United States Environmental Monitoring TS-AMD-8194
Environmental Systems Laboratory April 1982
Protection P.O. Box 15027
Agency Las Vegas, NV 89114
Research and Development
c/EPA AIR QUALITY SAMPLING
DURING THE GREEN
MOUNTAIN SMOKE
CHARACTERIZATION STUDY
-------
TS-AMD-8194
April 1982
AIR QUALITY SAMPLING DURING THE
GREEN MOUNTAIN SMOKE CHARACTERIZATION STUDY
by
J, A. Anderson, N. Waters, L. W. Richards, J. McDonald,
S. Hynek, and A. Brandt
Meteorology Research, Inc.
Altadena, California 91001
LEMSCO P. 0. #AM075
Charles K. Fitzsimmons
Project Officer
Advanced Monitoring Systems Division
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
This study was conducted in cooperation with
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Seattle, Washington 98105
and
U.S. Department of Energy
Seattle, Washington 98174
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89114
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS i
LIST OF TABLES & LIST OF FIGURES ii
1 INTRODUCTION 1-1
2 CHRONOLOGICAL SUMMARY 2-1
3 QUEEN AIR INSTRUMENTATION AND CALIBRATION 3-1
3.1 Instrumentation 3-1
3.2 Hydrocarbon Sampling 3-1
3.3 Filter Sampling 3-1
4 QUALITY ASSURANCE 4-1
4.1 Calibration 4-1
4.1.1 Methodology 4-1
4.1.2 Performance Audit 4-1
4.1.3 Previous Audit Results 4-1
4.2 Data management 4-4
4.2.1 Field Operation 4-4
4.2.2 Data processing 4-4
4.3 Data Reliability 4-5
5 DATA PRESENTATION 5-1
5.1 Presentation Format 5-1
5.2 July 13th Sampling 5-1
5.2.1 Flight Outline & Sampling Map 5-3
5.2.2 Plume Concentration Isopleths &
Center Line Traverse Data 5-6
5.3 July 14th Sampling 5-12
5.3.1 Flight Outline & Sampling Map 5-13
5.3.2 Plume Concentration Isopleths &
Center Line Traverse Data - First Set 5-17
5.3.3 Plume Concentration Isopleths~5
Center Line Traverse Data - Second Set 5-25
5.3.4 Plume Concentration Isopleths &
Center Line Traverse Data - Third Set 5-34
6 ANALYSIS
6.1 Flux 6-1
6.1.1 Flux Calculations 6-1
6.1.2 Flux Discussion 6-3
6.2 Plume Chemistry 6-5
7 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS 7-1
7.1 Conclusions 7-1
7.2 Recommendations 7-1
8 REFERENCES 8-1
i
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table # Page
3-1 QUEEN AIR INSTRUMENTATION 3-2
4-1 SUMMARY OF ROCKWELL AIRCRAFT AUDIT RESULTS 4-2
4-2 SUMMRAY OF THE SEAPC AUDIT RESULTS 4-3
4-3 GAS INSTRUMENT SLOPE CALIBRATIONS 4-4
6-1 SCATTERING EFFICIENCY DETERMINATION 6-2
6-2 PLUME FLUX SUMMARY 6-3
6-3 AVERAGE AND PEAK CONCENTRATIONS DURING 13 JULY 1981 6-6
5 MILE SAMPLING ORBIT
6-4 AVERAGE AND PEAK CONCENTRATIONS DURING THE 14 JULY 1981 6-7
FIRST 1 MILE/5 MILE SAMPLING SET
6-5 AVERAGE AND PEAK CONCENTRATIONS DURING THE 14 JULY 1981 6-8
SECOND 1 MILE/5 MILE SAMPLING SET
6-6 AVERAGE AND PEAK CONCENTRATIONS DURING THE 14 JULY 1981 6-9
THIRD 1 MILE/5 MILE SAMPLING SET
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure # Page
3-1 MRI Queen Air Sample Inlet Lines and External Probes 3-4
3-2 Queen Air Gas Sampling Manifold Configuration 3-5
3-3 Nephelometer & U.C. Davis Filter Configuration 3-5
3-4 HI VOL Sampling Configuration 3-6
3-5 Bag System Sampling Configuration 3-6
4-1 Data Processing - Airborne Air Quality
& Meteorological Data 4-6
5-1 Traverse Flight Pattern for Plume Sampling 5-2
6-1 Illustration of Flux Calculations Problem - July 13th 6-4
6-2 Summary of the plume excess concentrations in Tables 6-4
through 6-6. 6-10
i i
-------
SECTION 1.
INTRODUCTION
The U.S. Forest Service, Forest Residues and Energy Program, develop-
ed a study for characterizing emissions from broadcast burning of residues
from harvested timber. One of the objectives of this study was to determine
the reduction in emissions resulting from burning of units where higher
levels of utilization of woody materials has been practiced. Two units with
different harvesting specifications were selected for this work. The data
presented in this report* were collected in support of "The Green Mountain
Smoke Characterization Study" on July 13 and 14, 1981, near Cougar Reservoir
in the Willamette National Forest, approximately 40 miles east of Eugene,
Oregon. The study was cooperatively funded and administered by the U.S.
Forest Service; the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Department
of Energy.
The overall objective of the sampling program was to characterize
the smoke emissions during the different stages of each burn. Meteorology
Research, Inc. (MRI), serving as subcontractor to Lockheed Engineering and
Management Services, Company (LEMSCO), provided an air quality instrumented
Beechcraft Queen Air for airborne plume monitoring. LEMSCO, the prime
support contractor for the EPA-Las Vegas facility, provided some instrumentation
and a filter sampling system used aboard the aircraft during the field program.
LEMSCO also had the responsibility of providing the quality assurance audits
(Rockwell International) performed during the program. In addition, LEMSCO
operated an on-site van equipped with a gas chromatograph (GC) to analyze
hydrocarbon samples collected during the sampling flights. Additional
hydrocarbon analyses were provided by a second GC operated by the Forest
Service. Pibal data were collected during the burns by Forest Service
personnel. A scout aircraft was provided by the Forest Service to monitor
the progress of the unit being burned, to provide communications link
between the sampling aircraft and the burn crew and to take aerial photographs.
A data volume contains the processed data from the MRI portion of the
program as well as data reported by other sources and is available through
the EPA's Las Vegas laboratory. In addition, a magnetic tape of the processed
MRI data, flight notes and a copy of the strip chart data are on file at the
Las Vegas facility. These items will not be reproduced totally in this report
but will be incorporated by reference to the data volume (MRI 81 DV1834).
1
Further analysis of these data is being coordinated by Darold E. Ward and
David V. Sandberg of the Forest Residues and Energy Program, Pacific Northwest
Forest and Range Experiment Station, 4507 University Way N.E., Seattle, WA
98105.
1-1
-------
Sections 2 through 4 of this report summarize the operational aspects
of MRI's airborne sampling during the Green Mountain Smoke Characterization
Study. Section 2 outlines in chronological order the major events of the
MRI sampling program. Sections 3 and 4 discuss the details of the aircraft
instrumentation package and quality assurance program.
The remaining sections of this report contain the results of the MRI
portion of the program. Specifically, Section 5 contains a detailed summary
of each day's operation and presents isopleth plots of plume cross sections.
In addition, plume center line traverse plots are included for each set of
traverses that were used to construct the isopleths. Section 6 presents the
plume flux and mass calculations and comments on the O3, N0-N0x relationships
observed. Conclusions are contained in Section 7 followed by recommendations
for future studies.
1-2
-------
SECTION 2
CHRONOLOGICAL SUMMARY
2.1 MRI Sampling Program Outline
July 4th 1981 .Standby for ferry
July 5th 1981 .Ferry aborted by USFS due to rain
showers at the burn sites.
