been from drainage into the valley three hours previously




       and 10 to 20 miles down-river.  The gradual decrease of CO




       concentrations toward morning could be the result of the inversion




       limiting further drainage into the valley floor, industrial




       plants closing for the night, or some other means of keeping




       CO out of the valley floor.  (Potential industrial sources




       down river were not investigated.)




            The inversion dissipates shortly after sunrise.  Since




       fumigation conditions that occur in similar topography are




       absent, CO concentrations aloft are similar to those at




       the valley floor.




       Some credence to this hypothesis is given by the presence of nearly




clear skies and hence better radiational cooling through most of the




night of June  23-24 when the greatest rise in concentration occurred.




On other nights when a similar trend occurred, scattered low clouds and at




worst, high broken cirrus clouds were observed near sunset, gradually
                                    28

-------
increasing in amount over the night.  On the nights when the trend failed

to occur, radiative cooling at sunset was not as intense because of ceilings

(more than half or more of the sky covered) at 5,000 feet and 11,000 feet.

On the night of June 24-25, thunderstorms, northeasterly winds and heavy

ground fog apparently dispersed what appears to be a nocturnal CO increase.

     Only the effect of traffic at the end of each game can be detected above

the background in the hourly averages (see Figure 8). The increase of the

hourly average beginning at the end of the game ranges from zero to 19 ppm

for the site most influenced by traffic (C2).

     The eight-hour running averages for each of the continuous monitoring

stations are shown in Figure 9 and reflect the diurnal trend.  The maximum

eight-hour average and the maximum one-hour average values for each day are

presented in Table V.

            TABLE V.  MAXIMUM ONE-HOUR AND EIGHT-HOUR AVERAGE
                      CO CONCENTRATIONS OBSERVED IN PITTSBURGH

                                         Position

Average
Date Period
21 June 1 hr.
(Thurs) 8 hr.
22 June 1 hr.
(Fri) 8 hr.
23 June 1 hr.
(Sat) 8 hr.
24 June 1 hr.
(Sun) 8 hr.
25 June 1 hr.
(Mon) 8 hr.
Cl
Cone
(ppm)
7.0
3.5
7.5
5.6
9.5
3.3
8.0
7.0
4.0
2.8
Period
Ending
2300&2400
0400
0100
0500
2300
2400
0100
0500
0900
0900
C2
Cone
(ppm)
14.0
3.3
7.0
5.6
25.0
5.3
6.0
7.3
4.0
1.9
Period
Ending
2400
2400
0100
0600
2300
2400
0100&1700
0500
0800
0700
C3
Cone
(ppm)
7.5
3.3
8.0
6.2
9.0
2.75
9.0
7.1
4.5
3.5
Period
Ending
2400
0700
0100
0600
2400
2400
0100
0500
0500&0900
0900
                                   29

-------
                                                  4-1
                                                  O
                                                  (U
                                                  M
                                                  cfl

                                                  CO
                                                  (U
                                                  txO
                                                  cfl
                                                  )-i
                                                  0)   •
                                                  >  0)
                                                 
                                                  60  Cfl
                                                  (-1
                                                  3 <44
                                                 £>  O
                                                  CO
                                                 4J 13
                                                 •U  O
                                                 •H -H
                                                 PH  ^
                                                      Q)
                                                 4J  a,
                                                  cfl
                                                      h
                                                  co  3
                                                  OJ  O
                                                  60 JS
                                                  cfl
                                                  J-l •!->
                                                  0) ^3
                                                 >   60
                                                 Cfl  -rl
                                                      0)
                                                 60
                                                 C  <1J
                                                 •H  J3
                                                 Cl  W
                                                 3  a
                                                 O  01
                                                 60
                                                 •H  4-1
                                                 W  cfl
                                                CT\


                                                 60
                                                                                                          r
~tf
                                                                            U1JJ J J J i_U,'; U J J U J01U -; 1 J J 1 U-l J/l U
               
-------
      4.1.2   Stadium Activities




             The effect  of  the prevailing wind  and  the  game-related




traffic is obvious.  CO concentrations measured at  location  C3, upwind




of the stadium show almost no effect from stadium  traffic pre-game  or




post-game.   At the  midpoint of  the sampling  array,  Cl, pre-game traffic  is




perceptible  but inconsequential.  Post-game  traffic usually  makes a 30 to




45-minute impulse of 5  to  7 ppm amplitude upon the  diurnal trend.   This




impulse is in response  to  the traffic leaving  lots  1,  2, and 3 and  moving




roughly parallel to the wind direction past  the location.  Downwind of




the stadium  parking lots, where the traffic  must turn  north  and slowly pass




or idle (because of a traffic light) within  40 feet of location C2,  the




greatest concentrations of CO are found for  30 to 60 minutes after  the end




of the game.  A theoretical model developed  in Appendix E for Site  C2 and




the CO concentrations predicted by the model were compared to measured con-




centrations.  The concentrations return to background  levels soon after  the




cars have gone.  The magnitude  of the post-game rise is almost in proportion




to the attendance.




     An hourly average  concentration of 25.0 ppm measured at site C2 on




June 23 was  the largest observed at any site in Pittsburgh or Atlanta.   That




concentration is still  less than the 35.0 ppm  National Air Quality  Standard




for one hour.




     Three of the games were played at night.  The lone day  game—on Sunday,




June 24—shows only a minor change in the post-game concentrations measured




at Cl and a moderate (for the location)  increase at C2.  Better vertical




mixing of the air and a lower attendance are probably  responsible.
                                  31

-------
       4.1.3  Grab Samples




              Pre-game samples were, with one exception, 4.0 ppm or




less (see Figure 8), and in agreement with the continuous monitoring




results.  The two-to-three-hour influx  of vehicles,  good vertical




mixing conditions and the higher wind speeds all contribute to good




dispersion of the CO.  Samples taken within the stadium were typical




of those taken at locations in the parking areas.




       Post-game samples were also compatible with the continuous monitoring




readings.  Usually one sample from Gl and G2 showed a particularly high




concentration.  G2, because of its downwind location, usually showed higher




values than Gl toward the end of the sampling period.  Locations G3 and




G4 (later G5 and G6, respectively) showed a rise and fall pattern,




generally in keeping with the continuous monitoring sites.  (The last




day's values for these positions are somewhat suspect because of a




temporary malfunction of a strip chart recorder and are not shown




in Figure 8.)  It is somewhat surprising that G5 had low readings




since it was only 75 feet from a roadway for exiting cars.




       4.1.4  Traffic Count




              Transportation to and from the stadium is by means of




automobiles, buses and boats.  While only a small percentage of the




people use boats, a fairly large fraction of the people use the public




buses (diesel powered).




       Traffic counts, albeit with some inaccuracies, of cars entering




or leaving Lots 2 and 3 or 1, 2, and 3, are shown in Figure 8.  The




maximum rate of incoming cars within the time period of measurements usually
                                    32

-------
reaches its peak  (12 cars per minute) 20 to  40 minutes before  the  game.




After the end of  the game, there is about a  5 to  7 minute delay while




people get to the cars before everyone tries to get out at  the same  tiem.




The duration of the resulting traffic congestion  is dependent  upon the




closeness of the  game in the late innings and the attendance.




     Scatter diagrams of the grab sample concentrations at  Gl  and  G2




versus the traffic counts for the same period were plotted  and are shown




in Figure 10.  Visual inspection showed little correlation  of  the  data.




     Observations of ingress times for cars  showed an average  time of




two to three minutes to park the car in Lot  2 or  3 after turning from




the street.  Cars were observed to take somewhat more than  one minute and




less than 10 minutes to leave the lots and enter  the traffic moving  away




from the stadium  at the end of games.  The egress time depended mainly




on where the car was parked in relation to the lot exit.




     About two minutes are required to walk  the length of the  parking




lot.  Two to three more minutes are required to enter the stadium  gates.




Ingress and egress times for cars and people relative to the beginning and




ends of games are plotted in Figure 11.




     4.1.5  Wind  Characteristics




            Contrary to expectations, wind speeds measured  at  Three  Rivers




Stadium were usually less than those measured at  Greater Pittsburgh  Airport,




although the expected prevailing west winds were  fewer.  The average speed




at the stadium was 5.4 mph and 6.6 mph at the airport, for  95  consecutive




hours at each location.   Table VI summarizes the wind speed observations




by speed categories for the two locations.
                                   33

-------



Q)
JS rH
00 ft
rJ B
3 cO CM
fi cn o
tn
4-1 CO cd
•H S-i 4J
P-i O cn




G









1 1 1
O DO \D
CM rH rH


cn
cn CD
0) rH
r~H O-i
ft B
B cd
cd cn
CO
0)
a) g
oj e cd
^3 rH 03 00
bO ft 00 1
J-l B 1 4J
3 03 rH 0) cn
,0 cn o >-i o
cn PLI P-I
4J ^ .
4-1 co co Q Q
•H J-i 4-1
P-i O cn









Q
1 1 I 1 1 1
3 -3- CM O OO v£>
-J CM CM CM rH rH
cd
CO
0)
B o
CO — 1
00
1

cn ^«
o —
P-I
B
—









G



Q
? 1 1 Dnl 1 1 Q 1
in
CO


O
O
ro
0

CM

O
O
CM

0
m
rH

O
O
rH
O

<— >
<±CMOOO ^O-
(H
0»
4-J
c
M

~
rH
cn
0)
rH
a
•H
^
0)
MH
O

0)
B














rH
cd

S-l
0)
4J
c
M

^
rH
cn
0)
rH
O
•H
0)
>
o

CL)
,0
B
3


(uidd)
          00
 34

-------
O
•H
i-i
O
0)
6
•H
X

-------
    Table  VI.  FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF WIND SPEED CATEGORIES;
                              PITTSBURGH
Speed (mph)
<_ 3
> 3 but <_ 7
> 7 but <^ 11
> 11
Stadium
0.37
0.47
0.16
0.00
Airport
0.27
0.36
0.33
0.04
       A study of the "agreement" of the hourly wind speed and direction

between the locations showed that in 34 percent of the hours, the wind

directions differed by 20 degrees or less and in 49 percent of the hours

the wind directions differed by 40 degrees or less; the wind speed

differed by 2 mph or less in 60 percent of the hours and by 5 mph or less

in 92 percent of the hours.  The joint occurrences of these conditions are

expressed in Table VII.
       Table VII. JOINT PERCENTAGE FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF
                  WIND SPEED OF DIRECTION CATEGORIES;
                              PITTSBURGH
                                          Magnitude  of
                                   Wind Direction Difference
            Magnitude
                of
            Wind Speed    <•  2 mph
            Difference

                          <^ 5 mph
                                       20
< 40 deg
25
30
34
46
                                   36

-------
Less than half of the wind speeds and directions were within the upper

bounds of the analysis.  The principal reason for this result is that

the wind directions at the airport showed greater directional variability

during the comparison period.  Furthermore, given the constraints of the

topography and the frequency of winds less than 7 mph at the stadium site,

it is not surprising that the valley flow predominated.

       The lower wind speeds at the stadium may partially be caused by

the nearness of the anemometer to the stadium structure.  Without an

independent, on-site check, it is impossible to assess the extent of the

stadium influence.  However, if it is assumed that the air flows around the

stadium rather than over and through it, the air should experience an

acceleration since the streamlines of the flow are compressed, a higher

velocity, especially in a westerly or easterly flow, should result.

If it is argued that the anemometer was in a frictional sublayer of the

flow about the stadium, then the wind direction should be more variable,

responding to eddy motions.  The vane strip chart traces do not exhibit

great variability except as would be expected in low wind speed conditions.

       That the wind speeds measured at the stadium were smaller than the

airnort speeds, in contradiction to the preconstruction study of DeNardo

and McFarland , is not completely surprising.   The data from the

former study was taken atop a 20-foot  mast erected on the top of a

one-story building before clearing began for the stadium.  Hence,

elevation and local surface characteristics have substantially

changed.   From these considerations it is believed that the winds

recorded at the central station during the study are representative

of  the general conditions which would influence CO concentrations

in the stadium vicinity.
                                   37

-------
4.2  Atlanta

     4.2.1  Continuous Monitoring

            Cursory examinations of the strip chart record (Figure 5)

or the hourly average concentration plots (Figure 13)  for Atlanta show

that the nocturnal peak as seen in Pittsburgh data was not as prominent.