July 11th 1981 .Standby for ferry
July 12th 1981 .Ferry (Santa Rosa, CA to Eugene, OR)
•Calibration
July 13th 1981 .1st sampling flight
•Calibration
July 14th 1981 .2nd sampling flight
•Calibration
•Performance Audit
July 15th 1981 .Ferry (Eugene, OR to Santa Rosa, CA)
2-1
-------
SECTION 3
QUEEN AIR INSTRUMENTATION AND CALIBRATION
3.1 Instrumentation
Table 3-1 lists the instruments aboard the Queen Air during the
sampling program. The location of the sampling inlet lines and external
probes is shown in Figure 3-1. Figures 3-2 through 3-5 document the various
sample delivery systems inside the aircraft. A carbon monoxidp mnnitnr was
operated aboard the aircraft during the July 14, 1981 samDling. Although an
ozone monitor was not requested in the program work statement, MRI believed
that including these data would strengthen the data set. Therefore an ozone
monitor was operated aboard the aircraft during both days of sampling and the
data are included in this report.
3.2 Hydrocarbon Sampling
Grab bag samples were collected during the flights for later anal-
ysis of CO, CO2, CH4, and total hydrocarbon levels. The bags, made of
Teflon, were provided by Washington State University, Pullman, Washington.
Bag samples were analyzed in the field by Darold Ward of the U.S. Forest
Service using a Baseline Industries 1030A gas chromatograph, and by Steve
Pierett of LEMSCO using a Beckman 6800 gas chromatograph.
The analyses, as reported by the Forest Service and LEMSCO, are
included in Section 4A and 4B of the data volume referenced in section 1.
3.3 Filter Sampling
Two types of filter samples were collected during the airborne
sampling.
• Hi-Vol samples were collected on glass fiber filters (8"xl0")
provided by the University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
The exposed filters were returned to the U of W for gravimetric
analysis of total suspended particulate mass.
• Stretched Teflon filters (Ghia 25 mm) were provided (through LEMSCO)
by the University of California at Davis. The preweighed filters were
exposed to sample air with no particle-sizing device upstream
of the filter membrane. The exposed filters were returned to
Crocker Nuclear Laboratory at UCD for elemental analysis by
PIXE and gravimetric analysis for Total Particulate Mass.
Analyses of the filters, as reported by the U of W and the University of
California at Davis are also included in sections 4A & 4B of the data volume.
3-1
-------
Table 3-1 QUEEN AIR INSTRUMENTATION
CO
I
ro
PARAMETER
SAMPLER
MANUFACTURER
AND MODEL
ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE
NORMAL MEASURE-
MENT RANGES
(FULL SCALE)
TIME RESPONSE
(TO 90%)
APPROXIMATE
RESOLUTION
N0/N0x
Monitor Labs
8440
Chemi1umi nescence
200, 500, 1000 ppb
5 - 10 s
<10 ppb
bscat
MR I 1550 (heated)
Integrating
Nephelometer
1000,4000,10,000
10-6 m-l
selectable
"5 s
20x 10~6 m"1
03
Monitor Labs 8410
Chemiluminescence
500 ppb
5 s
5 ppb
Aerosol Charge
Acceptance
Washington
University
Aerosol Charge
Acceptance
primarily responds
to .01 - .ly particles
~ 1 s
Broad Band
Radiation
Eppley
PSP
Pyranometer
0 - 1026 w/m2
Cosine response
1 s
2 w/m2
Ultraviolet
Radiation
Eppley
Barrier-layer Photocell
295 - 385 mp
0 - 34.5 w/m2
Cosine response
1 s
0.1 w/m2
CO*
Energetics
Science, Inc.
Electro-chemical cell
10 ppm
15 s
0.1 ppm
*Supplied by
LEMSCO & operated
during July 14th sa
mpling.
-------
Table 3-1 QUEEN AIR INSTRUMENTATION(cont'd.)
PARAMETER
SAMPLER
MANUFACTURER
AND MODEL
ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE
NORMAL MEASURE-
MENT RANGES
(FULL SCALE)
TIME RESPONSE
(TO 90%)
APPROXIMATE
RESOLUTION
Turbulence
MR I 1120
Pressure Fluctuations
0-10 cm^/3 s~l
3 s (to 60%)
0.1 cm2/3 s~l
Temperature
YSI/MRI
Bead Thermister/
Vortex Housing
-55° to +450 C
5 s
0.50 C
Dew Point
Cambridge
Systems 137
Cooled Mirror
-500 to +500 c
0.5 s/o C
0.50 c
Altitude
Validyne
Absolute Pressure
Transducer
0 - 3048 m rasl
1 s
6 m
Indicated
Airspeed
Validyne
Differential Pressure
Transducer
23 - 68 m s"1
1 s
0.1 ms"l
Data Logger
(includes time)
MR I Data System
9-Track Tape - 6 hour
capacity in continuous
operation
t 9.99 VDC, 40 analog
channels, 30 digital
channels
Records data once
per second
0.01 VDC
Stripchart
Recorder
Linear
Instruments
Dual Channel
0.01, 0.1, 1, 10
VDC
< 1 s
Printer
Axiom
Prints out data
every 10 seconds and
at every event code
or data flag change
-------
Grab Bag
Figure 3-1 MRI Queen Air Sample Inlet Lines and External Probes
-------
Figure 3-2. Queen Air Gas Sampling Manifold Configuration.
25 MM "OPEN FACE"
NUCLEPORE FILTER HOLDER
(U.C. DAVIS STRETCHED TEFLON
FILTERS)
Figure 3-3. Nephelometer & U.C. Davis Filter Configuration.
3-5
-------
Figure 3-4. HI VOL Sampling Configuration.
INLET MANIFOLD
'ROOF
1/4" O.O.
TEFLON
SWAGELOK
QUICK DISCONNECT
FITTINGS
Figure 3-5. Bag System Sampling Configuration.
3-6
-------
SECTION 4
QUALITY ASSURANCE
4.1 Calibration
The instruments in the Queen Air were calibrated before the sam-
pling flight on July 13th. After the July 13th flight, the nephelometer
was calibrated; and after the July 14th flight, all the instruments were
calibrated again.
4.1.1 Methodology
The following calibration methodology was used by MRI during the
field program:
• N0-N0x - Calibration of the N0-N0x instrument was performed using
high concentration NO bottles («100 ppm - Scott Marrin, Inc.)
diluted with bottled zero air.
. O3 - An ozone transfer standard (CSI Model 1700) was used for the
calibration of the ozone monitor. The transfer standard was
calibrated against an absolute photometer (Dasibi Model 1003-PC)
before the field work.
• bscat ~ Freon"12 was used to calibrate the nephelometer.
4.1.2 Performance Audit
, During the period of July 14-16, David B. Wright of Rockwell Inter-
national Environmental Monitoring and Services Center conducted performance
audits of instruments in the airplane and the gas chromatographs used for
field analysis. Results of the aircraft audit are summarized in Table 4-1.
4.1.3 Previous Audit Results
During nearly every field project, the MRI Queen Air is subjected to
a performance audit. The results of one such audit, performed by ER&T, are
characteristic. The audit was performed for the Salt River Project during
the Source Emission & Plume Characterization Study (SEAPC). Table 4-2 sum-
marizes the results of the audit.
Excluding the current program audit, the SEAPC Audit (August 1980)
represents the most current audit of the Queen Air System. The SEAPC audit
results have been included with the permission of the SRP.