     The variety of days of the week, game times, single and double-

header games, the July 4th holiday,  and variable winds make com-

parative analysis more difficult.

     The strip charts show more isolated spikes and greater short-term

fluctuations since these locations are adjacent to more frequently used

streets than those in Pittsburgh.  Removing the spikes by the hourly

averaging process gives a more continuous pattern.  At each of the

locations, morning rush-hour traffic principally (we assume) from the

expressway system north and west of the stadium area can be identified

on July 2, 3, 5, and 6, which were normal weekdays.  The evening rush-

hour traffic is distinct only on July 2, although the winds at the

stadium were westerly and northwesterly (i.e. from the expressway) on

July 3 and 5.  No data of expressway traffic flow are available.
     During the nights of July 1-2 and 2-3,  CO concentrations remained

at higher levels than any of the other nights.  Only scattered clouds

above 15,000 feet were reported by the airport weather station through

most of those nights, with low wind speeds.   This suggests that a near

surface inversion may have trapped the air near the ground and fostered

slow diffusion.  Other nights either began with lower clouds and ceilings

and/or had slightly stronger winds, thereby inhibiting the formation

and maintenance of stabilized conditions.

     Pre-game traffic is more apparent than at Pittsburgh in this set

of observations, especially at C2 on July 3.  More people attended that
                                   38

-------

-------
game so that the parking lot in which C2 was located was used.  On most

other occasions this lot was not used.

     Hourly averages show the nighttime increase and low daytime values,

except for the higher values associated with morning expressway traffic,

that were noted in Pittsburgh (see Figure 13).  The hourly averages corres-

ponding to the end of the games, are from a few tenths to 3 ppm above what

appears to be the background trend.

     Eight-hour average concentrations shown in Figure 12 (p.30) show that

all three of the locations are influenced on this longer term by the same

factors.  The trends, maxima and minima, all follow the same pattern.  The

central location, Cl, shows concentrations lower by one to two ppm than

C2 and C3, which are approximately equal.  Maximum one-hour and eight-hour

average concentrations for each day are given in Table VIII.
          Table VIII.
MAXIMUM ONE-HOUR AND EIGHT-HOUR AVERAGE
CO CONCENTRATIONS OBSERVED IN ATLANTA

                    Position

Average
Date Period
30 June 1 hr.
(Sat) 8 hr.
1 July 1 hr,
(Sun) 8 hr.
2 July 1 hr.
(Mon) 8 hr.
3 July 1 hr.
(Tues) 8 hr.
4 July 1 hr,
(Wed) 8 hr.
5 July 1 hr.
(Thurs) 8 hr.
6 July 1 hr.
(Fri) 8 hr.
Cl
Cone
(ppm)
6.0
3.2
6.5
3.6
7.0
4.9
8.5
6.1
5.0
4.3
4.0
2.1
5.5
2.9
Period
Ending
2200
2400
2300
2400
0100 & 0900
0300 & 0500
0100 &0200
0900
0500
0200
0300
2300
1300 & 1400
0800 & 0900
1000
C2
Cone
(ppm)
9.0
3.7
2.5
3.4
10.5
7.1
10.5
7.4
4.5
6.6
4.5
2.9
7.0
3.4
Period
Ending
2200
2300
0800
0100 &0200
0600
2400
0100
0400
0200 &0300
0300
2300
0100
0900
1000
C3
Cone Period
(ppm) Ending
8.5 2100
4.1 2400
8.5 2100
5 . 8 2400
10 . 5 0800
7 . 3 2400
10 . 0 0000
8.2 0400
5.0 0200
4.3 0300
5.0 2300 & 24
3.3 2400
7.0 0800
3.8 1000
                                     40

-------
             For  the  first  three  games, the  grab samples were taken In




 areas adjacent to ticket booths.  Pre-game  samples were in the range of




 1.0 to  3.0 ppm concentration on  the  first two days, with 3.0 to 6.0 ppm




 concentrations on July 2.  The lower concentrations are perhaps due to




 the earlier  start of the game (1800  and 1330) than on the third day




 (2000).  However, on any given occasion, no significant concentration




 differences  among the locations were found.  The between-game samples on




 July 1  showed no variation with position or time from earlier samples.




     Post-game samples on  these same days showed more variability in




 position and in time than the pre-game samples.  There is a tendency




 toward  higher concentrations by 1.0 to 3.0 ppm in the third sample.




 On the  whole, these samples were in keeping with the hourly average




 concentrations measured at Cl.




     Grab sample sites located beside side  streets and auto parking areas




 during  the last three days gave larger and more variable concentrations




 in the  pre-game samples.  By being closer to the sources, the concentrations




were more dependent upon the local traffic  flow and usually exceeded the




 concentrations at Cl.  No one station consistently reported concentrations




higher  than any other.  Concentration differences are not consistently




wind direction dependent.




     Post-game samples on the night of July 3 produced the highest CO




 concentrations.  Six samples, three each from G5 and G7, contained over




20 ppm  CO.   The maximum value was 50.5 ppm at G7 in the period 45 to 60




minutes after the game and 15 to 30 minutes after a fireworks display.




Location G8, upwind of the stadium traffic area and fireworks, recorded




a maximum value of 8.0 ppm.  By the end of the sampling periods, most




                                  41

-------
concentrations had decreased to about 4.0 ppm except at G5 where traffic




was still heavy.  On other nights, G5 and G7 were usually higher than




the other locations for the 30 minutes following the game before returning




to more uniform conditions.




     4.2.3  Traffic Count




            The Atlanta traffic counting program was more successful




than at Pittsburgh.   For the primary entrances/exits, reasonably accurate




traffic rates were computed.  These are shown in Figure 13.  These counts




agreed rather well with the total number of cars parked as counted by




the Stadium Authority attendants (Table III).




     For the Capitol Avenue counters, a plot of total number of vehicles




as a function of time was prepared as in Figure 14.   To obtain the cars




entering the lots the difference of the 15 minute counts at Tl and T2




was used.  After the game, the traffic out-flow is taken as the sum of




the 15 minute counts at Tl and T2 since cars leaving the northern lots




go north and those in the south lots go south, except for those leaving




at T3.




     On the last three days, G7 was located at T3 and G6 was located at T2.




Scatter diagrams of 15 minute grab sample concentrations versus the traffic




count for the same period were plotted and are shown in Figure 15.   At T3




the pre-game samples and traffic count appeared correlated as the scatter




points were clustered together.  However, post-game  concentrations and




vehicle counts were widely scattered.  At T2 the same procedure showed




scatter about a straight line.   Pursuing this  further, the linear relation




                           C = -1.21 + 0.5N




where C is the concentration in ppm and N is number of vehicles, was







                                  42

-------
   6000
   5000
   4000
o
•H
M-t
O
 .  3000
   2000
   1000
     0

    1800
                     Start of game
                            2000
                                       End of game
                                             2300
                                                                  T2
                                                                T3
                                      J	I
                                                        I           I
1900        2000       2100       2200       2300       2400

                         Time
                                                                                0100
           Fig.  14.  Traffic  count data  from sites Tl, T2,  and T3,

                     3 July,  Atlanta Stadium.
                                       43

-------



c
0
•H
CO
H
^ C*
c ^
S p-
c x— '
o
C_>
o
o







22
20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6
4
2
0
~ QSW
DO 0 j

Q
Atlanta
Grab Sample
Sta. G7

-

_ O Pre-game Samples
Q Post-game Samples
—
Q
O
O Q
~0 °°
- OO Q
$°
1 1 1 1 1 1 I
               50
            100
150
200
250
300
350
                    Number of Vehicles/151  Interval

c
o
•H
4J
cfl
-1
c g;
QJ D-
a >— '
C
0
o
o
C_>

10 t- O Pre-game
8
6

A
"



2

0
3 Q Post-game
Q
QD O
0
— Q
OG)
G

~

1 1
Samples
Samples
Q


Q




1 1
Atlanta
Grab Sample
Sta. G3
Q
Q Q






1 1
               50    100     150     200    250    300
                    Number of Vehicles/15'  Interval
                                                 350



(3
o
•H
cO
4-1
C
0)
O
c
0
u
o
u

12


10



1 6
ex
^"^ /
4

7
£.
0
—
o /
	 x
/ Atlanta

o <$-/^ Grab Sample
.v * ^ Sta. G6 '
f) y x"^
"" ^ •" x O Pre-game Samples
G ^
— -^ G O

Ox G
— O^ G
G'T3DO G
/I 1 1 1 1 1
Fig. 15.
    50      100    150     200    250    300

        Number of Vehicles (N)/15*  Interval
CO concentration versus traffic count;  Atlanta.
                  44

-------
 found to  give the least square linear  fit to the data with a correlation




 coefficient of 0.90.




     One  to two minutes after a car entered a parking lot it was parked.




 The time  required for people to get from the car to the stadium was,




 of course, distance dependent.  It took 4  to 6 minutes for people to




 get from  the lots south of Georgia Avenue to the stadium.  The stadium




 was within 3 minutes walking time from most portions of the stadium




 parking lots.  If the patron did not have a ticket, an additional five to




 ten minutes was required to purchase a ticket, regardless of the time




 before or after the game had begun.  No specific observations of




 egress times were made.  Traffic began to jam up at the exits about 10




 minutes after the game ended.  All lots were practically empty about




 30 minutes after the end of a game.




     4.2.4  Wind Characteristics




            Light and variable winds,  mostly from the northwest through




 north, were characteristic of the seven days of observation in Atlanta.




 Analyses of the wind-direction strip charts was complicated since North




was the ambiguous point; i.e., zero and full-scale deflections on the




 charts.




     Partially because of the light and variable characteristics, winds




 measured at the stadium had little resemblence to those measured during




 a 144-hour period at the airport,  10 miles south.  Speeds averaged only




 3.3 mph at the stadium whereas the airport speeds averaged 6.5 mph.




Table IX below gives a breakdown of wind speed occurrences at the two




 locations.
                                  45

-------
    Table IX.  FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF WIND SPEED CATEGORIES; ATLANTA
Speed (mph)
£ 3
> 3 but £ 7
> 7 but <_ 11
> 11
Stadium
0.61
0.38
0.01
0.00
Airport
0.13
0.67
0.19
0.01
In only three instances did the stadium wind speed exceed the airport

wind speed.

     Further analysis of the compatibility of the wind measurements

shows that the wind directions differed by 20 degrees or less in 40

percent; and by 40 degrees or less in 57 percent of the comparable hours.

Wind speeds were within 5 mph of each other in 95 percent of the reports.

However, close agreement in speed and direction was rather infrequent

(20 percent) as shown in Table X.


        Table X.   JOINT PERCENTAGE FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF
                   WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION CATEGORIES; ATLANTA

                                         Magnitude of

                                  Wind Direction Difference

                                   ± 20 deg	<. 40 deg
Magnitude
of
Wind Speed
Difference
£ 2 mph
<_ 5 mph
20
36
29
52
       The reasons for the wind speed differences are not apparent in

the topography or exposure of the anemometer in the Atlanta Stadium complex.
                                 46

-------
5.0  CONCLUSIONS




     The primary objectives of the study were accomplished.  The main




conclusions drawn from the study are:




     1)  National Ambient Air Quality Standards were not exceeded




         for either the eight-hour or the one-hour averaging periods.




     2)  Post-game traffic strongly affects the ambient CO concentra-




         tions in the stadium vicinity for an interval of one hour




         or less in an amount dependent upon the number of vehicles.




     3)  Pre-game traffic exhibits little influence on ambient CO




         concentration since cars arrive over a period of several




         hours.




     4)  Grab samples may identify occasional "hot spots" but these




         peak concentrations diminish rapidly.  Overall, the grab




         samples do not add significant information to what can




         be learned from the continuous monitoring.




     5)  The combination of meteorological parameters and the




         topography of the stadium complex area exert the 'major




         influence upon the distribution of CO about the complex.




     6)  Even in conditions of light winds, locally generated CO




         is rapidly dispersed through horizontal and vertical




         mixing.