4-1
-------
Table 4-1
SUMMARY OF ROCKWELL AIRCRAFT AUDIT RESULTS
July 14, 1981
Continuous Analyzers
% difference full scale
from linear regression analysis
N0X -4.1
NO -0.9
03 -2.8
CO -5.1
1550 Nephelometer
MR I
(Corrected to std.)
bscat(Freon-12) 410xl0-6m"1
bscat(air) 60xl0~6nrl
Rockwel1
(calibrated at sea level)
SeOxlO-Srrr1
23xl0"®m-1
% difference
3.9
Hi-Vol (cfm)
Teflon (1pm)
Filter Systems
- Flow Rate -
MRT Rockwell
38.000
10.6
39.180
10.0
% difference
-3.0
6.0
4-2
-------
Table 4-2
Summary of the SEAPC Audit Results
Instrument Slopes
Ratio of Results
MRI
ERT
MRI/ERT
NO
1.06
1.03
1.029
N0X
1.18
1.17
1.008
03
0.90
0.90
1.00
S02
1.11
1.04
1.067
F12 red^
59
58
1.017
F12 green
158
158
1.00
F12 blue
357
355
1.006
F22 red
30^
30
1.00
F22 green
76
78
0.975
F22 blue
176
177
0.994
(a) F12 and F22 are Freon-12 and Freon-22 calibrations of the three-wavelength
nephelometer.
(b) Actual reading was 25 but was in error,i.e. read as bsp not bsca^. Based
on 19 August 1980 calibration by MRI F22R bsp = 25 pN and F22R bScat =
30 uN. Therefore MRI assumes a F22R bscat for 8/22/80 calibration of
30 uN.
4-3
-------
4.2 Data Management
4.2.1 Field Operation
Prior to each sampling flight, extensive checks of the various sam-
pling monitors were performed. Details of these checks were recorded on
a Preflight System Check list and the form maintained as part of the
flight note package.
During each flight, data from the various monitors aboard the
Queen Air were recorded by an MRI data system. The system wrote the
data at a rate of once per second onto a 9-track (Pertec recorder) mag-
netic tape and once every 10 seconds onto an Axiom printer tape. In
addition, the flight crew filled out detailed flight record forms and
sampling maps that summarized the details of each sampling flight. The
printer tape provided a data system backup and a record for the flight
crew to review during the field program.
After each flight, the flight note package was reviewed for com-
pleteness and accuracy. Filter sample numbers were confirmed,and the
samples stored.
At the end of the program, filter samples were delivered to LEMSCO
and the Forest Service for distribution to various analytical groups.
Data tapes, printer tapes, flight notes,and calibration records were re-
turned to MRI for further processing.
4.2.2 Data Processing
After the field project, the calibration data were reviewed by MRI
personnel. The calibration constants applied to the data during proces-
sing are listed in Table 4-3.
Table 4-3
GAS INSTRUMENT SLOPE CALIBRATIONS
Date/Tape NO
NO
x
0.
3
CO
b
scat
7/13/81
Tape 271
0.85
0.94
0.92
1.00
1.00
7/14/81
Tape 272
0.85
0.94
0.92
1.00
1.00
4-4
-------
A flow diagram of the various data processing steps is shown in
Figure 4-1 . The form of the processing formula used to apply instrument
slope values, zeros, conversion constants, instrument range information,
etc. is shown below:
CDF = Fi • [RANGE . (DLgQQR0)} + OFFSET
Where DL = Voltage as recorded by the data system- The sampling
instruments aboard the Queen Air have 0 to 5 volt out-
puts. Thus, at full scale, the "DL" value in the pro-
cessing equation equals 500.
ZERO = Instrument output voltage when the sampling input is
zero concentration.
RANGE = Range of instrument e.g. 500 (ppb)
?2 - Special processing function used to process indicated
airspeed - other data are processed as y = x.
SPAN = Instrument calibration slope • 100.
Fi . = Special processing function used to apply altitude
corrections to the indicated response of the ozone
monitor.
OFFSET = Allows calculation of negative values for temperature
and dew point. For all other parameters, OFFSET = 0.
CDF = £lean j)ata File - Final processed data in the proper
engineering units.
4.3 Data Reliability
The data have been reviewed and screened for obvious malfunctions and
errors. However, they have not yet been subjected to detailed analysis;
additional work with the data by the U.S. Forest Service is still in pro-
gress. Part of their work includes comparing the airborne data to their
ground data. In addition, a paper is being prepared using data obtained
during the study.
Anyone planning to use these data in a quantitative way is encouraged
to contact one of the authors of this report and discuss the data.
4-5
-------
SECTION 5
DATA PRESENTATION
5.1 Presentation Format
The remainder of this section presents an overview of the airborne
data collected during each sampling flight. Each subsection (sampling
flight) begins with a description of the meteorological conditions and gen-
eral comments concerning the sampling performed. This is followed by a
detailed flight outline and sampling map.
Figure 5-1 shows, schematically, a series of aircraft sampling
traverses through a plume. Each set of traverses is performed at a fixed
distance from the source. By plotting the data from such a set of tra-
verses, plume concentration isopleths can be constructed. Each subsection
contains isopleth plots for each set of sampling traverses performed dur-
ing a flight. The isopleths have been constructed from averaged data to
present a general "impression" of the plume. It should be noted that a
set of sampling traverses require anywhere from about 15 to 45 minutes to
complete and thus isopleths constructed from those traverses do not rep-
resent an instantaneous "snapshot" of the plume.
After reviewing a set of isopleths, a plume center line was deter-
mined and plots of key parameters, from the nearest traverse level, were
included with the isopleths.
5.2 July 13th Sampling
Westerly winds carried the plume east-southeast over Cougar Reservoir.
A layer of clouds throughout the sampling area limited the sampling capa-
bilities of the aircraft.
When sampling began one mile downwind from the burn site, a portion
of the plume was below the cloud layer and a portion of the plume was em-
bedded in the layer. A series of plume traverses at various altitudes
were performed under the cloud layer. A single traverse just above the
top of the clouds showed that the plume did not penetrate above the clouds.
Safety considerations precluded sampling traverses through the cloud
layer itself.
~ At five miles downwind, the plume was intermingled with the clouds.
Safety considerations again precluded sampling traverses. A plume chemistry
sample was obtained by orbiting at a single location that was free enough
of clouds to permit safe flying.
By the time the aircraft returned to the one mile sampling loca-
tion, the plume was rising directly into the cloud layer, and the layer
was deepening and becoming more extensive. Further sampling was not pos-
sible. After reviewing the situation with Forest Service personnel, it
was decided to cancel further sampling that day.
5-1
-------
Pt. B
pi- rt CU. T I . ALTITUOE,
rx" H ANO RCUTE NOTEO
• EVENT OFF
Figure 5-1 Aircraft Traverse Flight Pattern for Plume Sampling.
A set of ground reference points (e.g. A & 8) are used
to start and end each sampling traverse.
5-2
-------
5.2.1 Flight Outline and Sampling Map for July 13, 1981 Sampling
5-3
-------
CO MONITOR NOT INSTALLED
MRI FLIGHT OUTLINE
PRESCRIBED BURNING PLUME
PLUME FLUX PATTERN
13 July 1981
Tape #271
Sampling Time
Pass (MST) Flight
No. Start End Type
End Sampling ^|t1tude
Points Start End or Orbit Time
Hydrocarbon
Bag
Teflon
25mm
Hi-Vol
TSP
Neph.
Range
Comments
758 759 Traverse 1 - 2 1219
802 ¦ 803 Traverse 2 - 1 1280
806 808 Traverse 1 - 2 1341
810 812 Traverse 2 - 1 1*02
814 816 Traverse 1 - 2 1463
819 821 Traverse 2 - 1 1524
823 825 Traverse I - 2 1615
826 830 Traverse 2 - 1 1768
834 836 Traverse 1 - 2 1829
10 338 840 Traverse 2 - 1 1920
11 845 847 Traverse 1-2 2347
12 852 859 Spiral
13 916 93* Orbit
2377- 610
2377
8.0 Km.
B.O Km.
8.0 Km.
B.O Km.
8.0 Km.
8.0 Km.
8.0 Km.
8.0 Km.
8.0 Km.
8.0 Km.
8.0 Km.
N. A.
20.3 Min.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14-16
UCD2
HV1
1000
4000
"NO F
ILTERS"
2
Traverse under plume
1 mile plume traverse
10000
Bag defective
1 mile plume traverse
ii ii
with clouds
Bag defective
1 mile plume traverse
with clouds
Traverse above plume
Bag defective
i
|1 mile spiral
f
5 km orbit with clouds
Bag 15 defective
Hi-Vol on 9:22
-------
en
i
CJl
iANGMACK (Py,t)
Xfi50 - 21
'Sweet
Home
WA\KE
285 \
5470
Crawforc
PIOlSLEt/Rl VIL-L-A;(Pvt)
MAN]E
iawmill
lumber-
RIGHT'S (P<
320
HPvtn
A^JIELS
S~ -Atf-iWA^HlKGT-ON *
Vwil DE^£SS ARE.
MQBU
camp
M^bej
5283*
,o *-^%,McK er)'2i
o° - Bridge—
tai nbowT—¦
W vV
' ^:KEttA£5jB
OBUR
'Belknap
Springs
IBLGGS (Pvt)
st&jt^M'arc ola
2 .oaf-r^o
(Mphawk ~
ICoburg
camp^
kugn
I 590^'
-SEfilNGFIFI D"
•alterville 2°°°
SPRINGFIELD
. -Gusher
2065 \y
^(H86E SJS^ERS &
WIL ClEj?N E S^A REA-
SINKER MOUNTAIN
^ ^OBBY-^W^
.535 L 2 ) 122.8 \
. - . Pextei
^^LLoweli
SADDLE^
iKHj^OUNTA.lN^ /-
qrane
— 1 \ 3699^
CpTTAGE GRjOVE STATE
64043/1,22^8 V '
\ COTTAGt GRO*
'^HenilQck)
OAKKIUGI SlAJf
CHtEZ
¦\it5W *a
KILOMETERS
NAUTICAL MUES
STATUTE MILES
PRESCRIBED BURNING PLUME MR I SAMPLING FLIGHT
July 13, 1981 Tape #271
-------
(This page left intentionally blank.)
-------
5.2.2 Plume Concentration Isopleths and Center Line Traverse Data for
July 13, 1981 Plume Measurements.
5-6
-------
3000
2U00 -
cn
DUE TO CLOUD
LAYER
o. o
P0IH7 2
DISTANCE (KM)
-------
3000
2100
V)
jr
I*
S
1800
en
i
00
1200 -
600
CONCENTRRTIONS OF NOX (ppb)
THFc HO.! 271
RECCRDEDi 7/13/81
POSSES i 1,2,3,11.5,
6*7,8,9*10*
11
UNABLE TO SAMPLE
DUE TO CLOUD
LAYER
3.0
FGIHT 2
DISTANCE (KM)
-------
cn
i
10
0.0
n
m
3
Q
-Q
Ci
5.0
x
2C
7.5
PRESCRIBED BURN tape/passi 271/8 datei 7/13/01
TRAVERSE FR0H POINT 2 TO POINT 1 (1768 H MSL) TIHEi 828 TO 830 (POT)
2.5 —
10.0
I I I I I I I I I
1 ¦ ' ' ¦ I ¦ ' ¦ 1 1 1 ¦ ¦ ¦ I ' ¦ ¦ ¦ 1 ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ I ¦ 1 ¦ ¦ 1 ¦ ' ' ' I 1 ¦ ¦ ' 1 ' ' 1 ¦
#9 Hydrocarbon Bag
I I I I | I I M | I I I I | I I I . | I I I I | I I I I | I I I I | I I I I j I I I I | I i . I | I I I I j l I I I
FULL SCALE VALUE
e NOX 500. PFB
t> 03 500. PPB
-20
20 <10 60
PERCENT OF FULL SCALE VALUE
80
100
-------
PRESCRIBED BURN TfiPE/PflSS« 271/8 DATE: 7/13/81
TRRVERSE FROM POINT 2 TO POINT 1 (1768 M MSL) TIHEi 828 TO 830 (PDT)
cn
i
0.0
o
Ui
—t
33
3
o
rn
T|
ZD
Q
3
"O
CD
Z
-I
f\J
2.5
5.0
2
7.5 —
10.0
i
<
(
}
i
Ejf
i i i t | i i i i i i i »
| 1 1 1 1 I
i i i i I i i i i 1 i
I I I I I i ,| I I I I I I I I I ! I I I
FULL SCALE VRLUE
- G BSCRT 10000. 10-6 H-l
NO 500. PPB
-20
20 40 60
PERCENT OF FULL SCALE VALUE
80
100
-------
<_n
i
0.0
o
l-H
O)
2.5
3D
Q
Q
2
PRESCRIBED BURN tape/pass« 271/8 dates 7/13/81
TRAVERSE FROM POINT 2 TO POINT 1 (1768 M MSL) TIHEi 828 TO 830 (POT)
¦ i i | ' ' i i jf ' ¦ ¦ j i ¦ ' i j ¦ ¦ ' 1 | ¦ 1 ¦ ¦ j 1 ¦ ¦ 1 j 1 ¦ I 11 j ' ¦ ¦ 1 j 1 1 ' ¦ j 1 ' ¦ ¦ j ¦ ' 1 ¦
5.0 —
7.5 —
10.0
FULL SCALE VALUE
G
ALT.
3048.
METERS
>
TEMP
100.
DEG. C.
+
DEW PT.
100.
DEG. C.
X
CHARGER
10.
.01 VOLT
-20
20 HO 60
PERCENT GF FULL SCALE VALUE
80
100
-------
5.3 July 14th Sampling
Skies were clear throughout the sampling area and winds were gen-
erally from the east. The plume was being transported upslope to a
ridge line (approximately 1 mile downwind) after which it dropped into
the valleys on the lee side of the ridge. Because of the terrain struc-
ture along the plume track, plume rise was not sufficient to carry the
plume completely above the terrain as it crossed the ridge. Thus the
plume was mixed to the ground as it crossed the ridge line and then
dispersed rapidly after crossing the ridge.
Due to terrain features along the ridge line, airborne samplinq
traverses would be able to characterize an estimated 70 to 80% of t.hp smoke
plume. At five miles downwind, the plume was so widely dispersed that
flux pattern sampling was impractical. These factors were discussed
with Forest Service personnel and it was agreed that sampling would
consist of:
1) a set of traverses one mile downwind,
2) a plume chemistry orbit one mile downwind, and
3) a plume chemistry orbit five miles downwind.
This sampling strategy was performed three times.
Although the aircraft was not able to sample beneath the plume
during the one mile sampling traverses, it is believed that flux data
can be estimated for each of the one mile traverse sets.
5-12
-------
(This page left intentionally blank.)
-------
5.3.1 Flight Outline and Sampling Map for July 14, 1981 Sampling.
5-13
-------
(This page left intentionally blank.)
-------
CO MONITOR INSTALLED
MRI FLIGHT OUTLINE
PRESCRIBED BURNING PLUME
PLUME FLUX PATTERN
14 July 1981
Tape #272
cn
i
i—*
Pass
No.
Sampling Time
(MST) Flight
Start End Type
End
Points
Samp1i ng ^|t i tude
Start End
Traverse
Length
or Orbit Time
Hydrocarbon
Bag
Teflon
25mm
Hi-Vol
TSP
Neph.