     7)  Traffic rate and CO concentration at a given location are




         not necessarily linearly correlated.
                                   47

-------
6.0  REFERENCES
1.  DeNardo and McFarland Weather Services, Wind Study and Analysis
    for the North Side Stadium, Pittsburgh, October 1965.

2.  Climatic Atlas of the United States, U.S. Department of Commerce,
    Environmental Science Services Administration, Environmental
    Data Service, June 1968.

3.  Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, U. S. EPA, Office of
    Air Programs, Publication No. AP-42, February 1972.
                                   48

-------
 APPENDIX A





SAROAD FORMS
    A-l

-------
 0)


 

0
0>
o

>_
O)








E
£
i
_>
a
a
T
a
c
«*










~
7;
j
V,



-'
<
i;
r
•-

00
-

s
2



r»
~


_







X,
!-j

^



•C'

V
O
^r
-^
^
-




CJ


"?
"^


.^IVA
<3



1 1

a.
Q

£
c

£



>




(N C'
2 ?
s § ?
s c
!?
m *"" 
S ^
_ <**
•5
* O)
| Sa
g 2
t- 5

S
S
3
CO j
S 3
=
S
CM S
£ s
s
s
- »S
c! s s
s
I S
«0 -
>. ft
o s
















































0
Q
C
--(
c
V,
c-

0
c
N

c
1}
^

c
^
•>«

C
C
•\

0
0
->

























/\
-












































--









0
-c,
^v

Q
k^,
v

;



c
r
•S

-

0
0
-

Q
ki
1

c
Vf
r,

Q
c
V t

Q
^
Cv-

0
0
P)

u
Ci
T

0
Q
T

Q
»x
V

Q
'.fl
-^

C
Vr
r~

0
O
d
r-

^
^



N



-


C
^

o

--


Vj


o
o
(V


1


0
10
Q

Q
V>
O

a
o


0
Q


(<























































'<
1 •>








^


v.
-



~-

}
vu
^

V
I-


)
•4:


-.;
•f


\;
\f



K



L


^
o
fO

Q

'*


-~
u



-

}
^
^*.

0
Lr-



^
""-

V,
lo


r
Vj
^v

•I
v;



~-



























































•-
--



^


V,
^

r\
--


Q
Q
-

O
'•0
w

Q
^
Ir;

O
*0
u]

O
lo
(N

O
Vn
^

C
,
-•

«i
o
>
i
vi
^
^


V
^


c
^

•o
V
'-•

O
c
-•

v)
ir


Q



O

rt

C
*0


Q
•Q
"-

K3
L
-^

Q
^
-

rt
^


































































^
i
^

•o
O
-'

0
V

-------
 £

 CO
if'
< ^

jl
£ z
S
"c.
a.
^
o

*
c.
ra
J3
,C7
§

ro
	 0)
en
• §

" S
* 2
"it
«
">-
IM C







-
£ g
0 "-
z «
a _>
» 1
" §
€ i
i *
£









«
*~i


i
»t^
c
"' T
< •*,
CO

cx

-1
(0
-

U)
in

;

5
CN


-






•^
G
^





UJ

Q

r-
&

VI


d
^
O

I/I
111
,j
£ ^
H £
O


c

£





.-
(f







J
s




















rj C
Z s

8 -
?
s ^ -
s S "
r
(N
r-
s ^ ^
tfi T3 c
oc ^
* tn
rx (O
« 3
o>

in
:
S co S
o at
"o DC S
— *o
=> 0
^ S
£ 3
tO
S

£ S
» 3
"o '
"5 *« s
| fa
e ?
t- 5

S
S
;
tv, 5
en
S s
=
s


s
to
cT CT
Q_ QC *
s
£ s
CO ^

Q 2
















































0
O
0
^
(,
-
M'

•
/ s
X

^
^
-

.-5
•o
-

0
o
^~

O
<«;
C

























oJ























































O
(0
X

1



Q
si
^

3
^.
CX

O
0_
^

0
*o


o
Q
-


x
\,
'«}
U

C}

^

V)
S5
-

O
V
--

o
Vi


Q
C
^

0
O
-

0
Q
X,

o
V


Q
Q
^

Q
Q
-



• '.
.-
Or

0
^

O
0
to
CS
0

)c



O
\

•-
^






s
^


N
-

_
""







i



i/


•y
if


I
1
I

Cj
-



\
^




















































\
\
vi
-






•o
-

Q
tf


•^
U"
-

Q
i/-
,-v"

V
I
n

-
I
V

u
',-
i

\
t/
*



J

i-
^3
J
C<
Q
r
-

Q
<3
-•


«~
"^

'
•0
•*

c
'o
x-

V)
'•0


C
trj


C
Q
^

O
ir


Q
\c


C
O
X

•o
•Q
^

Cs
•^*,


































































n
V
-'

c
r.
->

X
xr
-

f
VJ
x

^
•^
--

Q
V
•^

0
Ih
-x.

o
In
•~%,

^



r
c
•j

























































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































O
CO
LfJ
O
o















































                                                                         01


                                                                         Q.
                                                                         a.
                                                                         a.
                                                                        A-4

-------
  o
 in
 £
 ro
      O
ra
e
c
01
a.
e
-L.
i

fn
>-

0)

O
0)
O
o!

>-
c
0)








E
o
u.
s
a
_>
a
C
O










-1
<:


-xU

'

CJ
F

CL



00
-

to
5

r

c



-







i-(
C





, 1


r~
i
4
^








1;
LI
£
•Z. i.
i'
<3 u
i"
^
f


SL_

2
c 	

£
O)

(U
8
o
0)
E
ro
°-


-

">
1 <
(U

i-





"8
O)
-8
fe -^
oj 0
e -\
m

d










to

<•> CC
8 ~
»
S ^ ~
0)
S S '
S
S ?
to ^ "
m -a o
~ OC -•
S S
" S


to
2
a .5
•s S s
c IIHI *
-^ o
r- 5
S 3
r-
S


J§ 5
"o s
"5 "* S
> 0)
| S s
F ?
i- •


>A
5
co 3
o>
T3 ^
OC S
5
S
CM ?
g S
rn
S

£ oc S
n
I S
v> s

O 0,
















































0
o
O
^
<3
v-o
")

c:
o
N

0
0
\

V^3
O
X



-

0
>n



1



i



1


I
1



1






^
-






















































1
1


0
IT
^

\)
^
^



*

'-
«•)
N

0
In
W


»o
^

VJ
lo
-


>0
w

0
o
5r

O
0
x9

O
O
10

0
<0
~-
c^
r>
^
•>


^
^

-,
M
^


' j
"N


•-;,
^

-
0
X

r>
^



i



o
^>


\1
^

J
Q
^^

O
O
--

<^
^























































'c
-.

•o

-/






V)
>


^
1 -



V


^
>

0
(o
^

s>
Q
^

O
«0
v3

O
>0
c-

^\
0
00

0
o
c-<


<;;
^



--.

-
T
•-

Q;
O
-

0
^
--

0
^


0
0
(V

c
IT,


1
1


0
V
^


VI
\


N
X.

^























































v-.
V)
X

V)
^
•N

0
v,


•.
V
-•

^
V
p?

Q
C
N

S
^)
^

^
^
--

'v

-
-

vi
\r
••*,

0
\T
r-

^
in
vx

O
Q

o
a.












































.A-5

-------
-6

-------
•£
J
03
0 >-
0)
t^ 01

S °£
< j> 2
'"i
2
t

-
?

E
I
- 0>
~S

n
2

ra - . o
tO ^ (D
sampling interval ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
National Aurxnetric Data Bank
— 	 	 — 	 Research Triangle Park, N. C. 27711
Agency
irf. (rrtOpJr.'A SARQAD Hourlv Data Form A
3 i
O ,
C.
"t
CM
C
03
,£
— 1 	 .
-

s
Q
<-£*
i V
O
cv)
0
•I.
u
• •l
t-
J
II
O J
5:

Parameter code

1 —

r-* O
OJ „
a -
IP








te Address Parameter observed Method
/H< fi'JC: . PfilT''. Pi'' H',' v-V -, f>1 ':'„;.,

at ^~ f*
s S ••
(N
j; •-
s 2 r
O)
i/> ^ O
fN n* **
IN o
r* *
05 £
en
J3 oo S
O OC to
(/I
£ S
— ^ o
"> S
o>
Sa
IO
in
US •"
"eo "> S
> 0)
£ S a
| 5
•- 5
CD
Ol
"D ^
OC 3
o
CN S
cr>
S s

? !
O a.
























































































































-44-

— 1
-
— 1




-
^























































' "~
'0
00


0
V)




'•'i




..

i
1
(j
>f






























-
--


-





-

1
°
rr
cj
O
*0

vj
Vj
^

Q
0


r\
VJ
Q
^

0
Q
tt

O
>0


0
^
^- —

0
o


r
c^
-
U



























Ki


0
Q
Oc

Q
S
^

0
V)
x9

0
^
Q

C
^
QC

Q
»r
(N<

•o
0
n

V
~




c^
-^.
oJ
o
•^

^
*o
UN

•Ci
^
^

O
V,
^

\1
V
v-

r>
Q
V"

O
Q
NS

•0
Q
Oc

o
Q
0
o
10
o
0
o
CQ




NO
-.,
N5







)

Vj
'*•-

O

^
^
0
C~\
-
^
r
*o
--

C
o
N

o

--

G
Q


1
!
1

Q
in
H

0
V}
N
CS
-
Q

































j 	 ,
























































	 L

—














































































-r-
-[-














0
*0
N

rj
x^






'
-',
N

<•
*
rN

0
C
r^

o
o
N

o
D
c-f

O
Q
or

O
In
31

O
In
3-

tl
lA
na

O
o
^
o
0
Q
(V|





ol

.4.

0
Q
KI

Q
j;
rl

0
l^
-

Q
k;
K

0
0
d

0
Q
/\

1
l
i

0
o


o
o


o
C


CN








































Q
^
-v.

C
0
A

^
«J
^
^

V
^
^1

Q
i<
K]

N
lp
-

Q
0
-.

^
O


•s^
V


G
Q
-

C
l^
-









Q
C
«r

0
0
10
Q

"




>

•-
-*
'N



'(


./-
N


/
" t



1

J

.^

Q
o
-^


•o
-


VJ
--

1
1
!

ri

































































"



c"



/-





-,
j
rJ

0
V)
vxl

o
i/-.
-V


d
e

• J
G
CM

O
O
(VI

0
C
V.
^























































































































































































































































































































CM to
O \
cc §
*— (rt
d -
CO UJ
o 5
o
Q.
Q.












.A-7

-------





QJ


rtj
<

s
z







5 *•
8-gR
3 *c

£ = 1
" I .s
^ «f B
2-5 ;•

ll s
z «












~a
0
e
"a.

|

C

Si"



L_
nj
£>-
ch
•i1

0 <->
CD
O
~"cL
-,
">.
^ c
•*







»
o
> •*•

5 °
> g
• 0
5 S
t
I













-
>- a'

£
^
X
_ r


05
-
-

, S
.. r

i>

<*>
S


I-







'J
.'-I
-5



I."
••*
0
^!
0
-^-
•5

• -
j
P 0

r, •<)
u

("^
j

3_
Q


00




S S
CM a,
— 13 &
« cc
8 ~
«p
S ^ '
Ol
?
r- rv
r< r
Z ° ~

s s
s s
O)
CC to
(D
S
S oo 3
»^ "a r*
O CC a
i s
"^ o
r- S
Ss
r-
•ft
to
to *«
S s
JS 2
•s s
to "> S
> 0>
s Ss
-p 5
*™ *

S »
S
J
co 5
S 3
:
c
CM S
S a
s
s
% - s
o" en
I S.
r
I S
y> -

a o.
































































































1


















































1





















































1






















































0
0
0
M
C
•xj
N

V
1
i,;

l>_
^
\

C
1
s.
IA.

0
Q
-

C
0
-

0
!i"i
M

^
I4
T

Q
'q
--

C
L
-









,
L -
-






























































V,
^%
\ ,
•^
i
^J
4 i
^

0
'^
-

\j
lr
-

0
Q
^

C
c
v-

0
d
•^

c
u-
—

0
c


G
«
--

0
<3

C
v/
c
r

C
A
V
r-

Ci

r

v
Q
be

0
4T
7

r\
V
^
r

0
0
•3-

d
e
r

Q
^
/x!