Range
Comments
I
712
728
T r aver se
1 - 2
1067
74.6 Km.
1,2
4
3
1000
1
Background
Bag 2 defective
2
737
740
Spiral
3
914-1524
N. A.
"NO
FILTERS"
Background spiral
3
7 49
751
Traverse
4-2
1189
5.6 Km.
3
5
i
40
00
1 mile plume traverse
Bag defective
4
753
754
Traverse
2-4
1219
5.6 Km.
4
1 mile plume traverse
5
756
757
Traverse
4-2
1250
5.6 Km.
5
t
II II
6
759
801
Tr aver se
2-4
1 280
5.6 Kin.
6
10000
II M
7
302
804
Traverse
4-2
1311
5.6 Km.
7
v
'
\
'
4000
Traverse above plume
8
aio
825
f)rbJ t
6
1219
15.2 Min.
8-13
6
6
10000
1 mile plume orbit
9
838
853
Drbit
7
1280
15.3 Min.
14-19
1
7
4000
5 mile plume orbit
10
904
906
Traverse
8-9
131 1
6.4 Km.
20
"NO FI
LTERS
II
10000
1 mile plume traverse
11
907
909
Tr aver se
9 - 8
1 372
6.4 Km.
21
\
\
II II
12
911
913
Traverse
8-9
1 433
6.4. Km.
22
4000
II II
13
915
917
T raver se
9-8
1494
6.4 Km.
• 23
J
1 mile traverse above plume
1*
919
921
Traverse
8-9
1219
6*4 Km.
24
\
*
t
100
00
1 mile plume traverse
15
924
939
Or bi t
6
1311
15.3 Min.
25-27
8
8
1 mile plume orbit
16
947
1002
~ rbi t
10
1280
15.1 Hin.
28
9
9
5 mile plume orbit;
17
1012
1013
Traverse
11 - 12
1524
5.6 Km.
"NO BAGS"
1
"NO F
1 LTERS"
1 mile plume traverse
18
1015
1017
Traver se
12 - 11
1585
5.6 Km.
1
\
I
\
/
II ii
-------
CO MONITOR INSTALLED
MRI FLIGHT OUTLINE
PRESCRIBED BURNING PLUME
PLUME FLUX PATTERN
14 July 1981
Tape #272 (cont'd.)
Sampling Time
Pass (MST) Flight
No. Start End Type
End Sampling^titude T«ver»
Points Start End or Orbit Time
Hydrocarbon
Bag
Teflon
25mm
Hi-Vol
TSP
Neph.
Range
Comments
19 iozo 1021 Traverse 11 - 12 1646
20 1024 1025 Traversa 12 - 11 1737
21 1033 1048 Orbit 13
22 1052 1109 Orbit 10
23 1111 1141 Orbit 14
24 1143 1144 Zero Spiral
1524
1494
1524
1006- 111
5•6 Km.
5.6 Km.
15.0 Hin.
16.0 Nin.
30.0 Min.
N.A.
"NO BAGS"
I
29
30,31
32,33
I
12
13
14
"NO
F ILTERS"
I
11
12
13
10000
1000
1 mile plume traverse
Traverse above plume
1 mile plume orbit
5 mile plume orbit
Background orbit
-------
cn
i
PRESCRIBED BURNING FLIGHT MR I SAMPLING FLIGHT
July 14, 1981 Tape #272
Brownsville
~oster
WnGMACK (Pyt)
^x650 - 21
I ) ySweet
Crawfordsville/x Home
MANTE
MOjUNT
sawmill
WRIGHT'S (Pvn
320 - 2^4.
_M7 WASHINGTON
>WILQe^N^SS ARE.
MOBIL
carpp
2600
'•yf.'i-
NORTH' <
Mabel
:c>huk
Belknap
¦Springs
ȣ^vterctJltK^ <
^ 06f
lohawk
iOUTj> SISTER
Itervilie 2®°°
SPRJ,NGflELO
SJNKER MOUNTAIN
flNjCp
4964,3
tUNfAlN
r ) r 369,sr
COTTAGE GR,OVE STATE
' 6401 3/X22: Slv
)TTAGE GROv
4618^
KILOMETERS
NAUTICAL MILES
STATUTE MILES
Waldo Ldb.
-------
(This page left intentionally blank.)
-------
5.3.2 Plume Concentration Isopleths and Center Line Traverses Data
For the First Set of Plume Measurements July 14, 1981.
5-17
-------
(This page left intentionally blank.)
-------
CONCENTRATIONS OF BSCflT
(x 10"4m-l)
TAPE NO.3 272
RECORDED: 7/1H/81
POSSES a 3,11,5,6.7
2000
1600 -
CO
21
I
1200
on
i
00
600
400 -
DISTANCE (KM)
-------
TAPE NO.i 272
CONCENTRATIONS OF NOX (ppb) J!™"; 3^"'"7
2000
1600 -
en
i
to
T
UJ
Q
1200 -
800
400
DISTANCE (KM)
-------
CONCENTRATIONS OF CO (PPm)
TAPE NO.i 272
RECORDED. 7/1U/81
PASSES : 3,11,5,6.7
2000
1600 -
1200 -
tn
i
ro
O
~ ,
800.
uoo -
POINT 2
DISTANCE (KM)
-------
PRESCRIBED BURN thpe/pbssi 272/5 dhtei 7 /iu/81
TRAVERSE FROM POINT U TO POINT 2 (1250 H HSL) TIHEi 756 TO 757 (POT)
cn
i
ro
0.0
D
U)
-t
3D
O
m
5.0
2.5 —
7.5 —
10.0
| i i i i | i i i i j i i i j | i i i i j i i i i | rrrrpri nyrrrr^1
¥5 Hyd
rocarbc
>n Bag
-
-
-
:
FULL SCALE VALUE
O NOX 500. PPB
> 03 500. PPB
-20
20 40 60
PERCENT OF FULL SCALE VPILUE
80
100
-------
FULL SCfiLE VALUE
0 BSCflT 11000. 10-6 H-
> NO 500. PPB
-------
PRESCRIBED BURN TflPE/PflSSi 272/5 DATEt 7 /14/81
TRAVERSE FROM POINT U TO POINT 2 (1250 M MSL) TIME a 756 TO 757 (POT)
en
i
ro
CO
0.0
a
i—«
u)
~D
a
z
—i
>1=
5.0
2.5 —
7.5 —
10.0
I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 \
FULL SCALE VfiLUE
_ G CO 10 PM
-20
20
•iO 60
PERCENT OF FULL SCRLE VALUE
80
100
-------
FULL SCALE VALUE
G
RLT.
3018.
METERS
l>
TEMP
100.
DEG. C.
+
DEW PT.
100.
DEG. C.
X
CHARGER
10.
.01 VOLT
-------
(This page left intentionally blank.)
-------
5.3.3 Plume Concentration Isopleths and Center Line Traverse Data
for the Second Set of Plume Measurements July 14, 1981.
5-25
-------
(This page left intentionally blank.)
-------
CONCENTRATIONS OF BSCflT
(x 10"4m-1)
THPE NO.i 272
RECORDED! 7/1U/81
PASSES i 10,11,12,13,14
2000
1600 -
<_n
i
ro
CTl
-------
CONCENTRATIONS OF NOX (PPb)
TAPE NO.: 272
RECORDED: 7/14/81
PASSES i 10,11.12.13.1U
2000
1600 -
<_n
i
ro
1200 -
800
<100 -
0.0
POINT 0
1
1
2
<1
3
2
0 1 2 0 2 1
2
2
3
2
2
1
0
0
>1
2
2
3 2^6>sJ 2 1
0
1
3
1
0
0
3
1
0
2
0 |
/4l>y^Q 3
3
1
1
1
1
3
2
0
0
0
•I ]
(V?2 3il
1
3
0
0
1
0
1
1
3
1
1 /I
\^ej) 30 rizY^/^o/Yx0/
u
l]
0
0
3
<5
<10
<50
1.6
"V
3.i
11.8
T
6.11
0.0
POINT 9
DISTANCE (KM)
-------
TOPE NO. i 272
CONCENTRATIONS OF CO (PPm) S?"! i2"™i9.»
2000
1600 -
1200 -
<_n
i
ro
oo
800
400
OISTRMCE (KM)
-------
TAPE NO.s 272
CONCENTRATIONS OF 03 (PPb) ST; i^U.im
2000
1600
cn
i
ro
vo
(O
y
I
a
3
¦J
a:
1200
800
400
40
42
40
42
43
42
43
40
41
42
m
41
41
41
39
>12
41
39
38
3d
34
35
35
33
34
0.0
point 0
<45
<50
44
45
43
44
42
42
39
38
37
37
39
39
38
38
37
38
39
42
41
41
45
^4
35
36
37
38
38
41
56V
| 39
35
36
36
35
37
1.6
3.2
—I—
4.8
i
6.»1
3.0
P0IHT 9
DISTANCE (KM)
-------
PRESCRIBED BURN TflPE/PflSSi 272/10 DRTEs 7 /1U/81
TRRVERSE FROM POINT 8 TO POINT 9 (1311 H MSL) TIHEi 90U TO 906 (POT)
c_n
i
CO
O
0.0
D
z
n
30
Q
TJ
Q
2.5 —
5.0 —
7.5 —
10.0
1 ¦ ¦ ¦11 ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦11 ¦ ¦ ¦ I ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦1 ¦' ¦' I ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦1 ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ I ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ i ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦
1111111
1111111111111111.111111111
111 < 1111
#20 Hydrocarbon Bag
i i i i i i i i i i i i i i , i i ii
-20
20 "40 60
PERCENT OF FULL SCRLE VALUE
T
80
FULL SCRLE VALUE
O N0X
03
500. PPB
500. PPB
100
-------
FULL SCALE VALUE
G BSCfiT 10000. 10-6 M-
O N3 500. PPB
-------
PRESCRIBED BURN tape/passi 272/10 date. 7 ziu/ei
TRAVERSE FROH POINT 8 TO POINT 9 (1311 H MSL) TIHEt 901 TO 906 (PDT)
I
U)
r\D
0.0
o
CO
—I
3D
Z
o
m
2.5
30
ca
3
"0
Q
5.0 —
7.5 —
10.0
FULL SCALE VALUE
_ 0 CO 10 PPM
M I I | i II I | M i I j I 1 1 I | i * i I | I i I I j i i I I | I I I i [ I I I I | I I I I | TI VI '
-20
20 40 60
PERCENT OF FULL SCALE VALUE
80
100
-------
en
i
CO
CO
0.0
o
M
O)
Q
Q
M
z
7.5
PRESCRIBED BURN tape/pass. 272/10 datej 7/m/8i
TRAVERSE FROH POINT 8 TO POINT 9 (1311 M MSL) TIHE: 90U TO 906 CPDT)
¦ j ¦ ¦ ¦ ' | ¦ ' ' ¦ j ty ¦ ¦ j 1 1 ¦ ¦ j 1 1 ¦ ' | 1 1 ¦ 1 j ¦ ' ¦ ¦ j ' ' 1 ¦
2.5 —
5.0 —
10.0
FULL SCALE VALUE
G
ALT.
30U8.
METERS
>
TEMP
100.
DEG. C.
+
DEW PT.
100.
DEG. C.
X
CHARGER
10.
.01 VOLT
-20
20 >10 60
PERCENT OF FULL SCALE VfiLUE
80
100
-------
5.3.4 Plume Concentration Isopleths and Center Line Traverse Data
for the Third Set of Plume Measurements July 14, 1981.
5-34
-------
(This page left intentionally blank.)
-------
CONCENTRATIONS OF
BSC AT
(x )
TAPE N0.S 272
RECORDED! 7/14/81
PASSES i 17.18.19,20
2000
1600 -
en
i
CO
cn
to
T
a
1200 -
800 -
1100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
*>
0.0
POINT 11
1.2
2J1
3.6
>1.6
6.0
POINT 12
DISTANCE (KM)
-------
CONCENTRATIONS OF NOX (PPb)
TAPE NO.i 272
RECORDED! 7/11/81
PASSES i 17,18,19,20
2000
1600
cn
i
CO
cn
-------
TAPE NO.i 272
CONCENTRATIONS OF CO(PPm) ~D;
2000
1600 -
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
01
s:
1200 -
cn
i
co
800
uoo -
0.0
POINT 11
%
0 0
j) 0
T\ o
i
1.2
i
2.4
3.6
1.8
6.0
FOIHT 12
DISTANCE (KM)
-------
TAPE NO.i 272
CONCENTRATIONS OF 03 (PPb) S°E0;
2000
1600 -
1200 -
CO
oo
i
z:
UJ
o
600
400
41
42
43
41
42
41
41
42
42
41 39
40
39
42 40
40
38
39
37
33
34
35
36
35
36
38
39
36
39^45
47
5O 38
37
35
36
37
36
39
37
37
36
37
37
39
39j
f4S_J!a/
|(S2
>14 40
41
38
38
36
37
35
38
36
36
35
39
4 \yf
''50
44
48 "\44
36
36
34
37
0.0
POINT 11
<45
< 50
—i—
1.2
" r11
2.4
3.6
U.8
C.O
POINT 12
DISTHMCE (KM)
-------
FULL SCALE VALUE
G NOX 500. PPB
> 03 500. PPB
-------
FULL SCALE VfiLUE
0 BSCfiT 10000. 10-6 H-
& NO 500. PPB
-------
PRESCRIBED BURN TAPE/PASSi 272/17 DATEi 7 /1U/81
TRAVERSE FROM POINT 11 TO POINT 12 (152U M MSL) TIHEi 1012 T0 1013 (POT)
en
i
0.0
—i
3D
Z
o
ro
Q
TJ
Q
2.5
5.0
7.5
10.0
FULL SCALE VALUE
G CO 10 PPM
-20
20 40 60
PERCENT OF FULL SCRLE VALUE
i l | I I I i I l l i ! -
80 100
-------
FULL SCALE VALUE
0
ALT.
3048.
METERS
l>
TEMP
100.
DEG. C.
+
DEW PT.
100.
DEG. C.
X
CHARGER
10.
.01 VOLT
-------
SECTION 6
ANALYSIS
6.1 Flux
6.1.1 Flux Calculations
Using data obtained from a series of traverses through the smoke
plume at a fixed distance from the source (see Figure 5-1) and wind data
obtained during sampling, plume flux calculations were made.
As a preliminary step in this analysis, a "Pass Average" program
was run on the processed data. A "Pass" is defined as a period of time
during which data were collected. A "Traverse Pass" is defined as the
data collection period during which the aircraft flew between two ground
reference points that encompass the plume (see Figure 5-1). The "Pass
Average" program is capable of averaging all data during that portion
of a pass in which a specified criterion is met. This permits selecting
a species of interest and averaging all data for the period of time when
the concentration was greater than a selected value. In the analysis
of these data, this process was repeated three times with the following
selection criteria:
1) bscat > 100 x 10"6m-l
2) N0X > 5 ppb
3) CO > 200 ppb
These values are slightly higher than the existing background values. They
were chosen to be reliable indicators of the smoke plume. Representative
average background values were selected from data obtained during non plume
sampling. Since "Pass Average" values include all data during the time the
selected criterion was met, the background value for each parameter of in-
terest was subtracted from its corresponding "Pass Average" value. The
resulting values,which represented the average plume contribution above
backaround for each Dass, were then converted to mass units.