0
0
/<

Q
M
H

C
lc
o

<>
-











!














































>^.
_
•H


C
f
V/
k

w
0
&>

Q
(':
Q
^
C
^
-a

0
tfl
•5:

0
^
T

0
0
-c

0
ki
-S

Q
c
r

C
C
fc

0
<:
/>.
L
^
Q
j-

C
Q
r-

\i
v-
vS

o
Vr
Cfc

(_
0
xS

s.
0


0
it
a-

Q
'^l
•^

c
If
N

C
'-0
r,

i



1
1


X
-


























































VJ
1
^r

<
•f
f

J
^,
c

v
<
J>(

Q
*fl
~

Q
t
'-c

^
k
±

^
<
sc

h
k.
•*

V
!C
J

<]
C
<2

C
Q
W
0
.
-'


-

^


Ir
'N

A
-0
T


\


0
V
rO

r.
'•O
(^

^
\r
^

(^

c

o
ft
^

o
o


o
Q
V

r4
—




















































fr
1



















































£ ,
























































-

c



i

£

s



r(



<

0
f
•~

VJ
v:
—

O
'o


o
>o
ro

<:
C
>9

O
O
HT

C
c
5
Q
0
Q
N"

Q^
\t
K)

A
0
^i

0
S)
A

Q
Q
r\

Q
Q
^

0
\<]
i\S

Q.
IT
A


icj
A

0
Q
A)

Q
Q
d

Q
Q
(\





1



^
'•v
IX

V
l<
i^

^
k,
3

\
r
1


(
(
f

(
L






'
t
<

,
i






















-




o
r'-


J .-
t-"'


u ' J
•I IV"


-r
-v

"\
w
0 ',
-,^

io
f
r\ ^

i r

\ r^

r\
d
i ^

•A
d)
v \>


Q-
*o
Q






























































r


v,
'-


,;
C_ -

^.
0
>

J
!/
^


'0
N

O
o
^

o

r-



(V

0
!T
^


'-
,j





























































































































































M to
g «
CO CO
0)
o* —
•^ CL
^-" X
O ^
o
Q.












































. A-8

-------
      APPENDIX B






GRAB BAG ANALYSIS FORMS
         B-l

-------
                          GRAB  SAMPLE ANALYSIS
DATE
                                         STATION NO.
LOCATION
           r
PERSON PERFORMING ANALYSIS
-i :   - ...   —< ~4- L " rr / r. j_,
                                       r
ANALYSIS METHOD  M $ &  - A/ [j Z. /._
SAMPLE NO.
^-2 - I
Gr-1-2
- _ -^
--//

'"-< ..' - 1




," ! - |
£ / - :-•-

4



'^

r. 4 ^-





TIME OF
START
t ••'• ^
lci 30
/ " ; -
JO 6^0

/ ; "

y - ,



ft ^-2
M4&
-i^'3
2^/f

/9 5
i -, • •* .^
i 7 ,20.
i 45
Z0'.00
> - , ^,




TIME OF
FINISH

^ '








MISSED














i
DURATION OF SAMPLE



'






VftWE Ke'ji7














CO CONCENTRATION
(ppttm)
4-, 5 : , i / f
^.?^U / 6
f * i *"
L~ ! • , i ,**

3 . 7 KK •/ ', <*
•^-* ' f , * -,J
7 'V
4 7 "• /
-?'?.•./ 1 <""
*S* 1 '- / i • J • _

„ L , v --
5",7 /'' / I', 5
i- / % ' /. o
3./ - /• /-O
3^--,nv /,u'

>> . 2 , '• r •""
^.•? / / /, 6*
•-? • ^: y /. c)
2.^ i'.' 7 /, T
3.51 / / I.S




                                                                                      ft
                                                                                     A
                                      Jf t 
-------
                          GRAB SA11TLE ANALYSIS
DATE
LOCATION
                             STATION NO.




                             .ANALYSIS METHOD
//  ,.
PERSON PERFORMING ANALYSIS
.-;
                              /•

SAMPLE
NO.
^ ''' - :''->
U-'hecl

•
/



G-2-5"
- -
7
8
Cj

r- i - L,
c^L /


,

i ; — -TT
•* tru* L-
JJnaJj us
i// i /
U f\o £> [ {j
w


TIME OF
START
'•<• I' '• !
Vl:. .- Dr.'-
I
; • "^
:u
2 -': '
'"' _,

^-T ...
- ;
-'• %
r'-
"? j* r~


_ , '
•7.3- 1 3
y '>. •
/ '-$- -;

^
r—
!«?<;. -^e H
c^ ! 5po/


COLLECTIO^
TIME OF
FINISH

blCA-J


















/^-, /n
f 73 ^
c? - / • ^
,= ^?7. /
1 1

-I
DURATION
OF SAMPLE

^}e} rtl 0 r C

lcj>
















^•Qft

(V '/
rti i/



TIME OF
ANALYSIS
-? - . .
-'" O
Lr-5 xa

~^hc ^
>~
'.
S } j
' / "?_,
/ ' - '
/,
4-
_ ' ! !


: ' H

• j
, ••'' ^
, i
> — ••

&• 6






METER
READING
17.-'. .
*v'- ,ji<< ,S
1
/ cr ,,
+ -.
/• :
/ *'
/ *T
/6.9
-- 0, .-.
o ^ *^
^m. /» J
/ /. o
'S>&

/-•. ;
l-l 	 ,
/ '• • o
„ ,
' , \







ANALYSIS
BASELINE
READING
/,0


It)
/•<"'
/'S
/.s
/,3
//3
i y^


/.3

;,3
AS
A3
A3









DIFFER-
ENCE
Aj) 3



4"9.0

/3.2
IH.S
/5 (,
31.2.
2E.O
'|0,T
I 9.3

8,1
12. n
y'V.3
/z,4?
/-LB _








p?>
f?-(


A<<
23.
^j(
^o,J
?'
T1'
iff.
j(!
«^f
/?•'

v,«
(5M
rt
O« v
6,








-------
                          GJiAB  GAMTLE Al.ALYJlS
DATE
LOCATION
STATION NO. _•_£_;__





ANALYSIS METHOD
PERSON PERFORMING ANALYSIS

SAMPLE
NO.
— ;















1 - . :. ,

1 - '• ,
i

1





TIME OF
START

i • "
'?
/

- .._ _
1 •
/ " • :..
! •', * -'
J > ' \ ^
j ,
	 	 "'


COLLECTIO
TIME OF
FINISH

















..
_
••







^
DURATION
OF SAMPLE


•

- A i r-.. ,< : . j L
c





















TIME OF
ANALYSIS
; ! .
7


•«.-d -F-ro-K

- /


v . 1 "'
^

,; ?
• .
-?-/. •'•

\

>?- : 1^

-^.2. ; I I

^ :• • 4




METER
READING
"2 B
a.? -
-; ;




v
* *~ <\ i
^ ')
-5

;
''
T -%/
•',• _•
- '- .- /

3. -.. ,
-> .
•i I . / »v /
"7 ^,
? , M ^ /



ANALYSIS :
BASELINE
READING




Ho*.





















' ,»•
DIFFER-
ENCE ' Pi: i
/.£ AO
A 5 A>
i//' \/.0
Z-1 i.O
\

2-3 |/,0
2- "2- '/,0
2.8 /.(5
2.1 /,Q
2 6> I/O
1
6.4 3,0
5,0 fc.S'
9, 0 3.5"
5.7 3,0
2,8 i,Z

Z,(o [\S
(o.i 3.0
20.1 \IO.C
to > 0 O,O
1.6. A-Q
.]


                                       B-5

-------
                          GRAB S/uiI'LE ANALYSIS
DATE
LOCATION   V —-, '•_
PERSON PERFORMING  ANALYSIS
STATION NO.
ANALYSIS METHOD

SAMPLE
NO.
_n 	


-
•• ! ; .1

z c,
w


i

/





.. c



,




TIME OF
START
7 - ' ' - "
yt- X « '-
,«*
i "I r.
^

^•- '_
'A.'... '"
•2.-$ -•:•
, f
"z ": 'i, f!

-V 7 .,
2, - : *

/I'*--
"7 "

— - - -•" '
X - '' ^
^^
7. t : i -
rfV '_ Jff' 1



COLLECTIO
TIME OF
FINISH


























N
DURATION
OF SAMPLE



























TIME OF
ANALYSIS
I.? :.^
- '
,
, C-^
,/ r;

c , "2.7


i '?


i

— >
f ;;
f

* i
r ' t

<••• • //





METER
READING
* /
«r?.-:i-/
i— -7..
5 * ''• /
r •; t

^,3,,,
/*,, 1 (
/•' .
6. 7 •/
,,


1
-. ... f

"s '

5: 4* ,
/
; , /'.. /
G / •" «
6 ... /



ANALYSIS
BASELINE
READING
/.r
-• z
1, X
1,5
/.£

/,£
l£
/•^
l-b
1,6

/.r
iS
/*£
/• ^
/,5

/.r

1.5
l,%
/•£




DIFFER-
ENCE ' PP
^, / i ^
y f~~. <•"*,
£• /*• **
^2. 2.
i*-j **/ ' y
H.2 ^.«>

7 ,g j //,
2J,£ 76.
//.5 d-
^5"- V x-
6-'? 1 3-
1
1
4.G 2.<
^./ ^-i
V.? ^J
V- u 2. (
t/t LJ \2,
\
3.9 2.,
i n*r f Xr* i ^*- ' '"
f'-' ^ J ;O '
//, ^ \2,(
	 Lj^g 2,


}
                                      B-6

-------
                         GRAB SAMPLE ANALYSIS
                                       STAT10N NO.
LOCATION
ANALYSIS METHOD
PERSON PERFORMING ANALYSIS

SAMPLE
NO.
G-i - \
G -• / - 2
-»- - • *j
,
^- ' - ;j

•^ - - i
', 7 <
,/ .- • -
, - •
_2 - M
. 5

T - t"^~"~ 1
L- - 'T - 1,
^ _ >
.
.-
COLLECTION
TIME OF
START
yc
: 3 , b"
' c "i ,:•
1 c M S
/^'',:.

-x1
/ -^ / -l^1
l^^o
\ r « —
1C100

j -
1 n 2-2
/ «-. :, 7
/ '-^ ^ 1
170^.
i
(/ - / ! I )**^ 1 ,'
_J_A--2<' }"J ' ^
i / ^ / ^"J O
L ('• " ' ! J
~
, _ '
/ v^:;
, . -• _jr-
TIl^E OF
FINISH
, •"
i ', •
! '> - i"
,"
f-7/5

/-"' /5
' - : 0
/ ^ i ^
i ;
! i ' L

)-• ^
Y- ' i
1 &:< $2.
I , :"
\ •' ^-1>

l^\5
l&3r'>
I^^-J
\ •} r '
i
r ~r


•

i
DU POTION
OF SAMPLE


























ANALYSIS
TIME OF
DIALYSIS
/<; * ' f
< L/ ^-' ^ >
xiG .;•/
^ '• 3 1
^/ j ? yj
»v->_-' ^» *'
METER
READING
Z.7
V.I
J>J^5
T'. 5
3.3

}, )
5. I
cr.o
(~,l
f ,0

3 j
"?. "i
3.7
-r. •:
3.6

^,'"1
4--0 •
3.3

^ -7
1
"



BASELINE
RI;ADING
l.o


t


1.0
/. ;
/. ")
1.0
/-o

/,
1,6
i . '..'
ho
/ • 0

1-0
1.0
1.0
1,',
|.;3



DIFFER-
ENCE p;1:;
1-7
n
, , _,
_:
^ .3


/.f"
/.£>
/, *
, ^
i
,-. - i/.F

j^?
't ,
T


'- • »
•2.7

7, 6

~
.> • -
or s_

2., 7

i
i
- .;
/.c

/.
i.o
}.$
1 f 1
•"4


1,5
1,5
1,0
1,1
1,? |

i '
I
                                      3-7

-------
                          GRAB  SAIU'LE  ANALYSIS
DATE
STATION NO.