When reporting results from the Portland Aerosol Study in which the
primary source of light scattering was determined to be vegetative burning,
Shah, et al. reported scattering efficiencies of approximately 5 m2/g
They found sulfates, nitrates and carbon to have nearly equal scattering
efficiencies. Vines, et al. reported results from vegetative burns in
Australia and used a scattering efficiency of~4.3 m2/g. White,in summarizing
the work of numerous investigators,reported efficiencies of 2.5 to 15.4 m2/g
for sulfates, 2.1 to 12.7 m2/g for nitrates and 1.5 to 4.0 m2/g for organics.
A scattering efficiency of 2.6 m2/g used in this report falls within the
range of reported values.
The 2.6 m2/g value was derived in the following manner. Three
orbits were flown in the plume one mile from the source during the July 14th
6-1
-------
sampling. Total suspended particulates (without size segregation) were
collected on a tared 25 mm stretched teflon filter during each orbit.
Gravimetric analysis of these filters by the University of California
at Davis provided total mass for each filter. Dividing the corresponding
mean plume bscat (10*6 m~l) by the filter mass per unit volume (pg/m^) and
averaging gave a 2.6m2/g scattering efficiency (Table 6-1). Thus the
derived scattering efficiency is based on both accumulation and coarse
particle size mode aerosols.
Table 6-1
SCATTERING EFFICIENCY DETERMINATION
From 1 mile Plume Orbit Data
UCD "Pass Average" b^at
Filter Mass bscat mass
Date Time (ug/m^) (10~6m-l) (n^/g)
7/14/81
0810-0825
1018
2539
2.5
7/14/81
0924-0939
746
2522
3.4
7/14/81
1052-1108
918
1787
1.9
Ave. 2.6
Plume dimensions were then determined for each pass. Depth (meters)
was the increment in altitude between passes. Plume width was calculated
as indicated air speed (meters/sec) times the time (seconds that the instru-
ment of interest was indicating values greater than the screening values
shown above).
Flux (for each pass) was then calculated using the following formula:
Fluxjsp(g/sec) = Depth (m) • Width (m) . Wind Speed (m/sec) .
bscat (10"6/m)
2.6(m2/g)
FluxM0x(g/sec) = Depth (m) • Width (m) . Wind Speed (m/sec) •
N0X (ppb) • 1.88^ ujj ^ (for N0X reported as NO2)
FluxC0(9/sec) = Depth (m) • Width (m) • Wind Speed (m/sec) •
CO (ppb) • 1.1 \
VPpv
The wind speed value used for each individual flux calculation was
from the pibal sounding closest in time to the cross section and from the
altitude closest to each traverse altitude.
6-2
-------
The individual flux values for each set of traverses were summed to
give the calculated-plume flux values shown in Table 6-2.
Table 6-2
PLUME FLUX SUMMARY
Distance Flux (g/sec)
Plume from
Date
Cross Sect.
Time
Source
Neph
N0X
CO
7/13/81
' 1
0758-0847
1 mi le
263
22
-
7/14/81
2
0749-0804
1 mile
446
42
1526
ll
3
0904-0921
ll
292
17
1102
II
4
1013-1025
ll
537
59
3919
6.1.2 Flux Discussion
Figure 6-1 (the same as shown in section 5.2.2) illustrates a pro-
blem with flux calculations based on July 13th sampling data. It was obvious
during sampling that a portion of the plume was rising into the 430 meter
thick cloud layer. Safety considerations prevented aircraft sampling in this
layer. The flux numbers in Table 6.2 for the 13th do not include an estimate
of the portion of plume embedded in the cloud layer"! It is estimated that 25
to 50% of the total plume may not have been sampled by the aircraft.
On July 14th, the plume rise was not sufficient to clear the terrain at
the one mile sampling distance and thus the aircraft could not traverse the
bottom layers of the plume. The flux numbers in Table 6-2 do not include
estimates for plume below the aircraft's minimum sampling altitude. It is
estimated" that 20 to 30% of the total plume was not sampled during the
July 14th traverse sets.
Pibal measurements on the 13th included 0800 and 0900 releases during
the 0758 to 0847 sampling period. The winds throughout the sampling altitudes
were constant enough that it is believed the 0800 values used during the flux
calculations were representative.
Pibal releases on the 14th were made at 0530, 0700, 0900, 1000 and
1100. Wind speeds decreased considerably during the 0700 to 0900 period.
Flux calculations for the 0749 to 0804 sampling period used 0700 wind
data and thus these flux values may be too large. Wind data, used for the
other two flux calculations, appear to be representative of the sampling
period.
In summary, the flux values presented in Table 5-2 are based on
sampling data. The inability of the aircraft to completely characterize the
plume during any set of traverses implies that the flux numbers are too small.
6-3
-------
VZ.
1
C0NCENTRRT IONS OF NOX (ppb)
Tfl"£ rn.j 271
KECURCITD: 7/13/61
PRSSES i 1.2.3,1,5,
6,7,8.9.10,
11
56020122012000311111
12 14 18 6 V./
3
1
1
i
4 J
0
1
CjT~
I?
i'J
1
c!
n
1
3
i
3
2
3
£
¦>
'1
2
1
1
.i
4
O
U
1
1
5
1
4
D ¦
0
~T-\3
1
1
1
0
0
2
2
0
I
. 2
1
2
3
1
0
1
4
3
2
1.
1
3
J
t
1
1
l
-%
3
2
1
0
2
"t
r-1
0
1
I
2
0
2
2
(j
1
Li
1
|J
3
2
1
c!
1
1
£
0
1
T
1
3
1
?.
?.
1
2
c!
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
2
3
>
3
1
?.
4
i
0
0
1
1
0
3
3
4
Zi
1
1
3
2
t
2
UNABLE TO SAMPLE
DUE TO CLOUD
LAYER
£.00 -
0.0
i-riTtj r 1
l.C
G.li
•'.o
coi.jt ?.
;kii;
Figure 6-1 Illustration of Flux Calculations Problem - July 13, 1981.
-------
Decreasing winds during the first set of traverses on the 14th, may have
caused these flux numbers to be too large. Anyone wishing to use these
data is encouraged to be aware of the above limitations. Further, it is
recommended that future sampling include additional wind measurements and
be planned for a plume that can be completely characterized by the sampling
platform.
6.2 Plume Chemistry
Tables 6-3 through 6-6 summarize some of the gas and particle con-
centration data obtained during plume (chemistry) orbits. The gas and
nephelometer data are from the "Pass Average" program. Data reported by
U.C. Davis for the mass of aerosol collected on the stretched Teflon filters
are also tabulated.
The plume orbit data obtained during the 14 July 1982 sampling
flight are summarized in Figure 6-2. Using pibal data, Ward2 has back
calculated, from the mid-point time and altitude of each orbit, to estimate
the emission time (tfr) of the smoke plume that was being sampled. Flaming/
smoldering percentages for each orbit's t£ emission, were provided by Ward
and are shown in Figure 6-2.
The general features of the ozone data are in accord with the exist-
ing understanding of photochemical air pollution. It is known that the
types of compounds emitted during the destructive distillation of slash
are highly reactive, and are capable of rapidly reacting in the presence
of the N0X in the plume to form ozone. It is also known that ozone formation
can be delayed by high N0X concentrations.
Figure 6-2 shows that ozone was rapidly formed in the plume. When
the 0801 t£ emissions were first sampled one mile from the unit, ozone
in the plume was roughly equal to the background value, i.e., plume excess
= 0. By the time similar emissions (0759 tg) were sampled at the five
mile orbit location average plume excess ozone was 27 ppb.
Sampling the 0856 tf emissions at one mile revealed only minor CO,
bSCat> and mass differences from the previous orbit though the flaming/smolder-
ing ratio that produced the emissions was substantially different. N0X and
NO, however, were reduced and O3 production was evident (13 ppb excess). O3
production continued at the one mile distance and by the time the 1026 tg
emissions were sampled the average plume excess was 23 ppb.
The 5 mile orbit data show the effects of plume dilution and the
elevated ozone concentrations. Background ozone was 37 ppb and the three
orbits showed average plume excess ozone of 23-32 ppb above background.
2This information obtained verbally per conversation with Darold Ward of
the Forest Residues and Energy Program, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range
Experiment Station, 4507 University Way N.E., Seattle, WA 98105.
6-5
-------
Table 6-3 AVERAGE AND PEAK CONCENTRATIONS DURING THE 13
JULY 1981 5 MILE SAMPLING ORBIT
03
(ppm)
N0X
(ppni)
NO
(ppm)
^scat
(10-d m-1)
mass
(uq/m3)
Tape 271 Pass 13
Orbit 5 miles downwind
background
average plume
maximum
average plume excess
32
52
70
20
2
6
16
4
0
1
6
.1
85
249
1552
164
Stretched Teflon filter
100.0
-------
Table 6-4 AVERAGE AND PEAK CONCENTRATIONS DURING THE 14 JULY 1981 FIRST 1 MILE/5 MILE SAMPLING SET
03
(ppm)
N0X
(ppm)
NO
(ppm)
bscat
(10-6 m-1)
mass
(ug/m3)
CO
(ppm)
Tape 272 Pass 8
Orbit 1 mile downwind
background
average plume
maximum
average plume excess
37
37
66
0
2
59
180
57
0
7
26
7
82
2539
6000
2457
54
0
3.1
11
3.1
Stretched Teflon filter
plume excess
1018
964
Tape 272 Pass 9
Orbit 5 miles downwind
background
average plume
maximum
average plume excess
37
69
111
32
2
28
78
26
0
2
10
2
82
2064
4472
1982
54
0
2.6
8
2.6
Stretched Teflon filter
plume excess
800
746
-------
Table 6-5 AVERAGE AND PEAK CONCENTRATIONS DURING THE 14 JULY 1981 SECOND 1 MILE/5 MILE SAMPLING SET
°3
N0X
NO
^scat
mass
CO
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(10-6 m-1)
(uq/m3)
(ppm)
Tape 272 Pass 15
Orbit 1 mile downwind
background
37
2
0
82
54
0
average plume
50
52
5
2522
3.2
maximum
80
152
20
8560
11
average plume excess
13
50
5
2440
3.2
Stretched Teflon filter
746
plume excess
692
Tape 272 Pass 16
Orbit 5 miles downwind
background
37
2
0
82
54
0
average plume
64
18
1
1813
1.8
maximum
104
54
12
13160
6
average plume excess
27
16
1
1731
1.8
Stretched Teflon filter
650
plume excess
596
-------
Table 6-6 AVERAGE AND PEAK CONCENTRATIONS DURING THE 14 JULY 1981 THIRD 1 MILE/5 MILE SAMPLING SET
03
N0X
NO
^scat
mass
CO
(ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
(10-6 m-l)
(yq/m3)
(ppm)
Tape 272 Pass 21
Orbit 1 mile downwind
background
37
2
0
82
54
0
average plume
60
18
1
1787
2-2
maximum
98
42
12
4900
6
average plume excess
23
16
1
1705
2.2
Stretched Teflon filter
918
plume excess
864
Tape 272 Pass 22
Orbit 5 miles downwind
background
37
2
0
82
54
0
average plume
60
10
1
718
1.1
maximum
114
28
8
2240
4
average plume excess
23
8
1
646
1.1
Stretched Teflon filter
808
plume excess
754
-------
cn
cn
c
c
¦ r~~
Cn S-
cn s-
C Q)
d Q)
i-H 'f~ "O
•r- "O
O £ 1
Lf>
E «—
CO ^ o
CO
o
o — e
o
•— e
Ll. lo
Ll. UO
li
II
LlJ LO LO
LlJ
ro
4-i CJ
+J
CO
I 40-
8:00 9:00 10:00
1 MILE ORBIT
11:00
8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00
5 MILE ORBIT
Midpoint Time of Orbit (PDT) 14 July 1981
Figure 6-2 Surrenary of the plume excess concentrations in Tables 6-4 through 6-6.
Filter mass concentrations are in units of 100 pg/m , and bscat in
10-V1.
-------
SECTION 7
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 Conclusions
One mile flux calculations, based on the aircraft traverse data,have
been made. These calculations are internally consistent but need to be
compared with emission rate data being computed by the Forest Service.
This comparison and further analyses are underway.and are being coordinated
and will be reported by the U.S. Forest Service.
The flux data are restricted by aircraft sampling limitations during
each flight and lack of wind data during the first set of sampling traverses
performed on July 14th. Estimates of the amount of plume not sampled by the
aircraft have been included, but the flux calculations only include contri-
butions of the portions of the plume that were sampled.
Data from the plume chemistry orbits at 1 mile and 5 miles downwind on
July 14th show that ozone was rapidly formed in the plume, and that at five
miles downwind the ozone concentration in the plume was roughly double that of
background. Based on the data set for this program, no estimate of location
or concentration of the maximum plume excess ozone was possible.
The highest N0X concentration (average plume excess 57 ppb, peak 180 ppb)
was sampled one mile downwind from the source in emissions from a unit estimated
as 75% flaming and 25% smoldering. As the smoldering portion of the unit in-
creased, the sampled N0X concentrations decreased. The N0X concentrations mea-
sured were primarily NO2 since only small NO concentrations were observed.
Although the data were examined, no clear relationship of bSCat to
emissions from different flaming/smoldering combinations was obvious.
7.2 Recommendations
In future studies, elevated plumes that are not embedded in a cloud
layer would allow aircraft sampling to completely characterize the plume
and allow more accurate flux calculations than were possible during this
program. Thus, in selecting future burn sites, consideration of plot
location with respect to terrain features is important. Plots along or
near ridge lines have a better chance of producing elevated plumes than
those located on lower slopes. If lower slope plots are selected, a
narrower range of meteorological conditions will allow complete character-
ization of the plume, i.e. winds that carry the plume away from higher
terrain.
The need for additional wind information is obvious. Continuous
tethersonde profiles (to characterize lower level winds) and pibal releases
every half hour are recommended. The pibal data should include observations
every 30 sec.
7-1
-------
SECTION 8
REFERENCES
1. Shah, J. J., J. J. Huntzicker, J. A. Cooper and J. G. Watson, "Sources
of Visibility Degradation in Portland, Oregon," presented at the 74th
Annual Meeting of the Air Pollution Control Association, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, June 21-26,1981.
2. Ward, D. E., Forest Residues and Energy Program, Pacific Northwest
Forest and Range Experiment Station, Seattle, WA, verbal information, 1982.
3. White, W. H., "The Role of Particulate Sulfates and Nitrates in Reducing
Visibility," presented at the 74th Annual Meeting of the Air Pollution
Control Association, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, June 21-26, 1981.
4. Vines, R. G., L. Gibson, A. B. Hatch, N. K. King, D. A. MacArthur,
D. R. Packham, and R.J. Taylor, Paper #1, Commonwealth Scientific
and Industrial Research Organization, Australia, 1971.
8-1
------- |