l.  1+ i    5". j
LOCATION
ANALYSIS METHOD
     AY D ]
PERSON PERFORMING ANALYSIS

SAMPLE
NO.
:, ) - (-,

-

i

^


t
' ,





>

6ft - -
/
•)
/
j :>




TIME OF
START
i
- -. i , •-
; I
"
•2. -- '•£
•2-^6

-71) • ', '->
-^-7 i O
;7_ .: ;
^'.^0
;- ""'- ^ v

- 1 ' -
„,

"i -1
*- .^

r-n 1 • r~ -•
^- 1 . \> J
-z--;/'^
Z2 2.3
7 Z ' L -^^
-z.?. '!0
^Z 35
'-di'/O



N
DURATION
OF SAl'ffLE



























TIME OF
ANALYSIS
\ •'-
"> • . _.
^ v
'*'- 1 ' 'o
1Tj Q&.
. .. ^

ao x.-"
OT1 "^-4-
00 • '2,0
oo .-/
-Oa •. \ 3

"^ '*'
•""- .- ' \^s
*M: - "

OO :-
"0 ^^

a3 :'j
•^ '. .
^
-i ', ' ^
-z'i ",^
^3; zA




METER
READING
^ !.'>
"^ — »
> ;' . O
- i.';
/'C.0
/(sS

X';M
/
?-\-l
2.-* ^
?, ^

l!,7
/H.5
I '
i 4 • •
j

>~;,^
J.~ • f
1(«. ->
/4,o
IL'}



ANALYSIS
BASELINE
READING
i 'j

j

\. •;

/, o
* ^
' '0
1, 0
l.o

l.o
; . j
! , ^
i i
1 . -..-

/,0'
/. j
/, 6)
1,0
ho




DIFFER-
ENCE
7i M
-J -
2. -' .
/7. 0
/ ~ /

JZ-J
3 -' . i
-5,0.7
' ^ '
?^ j

O//
17."
/•! 1-
-
i . • • '

7^.--
0.7,7
^,-
/ J. j
/;7
i



PF
i J.
! b •
14^'
7
x " ,
I-~'.f.

11,
//..
15.
U.'
1?

5/
!• '
i ,'
t .
ti'
T,'

•—•i
/£
tf.
7,
•" ,



                                     B-8

-------
LUCA'l 10'A
              T-sr^ L
                                          SiAIiuii NO.
                                                                        /
A..EYSJS  Ki.iiiu
PERSON  PERFORMING ANALYSIS  >  -^ V    A c-,

SAMPLE
NO.
,i ~ 1


<
L;

- '^- \
i
"Z
1 — •
T
•M*

'V „ -• |


t


,
1 	 „__ 	
U •' -L








TIME OF
S1ART
1 - '. ? C
I >\ 4-
/':• ';
1? 13
__1L_— _

\7. 5 ,
* * *
1 :'
u? i-
I'-' *")

1- ' -
1 ".
i " "t
! '- i
13 1^
ii. • '

12 :3O
12-4-5
la:^
L_JL_3 • ' 5
/ .^ : 3o



COLLECT! 0
Til-IE OF
IJMISH
I 2 ' 
i - •,
- ' i
• -•

i - • r
13 ••
/ ,: -
i: - .
i- --^

. ',/— *
•^i
I-1 : ,
»a - i
!2> '

/_:' <'{T
/i 3o
1?. i 5
13-30
/ 3:4-5



N
J
DUMA.TION
OF S/^^LE



























TIME OF
ANALYSIS
ir- '
/ ' • , -J
/ 5 ' :> I
(' '-- ~"j 4r>
/•f 5?
1 ; ~.

14 4-C
Ht *vr;
H .
1-1 I
/^-:~C,

i : • X
1 4 r-
/T | 4-
M i
iq- L

/' :-/
/5;/7
I 5; "5-z.
1 5 • -' /
/ f-7 z i




METER
READING
^,^
5,^
S. .
^->
* **-.
:.o
f~
• ,^

4,4
4.'''
r 4 -
^ '<
3.^T

4-7

•?.-
1>,1
. .£

4-.^.
4-,4-
^U
3,^
^-/



ANALYSIS
BASELINE
RE/JJ1NG
I,O
/.^
.'.(3
/ . O
/ ?.

» . o
i .^
1.0
/•
/ , 0

1,0
1. c
i- '
\.t
i.

/. 0
/-O
/.o
/.o
/-o




DIFFER-
ENCE
5.Z
• i- +
7.2.
x ,0
->•

3 , V

3 -
A. /
•^ 5

^,7
'• :J
7. ,S
, , |
!•'-

'j.2-
3,4-
1.L
2. A
3, (



i
i
i
!
prx
^,5
^,^;

/.Qi

"
l.:;i


7.0
/,5l
1
2.0 \
i.O
1,5,
I.O1
1.0
i
1,^1
/.5|
l,5i
/.5*
/•5;
i
,
!
                                        B-9

-------
DATE
         •/
         STATION NO.
LOCATION
         ANALYSIS HlliiOD   yVPl K
PERSON PERFORMING  ANALYSIS
P'f
.i  >.- y
                                                 ~r

SAMPLE
NO.
Crf- U
7
3
•?
jQ

£i+l>
_ 1.
$
rf
/£>

c: 5- k
7
/
V
/
I _J^2

^ 6 - 6»
, 	 _L
Q,
1
io




TIME OF
START
/ ^ (2.
<^/
\'^^-
•••"' ' ('
f "''

/('- V
, j *•
/ ,"> *-- ^
:, 4-



XI
DURATION
OF SAMPLE



























TIME OF
ANALYSIS
f * / i
.' *. . V
7^f)
n - ^
7 4- 2.
/"/4- I,

/- /.x
/ •'_
/ ^ /
/ 'w*1
j
7' -:

/ .
/ ;
;...•. |
/f . i
/ g ' .:V
I *^ » "5 -I
i /,, X. vL

)1'^-\
1 " --4
/;- 53
/^ f 7
/* ^4




METER
READING
L,^

(r, 0

:CJ

^'-/
//. ':
/'. . -
6 .:.
^•2.

->. c
' V , •' J
' , f-
# .•;>
C . 1-

/(9. 7
/2,T
'•".(^
*•'. t.
9,4



ANALYSIS
BASELINE
READING
I L--
uo
, o
r
; i ^
/,n

1,0
1,0
l.o
/
1- ^' 6 -I

I / -
/.
/. /
1,0
1. _'

l.o
/.o
A-0
' AO
;.o




DIFFER-
ENCE
- .
£-.0,
^.^
r .
i

~'* 2
1



^' (

X"
r
, 7,4-
r? 4
'7.:f.

i l/._i_
11.7
7, 4
7, .'•
7.4





.- ,
^ *•-
•*^« -
.,>,'
* '
•s. «

T.'

•M •
<«• , ^
f '

^
3>
J>,'

J,5

u,
5,
f.<
^
&



T'-  . -.'  V  -    '.  „.....- ,.  a. ,:


 •\        ''-->•,..
                            CO • t
                              , ri
                                                       -r;
                                :/.   M


                                   B-10
                                         '    'i
                                                                             :  /. 0

-------
                          GKAC i,A:L'LL ANALYSIS
DATE
STATION NO.
LOCATION
       PERFOlLMr.IG  ANALYSIS
ANALYSIS METHOD
                                                   T
                                       3-11

-------
                         GRAB SAMPLE ANALYSIS
DATE
   STATION NO.

LOCATION   y\~T i-  ••  ' >•! A,
   AI^ALYSIS METHOD   A)Jj>I
PERSON PERFORJ-11NG ANALYSIS
;  Ko .".••-.

SAMPLE
NO.
(4 :- C,
*-t
^
^
V
•D

X*! ~1 /
^5 *£ ~ ^>
'i
&
7
/o

r " - L
"} ^ >O
-7
2


^r ;'
Z! :|f
"2.1". ^ -o
* I ' -1 ^>
'il ', :,•

"-?.^'' '.'^
31 ' 1 0
•2J : z 5
^2 I:A-O
'ZJ ', 55

O I ' • "
x, 1 u.
O 1 ' I r
-11 , 1 >
2 i • '0 ^
-;.' i . '"
^ - ' ,•



COLLECTIO
TIME OF
FINISH
v i 10
^ 1 ^- ._>
^ i ' 4-;
a i ' I i
T.^' (0

^ 1 ' f 0
-.'1 - ^
a r VO
^.r j:
V, /L.

•z/:/o
Q t '^"o
a 1,4-0
ai'55
•21' 10

?. \ ' 13
•2. i '::•••
7 1 -, So
71&J
^ .:



N
DURATION
OF SAMPLE
'£'
\
\
;

/ ->

>
> t
\
\
/
/r'

n"
V
N
/
/K

-r'

}
/
lff




TIME OF
ANALYSIS
-21' 47
-2-2'.r.-.
^ :^
-2-; n
;ri "2.

li ^*r
•'XL'.Ct*
•2}"2,5
-22 3Q
72. '.ir

2_ 2. ^*
x x.^7
2 3 ' /
v 6,04-
-z3;o^

2i: '47
^2 : 4 f-
-11 ^
"2.2 ' vO
a? -/v




METER
READING
0,1
Y, -•
2..L
iM
16.0

1,2-
',•) •*
/<-'• f
/^,3
/on
AO.S

/r.r
10. 1
fr.l
)o,(
^

i t <
/6o
l/.z-
/a *
•/, /



ANALYSIS
BASELINE
READING
i
/' • :..•
/.<3
;,o
1,0
/.o

j,6
i , . •
/.^
/,o
/•o

/.o
/.o
l>0
J.o
1.0

1,0
ho
1,0
I 0
;.o




DIFFER-
ENCE
5,1
.j •
M.C.
10,1
^,0

^
•i,-7
/7-3
7-7
?. >:

:; '••'
<7,3
/S,/
^./
a.^

?^
7. 3
//), 2,
i.$
b-'i




pp>
*- c.
< • D
^'5
6.^
5",<
, ^
,^^
s5.^
,?/

•? ;
f.J
^,r
f.,
*.

$:<
^
vT,(
5(
*,5



                                    B-12

-------
DATE

CKAB SA:^LI: ANALYSIS
7/
6
G^ - i
'2-
3
^.
5
6


N PERFORMING ANALYSIS M^J
\ COLLECTION
TIME OF
START
1.9 ;^
J r,fo
)3 " '
1 •? ?• :
1 3 . >,.",

U' -C
iz ;
) >, ^ "
1 3 z o
133.^
/L-3 0
i z.' •; ^
I ? 47
1 -3 • :. . -
13 i 17
1-3 :-

I2--3-J
JZ.'. >C>
I3'.o 5
la-fiLO,
1 o " /
It'lF


TIME OF
FINISH
)?\cr •"-
13 -r,;-
) 5
1 1 -^


\Z'.~>3
" -
S.vO
i 3j C"
J3S/3

/-'- 4/
I? 02-
|3'I7
13^2.

/6 ; */5~
/2:5To
i 3;oy
1 3' C.O
1 3 /57
1 "*> ' ?
ifrL/o


DURATION
OF SAMPLE
^ i
/ *
\
]
/
(~
if
IS'
\
\
/
/
/vr^
/£'
\
\
\
y

7vf '
/sf'
\
"\

f^
If




STATION NO. & t ' "ir
ANALYSIS METHOD /J^J / ^
/

1
ANALYSIS
TIME OF
ANALYSIS
/5'-^
) 3; )4-
15' /p
/ .^ -'-2-
1 ^ °7
/9 .'07
/4-'24-
M /^
l^f-T ld
1,0

1-0
/ ' O
I. .0

7,0
7-Y
/,o
1-0
; . o
/' o
/^
7,4



DIFFER-
ENCE ' PPMj
;<7.^
2,^
a.. /
2 /
7.4-
/-&
1,2.
'N* -
5. o
3.6>
/.C,

2.. O
2, r
2, 7
2/
• /
7.7

2, :
2,0
2, ^
J.:
^ c?
2-.r


7/0
/.£
-^
.0^1
y •-
/ * ^i
/X"\
* Cxi
/-oi
To"
/•'J
A 5

7.01
i
/-o
7.0
M
0,6"
7.^
A <5

B-13

-------
                          GRAB SAMPLE ANALYSIS
   DATE
                             STATION NO.
   LOCATION    Al ^-'A Ml i~1
   PERSON PERFORMING ANALYSIS
                          :*  r—
                          .   '
                                       ANALYSIS  METHOD   /J£)/
                                             i
                f'r'COLLECTION
                                            / tf,
                                                       ANALYSIS
SAMPLE
 NO.
TIME OF
 START
                    TJME OF
                     FINISH
                       DURATION
                       OF SAMPLE
                                   TIME OF
                                  ANALYSIS
 METER
READING
BASELINE
READING
DIFFER-
 ENCE   ! PPI^
.61  - 7
                                                                   -8
                                                               C3.C
                                                 ii
                                                A^.
Ji.
              55
                                1 '. 25
                                                   5"
                                                     /,
         -2.  V 08
                    C
                                                                   4^
                                        2^,
                                                           /, 0
                                                   -X
      R
         2. 0.^ 3
                                                   7.1
                                                    ACL
                                       _ki
                                                            0
                                                                   ^_Z
              oC,
                                       -^IZ
    XL
                                                1^0
                                                                         &L
                                                          l.o
                   2.O-.5O
                                        8.0
                                                            1,0
          20:30
                                                   &3L
                                                 1,0

                                                           1,0
M-
                                                 17,0
                                                 1.0
                                                                          8.'
   ^JL
   ^L
                               ±L
                                                     J^JZ.
                                                          1.0
                                                         7.8
                       ; oo
                                       2^L
                                           . 35
                                                               4-.:
                                                          1,0
                                    B-14

-------
DATE

GRAB SAMPLE ANALYSIS
7A/73
LOCATION H! Lr\ A/ T h
PERSO
SAMPLE
NO.
c; i - i
2.
3
<9~
z

&••*- 1
z
3
^
S"

>o- i
2
j,
4-
5

G4-- i
2.-
3
4-
£



N PERFORMING ANALYSIS \^luJ^
''" .> •> • * ' >• •'. S :
J - ' \*r
1
COLLECTION
TIME OF
START
/y.oS
/i:r '
/ v ' 5 -
/•?: 5r
<^~) /"\ • *^ *^

i & ' f\ 1>
n"'^
I1:i5
11' 50
^cO;t?5

//. '~-'^
/f-' /5
j^J,0
y^945
^0:00

/I', o5
I^'/^O
	 ^'_3A
JLlliL




TIME OF
FINISH
/?'^0
IT 55
i 7'jO
ZO'.Ot
*0'23

1 f ^£
/?:&

zc o:
2'- zO

/f'15
I7'~o
/v^
ZO'GS
20 13

/f/ZO
yf -'35
»?; 5i
5.^o(>
^/);2-2



DURATION
OF SAMPLE
1C1


'
/ ' '

~- 1
(
\
^
/ f- — J

If'
(
}
c
/{-'

/ 5 '
(
\
\
)
l?~'





STATION NO. ^ /- '/
ANALYSIS METHOD /.J£ ' ^
1\??C'^
:"'(f /
/
ANALYSIS
TIME OF
ANALYSIS
-2,1', oa
>
>
j
21 ', 1 5

-7L 1 • ^
2- / .' 5 6
^l :3^-
-zJ ;^7
9 1 : 26

"2.0 AQ

t

•if Ofi

^2.'/5
•Z-"Z : 00
^^-^04-
Z^-:oS
2.1 : 55



METER
READING
/ x;
7.6
*"! «^_.
;0, f-
^*(*

7,6
7,4-
7.2-
f,^-
y/.o

<5.4-
SO

y/.^-
_y^4

78

A3
/&. 7
6 . o
/ ;(^.
^«4*
^\, /,

(^,o
£.*•
4>, 2-

3.0
,5.0
4.5
4,5

?,0
5.d)
56
4.^
i.O

^,5
3.J
3-6
5.<0
J^

5,5
3.0
f,o
so
5.0

_
B-15

-------
DATE

P r A r c / * " •> T r^ • * •< T \ • c1 T f
u U V i j o i i* . .. I- / ^ '.-...- L . ^ 1 o
7/V73
LOCATION M T L V \ r M rr
PER^C
>'l; Q>n
SAMPLE
NO.
•,-*• i ~ (&
7

1
/O

(£2.- U
7
9-
?
,o

(Vi- u
/
P.
>
J0

£- -
-2 "^ '^ CJ
7^ -:;o:n5



TI>E OF
FINISH
2.3VU1
^-'O1^;
a^'-fo
•t. _' 1>«i
(O-" : 1 O

:-C 15
o "^ • ">, /~\
oO^ ' LH '^/
* - — -' ,
2,*-Oo
oa'j'3

o ^ - ^
^T* W *-^
' ' •> ' * ' ' ^V" ^
-a?^:oo
OO '. / 5

^3'<^O
a'3',^5
O-7 • r ~,
» , w>, )
OO.Qj
OO iO



DURATION
OF SAMJLE
/^/
\
y
C
/^T7

Lr/
\
/
c
/sr/

/s/

(
^
/•^ '

/^
N
J)
C
/^y





STATION NO. --. /- Y
ANALYSIS METHOD /J/- ' !^-
^-,-x
s v'- 5.
\ • V (
f r.- 695^
ANALYSIS
TIME OF
ANALYSIS
+^- \J i — J >1^""
ta^- c t^
a^'o-i
J^*" ' /' ~ «' **^l


06 • i a
a^;0(o
c-o://
c r ) 7
nc:ii-2-

cnf. 36>
O f^-1 ' O 1
L
OO ' 4^7
oo ;50

<9/./<9
01 '05
0 I'OI
60: 57
00:54-



METER
READING
13. X
I^XU
1 Jl^ «-^J
/ ^, ^

l?.0
//0.7
r

1^,0
ld*k
//,(*
J7.7
J5>b

'3* y
) O ^1—
//.3
/3. /
IZ.Q



BASELINE
READING
I. O
/, 0
/, . /


//,G

/O.fe
/6>.7
I4-.L

J%%
114
W.3
J2. /
/&&



.7, 3
5,c
7-0



J".*
5/
S'.^b
8-(
7/6

6,b
5". f
5,t
4-<
3" 5



B-16

-------
                           GRAB SAMPLE ANALYSIS
 «   7/V73
     DATE
     LOCATION
                   STATION NO.
     PERSON PERFORMING ANALYSIS
£_
                                 ANALYSIS METHOD

                                       tl^Ll^
  SAMPLE
  NO.
                   COLLECTION
     TIME OF
      START
TJ>Di OF
 FINISH
DURATION
OF SAMPLE
                                                       ANALYSIS
 TIME OF
ANALYSIS
                                          i ;
                                       20
 METER
READIKG
                                           5,0
BASELINE
READING
                                                      ,0
                                       1.0
DIFFER-I
 ENCE  I  PPM
                                            z.o
                                           ,j£i
                                           2^2L
                                          i ; o \
                                                    1,0
                                               3.2-
                                            1.5
                                                                  J»L
                    J2L50
                                            JLZa
                                      J^2_
                                                           1.0
                                                          A^_
                                                          A^.
       O
                                                                   7,7
                                      3Z
                             _2_a
                                                           /. 0
                                                                  4-.0
                                                                  //.
      3
±.
                                                           1,0
                                                     LO
                                                     7,5
                             j^4
                                                                         5:5
                       J21
                                                           i.o
                                                                  7.5

                                                              C\
                                    B-17

-------
                         GRAB SAMPLE ANALYSIS
DATE
STATION NO.
LOCATION
ANALYSIS METHOD   / *>0 > ' i ;•- 1 y
u -^
TIME OF
START
-2.3.00
-^^ ', IS
2-^30
2^3.V5
^^,00

^3 ' 0^
23' 15
X^'.^O
-7^'^S
^ , ofN

12 55
13 '. / o
2.3; i:
Z3 VO
•2-3 'i"5

ZS'.OO
^3:13
•2.3:30
a5;^-5
-aj^-:o^



COLLECTIOl
TIME OF
FINISH
•-7 -5. • i c
•c ^ • to
-Z"530
-2.5 '^
2^; oo
o:- 15

£3: is
2-5:30
2,3'45
d^\'oo
oo.iS

v -: ^
03 ', IS
a.3:4C
-2 '' " >
^ ^ —
Or ' IO

V . !5
7,3 ', 30
£3:4-5
^^..' •;:)
r>o:\s



^
DURATION
OF SAMPLE
1^'
^
/
/
iff'

,--'
\
>
r
//:'

/>-'
'\
;
i
/>r y
/ •— -

> r '
(
\
)
/
;?,'




TIME OF
ANALYSIS
o i : 2^
o\\*.
oi ;^5
oi: n
Oi: 1^

0^,5^
CO ; 4-3
o, ;;4^

_/_^

1,0
),0
i< a
1,0
J.o




DIFFER-
ENCE
-2*7.4-
73,2,
6^.8
43.4-
^.4.2.

H,l
l_2AO
_2Lf
_J_U
*L^

/5.4-
4-1.4-
101,4-
4-1.2.
s9,0

-M>L
]_!$•(*-
LJ2L-1
_S..4.
6,7




pr;
K
.^^.
36,
^1.
)2.<

5,
L.LS
Af.
<;,i
^,

t,.
30.
^50H
^.^
4,

5".
(3
' ^'»
c.
.4-
3-



                                     B-18

-------
                           GRAB sAiii'LL A::ALYSIS
DATE
 STATION NO.
LOCATION
PERSON PERFORMING ANALYSIS    \"
ANALYSIS METHOD     HO i
' ~-N
'sja-V.'fAA-.* /	

SAMPLE
NO.
^C~ !
•?-
•?
^
4
5
(*
* 1
;^r -:-• * 1
2.
a
^>
^
5
t>
&1 - t
a.
•&
*
CJ
(y~>
a*- .1
7.
-7
0-
/5


COLLECTION
TIME OF
START
r/ -.-i
'7- '>
IT "^
IT -3
/ p " ^
£r^n
/v-->
/?: 15
n. ^> ^,
j.j
17^-5
/^'^
lo^.
\TOO
17:15
n^o
/7-.1-5
/g :oo
a:"", 50
/7 : oo
IT, Ib
IT. "So
17 --- ^
/^-.•'•-•c>
^0,5^


TIME OF
FINISH
I 7 ' I 5
17'SO
p 4-0
r«ao
; ^ ' /:•
2/; 0 2
J7 /5
1 7 5.0
17:4-5
/' -•"
yS 15
JO 5V
17.6
|7'3<2
I-7- 1-5
j*J-.^r»
S&-I5
zi'05'
1 7 •/:,
n^o
rr.4".
".
/0.(S
2i '/o


DURATION
OF SAMPLE
,rl
^
\
/
(
/^y
,r>
^.
\
i
y
(
\
I f~
~- >
/ :
V
)
/
(
.r'
/r'
f
(
\
]
/
/d"


ANALYSIS
TIME OF
ANALYSIS
/f r/
I -V, -y x-
' ' i -^ T
li\37
!1'30
11^2.
21 -.30
/f Z3
yf ^z.
/'r />
/?•/:?
/•?: ^1
^' : 15?
rt;o?
tf;o3
13 ; 5-;
/tt'O^
ft '-0-2.
21: /
?.i:^^


METER
READING
2.UZ
37,4
yf.^
/d.n
/A<3
5,^
4-7
7./
6.^
*.r
^.^
YV
/?.(.
/9./
5-.I
4-. fc
5.o
fa , o
70
7.f
(^:)
8,d
(^
^


BASELINE
READING
1:0
/ O
1 ,D
1.0
i ^
1-0
J.O
/• •',
1,0
1-0
1,0
1,0
1,0
|,6>
1,0
l.o
1,0
AC
l.o
1,0
I/O
A 0
1, 0
/,d


DIFFER-
ENCE
ZC.'JL
/
/G4
/S,."j
/>:„ . -
*A
3.7
:?./
5.;^(
•6/')
— ,' - •»,
s,y
//.4
^/
f,/
:?, (b
. ^
2^
2.0
" 1
3.0
1*5
7.3
A^
6><9
*5
5,0
3-0
2,-0
- -6"
>O
^,5
'fiC3

-------
                        GRAB SAMPLE ANALYSIS
DATE
 STATION NO.
-~y
LOCATION
PERSON PERFORMING ANALYSIS
 ANALYSIS METHOD





.rV*',f SAi

SAMPLE
KO.
G 5-nt
2
^
1C
1 t
1 1

(*-(* n
L ?
<*
10
n

Gr-H 9
. 	 i^
1
to
n

6-9 7
3
^
./G
1 1




TIME OF
START
OO'c^r
(SO-: is
(90 • '..r.
OO'.4-S
-$& fr


OO ' 05
(DO -,70
00;rt
O^l&O
01 '.05

(0(9 ; c, j
/Vr, zo
oo'.r^s
o co : v o
«€>^/;c6

fid1. 10
OO'15
ao'^-o
oo:$5
O/ilO


•
COLLECTTO
TIME OF
FINISH
£r;)5
00,3^
nf. ' ^
0 /', OC<
y^^ / / f CT
O I ' 1 U

0'20
00:35
00 ; SO
0 1 : 03
o!:2jD

O0'*:0
ftCl3.5
no -50
01105
f)|',20

$0;S5
or '4-o
or:. : 5;j
o\:oo
O\ '25



N
DURATION
OF SAMPLE
If"
V
^
c
i *^'
/-T

/.<'

\
j
/
(
/.-"

AT'

;
(
/.'"'

/^'
i
(
p
/fT'




TIME OF
ANALYSIS
O9:i.+-
bO'.Z^r
0<"-^
Ol',34r
/IN 1 J -^ ^i
o/ . 2,0

/o/ ;nr
o\\ o#
o 1 : 3 1
£l;37
' r
oi ; + \

oi:tl
nl\ -2&>
 \ \ 4-4-
oi ;^^
o/;4S

00,'BO
01:0-2.
on; oft
Ol\-24*
OH2.2-




METER
READING
20.3

/5,7
1,<0
6,,0
_J^i

/7. ?
?,3
^•7
3.4-
3,,X
7,4,
<^.z
^./
-a -7




pp^
9,5
^i.i
5,<
?.c
/i r
4-,(

/^.f
7,5
;v
7..'
/^

/?.6
fi?
7.5
/•<
A


-------
                          GRAB PA::PI.I, ANALYSTS
   DATE
LOCATION
7/s/2-
       r-r\MTA
                                   STATION NO.

                                      ANALYSIS METHOD
   PERSON  PERFORMING ANALYSIS

    '•> '-» '-A.4- C  ^", =  • t .\C ^

       I           COLLECTION
SAMPLE
 NO.
     3
TIME OF   TIME OF
 SXAK'J     FiNlSl.
                        DURATION
                        OF SAl-L'LE
                          I    /
                                                      ANALYSIS
                             TIME OF  1 MliTER
                            ANALYSTS  | READING
                                      n^L
BASELINE
RI-:ADING
                                                          1,0
                                                       J.D
DIFFER-j
 ENCE  !  PPI1
                                                          /.o
                      ' /5
                                   ^O-.fc)
                                       4.2-
  1,0
                  j^L20
                                                      T^L
                   rr 35
                                                      l.O
                                                        ^.k  |/.j
                                                          1.0
                                                         1,0
      5
                           if,
                                       4,2-
  1,0
                                                               1.5
   - \
 A
                             2,1'OU
                                                 //, 0
                                                      1,0
                                       •2.I1. 13
                                              13,0
                                                /, 0
                       ; oo
 Ji
2
                                                                          ,
                                      ILZ
                                                          1.0
                                                                     3,5
                                                         Aa
                      , SO
                                       ; -2.2.
                                                1,0
                 3.0

                                                AJ2.
                                                                   4.
                                                                     3,0
                                                         AJ2_
                                                   Cl
                                   B-21
                                                             ^^

-------
                          GRAB SAMPLE ANALYSIS
    DATE
                                STATION NO
                              Xr,.
                            • -<&.->
    LOCATION

    PERSON PERFORMING ANALYSIS _
       •^'•'»..    ^   "';~'-
                   COLLECTION
                                ANALYSIS METHOD   fvi D  j {^
                              _\jc>4^'-.
 SAMPLE
  NO.
 ff- r-   /
  ••"
     TIME OF
      START
TJME OF
 FINISH
                      DURATION
                      OF SAI'IPLE
                        1 6'
                                                  (9
                                                     ANALYSIS
 TIME OF
ANALYSIS
 METER
RFADING
BASELINE
READING
                                      /-O
DIFFER-
 ENCE  !  FPi
                                      •- "--.
                                                    .o
                                                                       ^
                                       2.3'
                                                   (.0
                                           ±a
                                                         1,0
                                              A_T
     10
     •2.1130
                                          ULt
                                                    ST.C
                                                                       &
                                                   J^L
                                                                 fi.O
        1^11
ae PS
                                      oo.
                                                                 i,
                                                                40, CD
-Z
                                                        1,0
                                             ^7.7
                                      00:0-5-
                                                    1.0
Z
                                         •  on
                                           //,0
                           /6.0
                                                    5,
                              /-
                                73 :
                        i
                                                          ^LZ
G9
                                           /7,0
                                      /, 0
                                                                    .
      7
                                                   1,0
                                                    7'

                                          12_
                                                                 9.7
         JSL^I
                                   B-22

-------
      APPENDIX C





FIELD CALIBRATION FORMS
          C-l

-------
                             CO  INSTFUMKNT DAILY CHECK SHEET
STATION NAME
SAMPLE ROTAMETER SETTING
                             '.  :   ' _                        LOCATION
                            	  REFERENCE ROTAMETER SETTING
ZERO BASELINE (% RECORDER CHART)    .i.
,0,7
i .3
l,-2_
/./
AA
l<3
i










SPAN
?,R&r
r-.-
• ( *
43»>
^ori_
/3c?..G
f
.47.3
5"' • °
•JL^l
1 j *
5C. ^
JT<3.4
3 Ll.













ZERO
! 0 t*L



















SPAN




















CYL. PRESS
ZET?Q













SJPAN













1




I


!
j
                                           C-3

-------
STATION NAME
SAMPLE ROTAMETER SETTING
ZERO BASELINE  (% RECORDER CHART)
SPAN (% RECORDER CHART) 	
CALIBRATE ADJUST SETTING
CO INSTRUMENT DAILY CHECK  SHEET
'  f-  ^  i_,                       LOCATION
     :., 	  REFERENCE ROTAMETER SETTING
           1.0
                                                                     A-TU-*
                                                          OPERATOR
f?£riO//b6 (nv\
DATE
' S ^
L". ' -
? :- 10

!•'.,
^•'1'i
/^"j > *>n
>•;.-;
^;/._!J
/ H' "^ *~*


^ji i
FLOW READING
SAMPLE
^. :>

-5,0
?,^
";: D
3.!*"
Jd~
o.Q
1,0
/./
o.f
6,6,
A/0
/./"







SPAN
. "1 -V
53^
ILL
^
^^
— /"-
so./
€TM
^•7
$0.2.
•7-7'fc
"c" O
CC.|








NEW KNOB POS.
ZERO
5^
^~ _^
/
ko
., '";
A, o
6 ^
^
6O
'V "'
/;
(^
Lo







SPAN
>0
lo
(!^.
4-3
43
4-;v:
^'.>.,
f2,£T
^a-ff
4z_
4-2.
4-y










CYL. PRESS
ZERQ SPAN






_,











I





















                                           C-4

-------
                             CO INSTKi.iMiMMi UAH.* CHKCK

STATION NAME (floBjie  \/ft*J
SAMPLE ROTAMETER SETTING   2. 0
                                 I
ZERO BASELINE  (% RECORDER CHART)
SPAN (% RECORDER CHART)       .5*4
                   LOCATION
REFERENCE ROTAMETER  SETTING
CALIBRATE ADJUST SETTING
                   OPERATOR
                                                                          c A/-/ /y r,: •
DATE
(:• ,
'*' ^ J;
1
3 ->'

f, ' ' f'~














FLOW READING
SAMPLE
V ,
6.0
3.1
-27
SI
;














REF




















INST. CHECKS
1
1
C-t-*°
Z5o
5.0
















2
/
^
A
r
v















3




















4




















,5




















UNADJ. CALIB.
ZERO
•S -•
5
6
L
(n
(*.->














SPAN
1 ' •-.
6 '/. ">
5G
^a
^^
5k
c c
^ •• — >














NEW KNOB POS.
ZERO
7V
75
V-; (—
7S
'", 
-------
                            CO INSTRUMENT DATT.Y CHECK  SHEET
STATION NAME -b Tf

SAMPLE ROTAMETER SETTING
                   LOCATION 














SPAN
1_
' j-5
55".5
^:; s

El.o
£4,0














NEW KNOB POS.
ZERO
r/.
r/4
^i
*_.-
?t
/.vx; : -.••
/-., .v . i 'n,














SPAN
/ ,
/-
r/^.
I "~;
V't
/ /v: , '- '
>!.*"-*• , t|>rr














CYL. PRES!
ZF.Kn 1 SPA1
2- '- .}
I
f"2
/(.-:"
/IT^
If^o











!
|

' " " /
, ^ % ,_
/-:-•
/(, ;
•/i-
' '' 'b














                                           C-6

-------
                            CO INSTRUMENT DAILY CHECK SHEET
STATION NAME
SAMPLE ROTAMETER SETTING    3*0
ZERO BASELINE (% RECORDER CHART)
SPAN (% RECORDER CHART)    ^ '/
CALIBRATE ADJUST SETTING   	
                                       : C.3
                                                            LOCATION
                                         REFERENCE ROTAMETER SETTING  3.0
                                                            OPERATOR
DATE
','
i<-.3v
r. v-
i1 ' '
/- ;














i
i
FLOW READING
SAMPLE
	 ' t
1 7
3,D
i _• •

















1 	 REF





















INST. CHECKS
1
>o
"J.^
^.t
2,-B














1

2
r -
,'.S
Me
X
^
















3





















4





















^




















TJNADJ. CALIB.
ZERO
H.o
L.O
4-6
(.,0
0/A- ^















SPAN
i'.'
3^7-0
57 0
S7,0
















NEW KNOB POS.
ZERO

I'
"1
It
•^ju ', O















SPAN

' \
81
^/]
^^-0















CYL. PRESS
7.ERQ
/ "*""
V\ f pj-v ^ "*> '
/ '" -0
I^-D
/ . J •<- -.


..













SPAN
//-
;7\' '/
\^€
( *l 7 u









I







-------
                             CO INSTRUMENT DAILY CHECK  SHEET
STATION NAME  f\Tl,**>-eA
LOCATION
SAMPLE ROTAMETER SETTING
JT'.D REFERENCE ROTAMETER SETTING o".O
ZERO BASELINE (% RECORDER CHART) 6
SPAN (% RECORDER CHART)
CALIBRATE ADJUST SETTING
DATE
6/2-?
f?6
JOoo
7ft
i : ' A- c.
Jfi?
12:^5
1 r :! ,"
fo?5o












FLOW READING
SAMPLE
3t*&
O ^i*
o
35
3,o
?.o
^0
?fl












REF




















ft
4|
7'-s
•/v
7 a
7?













SPAN
5-5"
^L-O
;lv
4 C-
1 -,
V
1-9
^'^....













CYL. PRESJ
ZERO I SPA1

/ :/" -
/^^
r, ,:
>2£t>
\ ^
•&7f














i$:
/tt

1 
-------
                     CO TNSTRtTMKNT DAILY  CHECK  SHEET
STATION NAME STflQtW ? 7"^/^"/?. ^/JL ( A/-
SAMPLE ROTAMETER SETTING
f ) LOCATION . A;"^ ;. . r" • r /- ; /' ^~
^5 O REFERENCE ROTAMETER SETTING ^ *-. >
ZERO BASELINE (% RECORDER CHART) G?
SPAN (% RECORDER CHART)
CALIBRATE ADJUST SETTING
DATE
r '
i . .*.--,
Co ' -
j~> fs
'
(0/^0/73
-7 • / »
"' V"
!'',"•'
/ f , . ,
r/.''. '



» <:.
1 / •' V 2
'tsce>

Vjff


FLOW READING
SAMPLE
-TW
1*'k &
3,5

.\o
3,1
-L.I
i '
i / *
o b-
r-
C%c 0
Jt i *^5

^,,
r.4
>/^
At P.
3,V


REF
.'y-x. ^—^
\ /^


/>L '7-





" V*' \'^"-


•t v


/nc+ri,,

OKJI-T

2- ~7
_> (
OPEI
^ / t
IATOR:^^/ - "/u^'A,1
^,, ; > - , t i/
INST. CHECKS
1

/b



.r;
4T<
/ r5
2C
i'S
S I
"

^,-
IS*
?<>£
•Uv
, -t
S

2 3
\r p w«
nftl^Di
i1


f f
fc
*
^
16
»v
' 1 ^
X

f'-
to.
^
1 *A
'V
t)-c



fl\





j y ;





p(^J

"0

4
c^
\


'— .











'•"



'j
t



j





Hi i





-

'nJ

UNADJ. CALEB.
ZERO
OA/

^nS3

c
l ;'

12.6

/O- 6

/-o,o


*^'«"\
\
/.. - -
7
i3 c

SPAN


VS$?M

r i
(rb
' •; r
6-2.'
•• .
62
7-b
c*


l"^"o
&

NEW KNOB POS.
ZERO

3-0
C/M/v

^r
^ ^
*r,r
a.c
2o
3X
/ W
Onil/
iT7 '*~^ f )

3*
2 i
Ho
?a*el m



SPAN

71-
r££ /4

^^"
^.d
•^.f..
?6---
77
93 ,
r^ .. '
;.."

7 '> ,'t

Afd)O
^,;,
.-'C7£
a
itv;

<•)
***-' * * '

/6 .
><: - ^


//: -


)7Jo
'Vo
/v:' •'

itf.




/?.-,
//;,,-












O
                                   C-9
6
/"•  •  ^/-/

-------
CO INSTRUMENT DAILY CHECK SHEET
STATION NAME
                                LOCATION
SAMPLE ROTAMETER SETTING
,S 
SPAN (% RECORDER CHART)
CALIBRATE ADJUST SETTING
DATE
b( 3o
/ 330
1 O -
nVJi
73K
' ~f
11 -; '
7/tell3













FLOW READING
SAMPLE
*0
^
3.5
-3$
--"1
' ' w
J'tT













REF




















ST7,o

V A'
OPERATOR /^ S.£'e*F^ /(' ^' S i >

INST. CHECKS
1

i,
^
/
•
^
^













2

X
J
^
y
X
xio













3




















4




















5




















UNADJ. CALIB.
ZERO

7
7,5
IZO
7
5".5
5:0













SPAN

57
£7,5
G^-
58
65
^,5-













NEW KNOB PCS.
ZERO
JS-6
£4
55.5
6'.o
^.fr
g^
—













SPAN
4*r
-•? z
qj,:
^2,o
u 7.<^
^-z
- —













CYL. PRESS
ZERO
• •»*>
,-7-
1*16
/41-,
N ^>t>
1300
-/2-T6"













SPAN
I'Tic,
/b<-O
/ - -:o
/ '. "
ISou
1^-75
/v^r













              C-10

-------
CO INSTRUMENT DAILY nHF.CK SHEET
STATION NAME m"L^, 17 6 ^c:
/
y

r












3^
£
j





•^
rGn-.
)











L_
Cf y
ff5-


















•j

rl





s












UNADJ. CALIB.
ZERO
WQr\ L
K'ATf (f*\.
j ^
5. :
4,5
/2 ;o

y- ,/
;











SPAN


r^
6-i
S'/
cr-

TAJ^ Ttf












NEW KNOB POS.
ZERO

8 I
§L
c ,
£z
%

o if^/2^












SPAN

77
7«
. •-•,
f7
(JUu>v

F7^//












CYL. PRESS
7.KRO

/f •
l*?^0
)£->-
/ZZ5
»" '.'

-( •
tr











gPAN

/>
i?tc

/ 55"o

i













              C-ll

-------
        APPENDIX D





INSTRUMENT DRIFT STATISTICS
          D-l

-------
TABLE I)].  Zero and span 24-hour drift statistics Tor CO analyzers.
The numbers under Span and Zero headings are the drift in ppm in 24
hours.  Negative indicates a decrease in the zero or span point.
                           PITTSBURGH
Date

6-21
6-22
6-23
6-24
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Unit 1
Zero
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
-1.0
-1.0
0.4
Span
-2.5
-2.0
-2.0
-1.5
-2.0
0.4
Unit 2
Zero
0.0
0.0
0.0
-0.5
-0.1
0.0
Span
0.0
0.0
0.0
-0.5
-0.1
0.0
Unit 3
Zero
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Span
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
                            ATLANTA
Date

6-30
7-1
7-2
7-3
7-4
7-5
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Unit 5
Zero
0.5
0.5
3.0
0.0
0.0
-0.5
0.6
1.1
Span
0.5
0.0
3.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.7
1.3
Unit 6
Zero
2.5
0.5
3.0
0.0
2.0
0.0
1.3
1.2
Span
4.0
1.0
3.0
0.5
2.5
0.5
1.9
1.3
Unit 3
Zero
0.0
0.0
0.0
-0.5
0.0
0.0
-1.0
0.0
Span
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
                               D-3

-------

-------
                 APPENDIX E.


THEORETICAL COMPUTATION OF CO CONCENTRATION
     FOR TRAFFIC AT PITTSBURGH STADIUM
                     E-l

-------
              THEORETICAL COMPUTATION OF CO CONCENTRATION
                   FOR TRAFFIC AT PITTSBURGH STADIUM
     One of the primary uses of the data collected in this study

will be in assessing procedures for estimating CO concentrations about

proposed sports complexes.  The research team was, thus, motivated to

try a simple model comparison with the data.  A case was selected in

which the prototype situation could be most closely approximated by

an analytic model and one in which the best estimates could be made

of the model parameters describing the site characteristics.

     The prototype situation was that of site C2 in Pittsburgh (see

Figure 2) for aftergame traffic moving along North Shore Drive from

Allegheny Avenue.  The model is shown below.
                 LINE OF TRAFFIC
                 	 800 m  —
                                                 40 m
                                                 20 m
                                                       U
                                                            ANALYZER
                               E-3

-------
CO was assumed to be generated only by cars moving along the heavy



line; no contribution from the parking lots was included.



     Concentration, x. from a point source of strength Q is given by
                                                                    (E.I)
                       y z
where Q is the point strength in gm/sec, a  and a  are the standard
                                          y      z


deviations in the y and z directions respectively of a Gaussian



concentration, u is the average wind speed, H is the source height



and z is measured in the vertical.  It was assumed z-H"=0 (source



and receptor at the same height), 0  = 4.5m and a (x) = .08x
                                   z             y


corresponding to D class stability.     For reflection at the



bottom boundary, the source strength must be doubled.  Therefore,



the concentration from a line source parallel to the wind is given



by integrating x along the line.  Assuming Q constant along the line



gives


                      10m                      2



                                             (Z)2 •     dx •      (E-2)
                  2   800m





Graphically integrating (E.2) for y = 20m (the concentration appropriate



to the analyzer location 20m off the centerline) gives



                                 1.58Q
                 or



                        XB S           2
                        -j—  - .1118/m   .                        (E.3)
                                  E-4

-------
The contribution from  the  traffic moving  perpendicular  to  the wind



is obtained by integrating x along  the  line  10m to  the  left  of the



analyzer,


                               40m


                                     exp {-
                      uiro a

                         7 Z -20m
                        Q         -
                    = —=—       e        dp      where  p  = J-
                      irua                  *             ^   a
                         z  J                                y
                       /iT ua
                           z



or



              xi"            2
              -±-   =  .1254/m                                        (E.4)
The total concentration at the analyzer  is,  thus,
                 XT =  .2372 |  gm/m3                                 (E.5)
                                                          3
Assuming a 1973 mix of automobiles, the CO emission  factor  is



80 gm/vehicle mi.   If the cars are assumed  to be moving at 5 mph

                            3
the  speed adjustment factor  is 3.0.  If the car spacing is 6m



the line source strength is




               _  80 gm     _ 1 vehicle m    1 mi      ^  2.5m ^ „

                 vehicle mi      6m       ,  ..   , ..3     sec
                                          1.6 x 10 m




               = 62.5 gm/msec
                               E-5

-------
With u = 4.5 mph = (2.0 m/sec)
           X  = 62.5 gm  .  1 sec    0.2372    , .    ,3
            T              "T      '  	  "7.4 gm/m
                     msec  2m         m          °
or



                         XT = 5.7 ppm .






Since three lanes of traffic were present (3 x Q)





                         XT = 17.1 ppm  .






This concentration assumes a steady state source contribution.  If




the source lasted for one hour, the hourly average would be 17.1 ppm.




Since the traffic moves out of the stadium area in less than an hour,




the hourly average must be less than 17.1 ppm.  The constant line




source strength based on the maximum emissions along its total




length (3 cars every 6m) would also overestimate the hourly




average .




     If we allow for this by assuming 100% capacity for the 30 minutes




directly following the game , 50% capacity for the next 15 minutes




and 25% capacity for the next 15 minutes, the hourly average would




be
                XAVG = (17'1 X 2 + 8>5 + 4'3)/4




                     =11.8 ppm .





CO concentrations, above the background nighttime values, observed




at site C2 for the four fifteen minute periods starting at the end




of the ballgame were 14.0 ppm, 19.0 ppm, 25.0 ppm and 15.0 ppm giving




an hourly average of 18.3 ppm.
                               E-6

-------
     The difference between the computed and measured concentrations




could be the CO produced by vehicles in the parking lots which were




not included in the linear source model.  This leads to a parking lot




contribution to the hourly average of about 6.5 ppm.




     On 21 June the attendance was about half that of 23 June (see




Table III) and the wind was about the same speed and from the west.  Under




the same assumptions used for 23 June the computed hourly average CO con-




centration is 5.9 ppm.  The measured values for the four fifteen minute




periods starting at the end of the game were 1.0 ppm, 19.5 ppm,  6.0 ppm




and 1.0 ppm above the diurnal trend giving an hourly average of  6.9 ppm.




This would yield a parking lot contribution to the hourly average of only




about 1 ppm.




     For 22 June the attendance was about the same as 23 June.  All




other variables were the same except the wind direction which was from




the south instead of the west, i.e. perpendicular to the long traffic




line source of the model.  The wind direction effect is highlighted if




the preceeding calculations are repeated for 22 June and a west  wind is




assumed as before.  The computed hourly average is, thus, the same as




for 23 June, 11.8 ppm.   The observed average is only 5.6 ppm at site C2




reflecting the effect of the south wind in reducing the concentration




at C2.
                                E-7

-------
TFCHIMICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Littructions on tht reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO. 2
EPA-450/3-74-049
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Carbon Monoxide Measurements in the Vicinity of
Sports Stadiums
7 AUTHOR(S)
Bach, W.D., B.W. Crissman, C.E. Decker, J.W. Minear,
P.P. Rasberry and J.B. Tommerdahl
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Research Triangle Institute
Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Monitoring and Data Analysis Division
Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711
3. REC'PIENT'S ACCESSION' NO.
5. REPORT DATE
July 1973
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NC
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
2AC 129
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-02-1096 Task No. 1
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final June-July 1973
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
     Monitoring studies of ambient CO concentrations in the vicinity of major league
 baseball  stadiums in Pittsburgh and Atlanta were conducted for approximately 1 week
 in each location.  Wind speed and direction were also recorded on the site.  Traffic
 was monitored for 1-hour periods before and after games.   Grab samples of CO were
 also obtained during the one hour periods before and after games.  No violations of
 the 1-hour National  Ambient Air Quality Standard for CO were observed.  Highest
 concentration occurred immediately after the games.  Traffic was observed to clear
 out within about 30 minutes after a game.  Some of the data suggest that a less
 efficient system of traffic controls may result in violations of the 1-hour National
 Ambient Air Quality Standard in certain locations.
17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
a. DESCRIPTORS
Air Pollution, Parking Facilities, Exhaust
Emissions, Micro Meteorology Traffic
Surveys
13. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Unlimited
b. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
Indirect Sources
Ambient CO Concentrations
Air Quality Monitoring
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
UNCLASSIFIED
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
UNCLASSIFIED
c. COS AT I Field/Group
13/02
21. NO. OF PAGES
98
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
                                          E-8

-------