RESEARCH PROGRESS PRESENTATION ON

MODELLING AND ASSESSMENT OF TRAFFIC RELATED

AIR POLLUTION IN AN URBAN AREA
BY
SHADAB AHMAD
PhD Student
Supervised by
Dr. Farhan Kidwai and Dr. Kafeel Ahmad

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

Faculty of Engineering & Technology
Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi - 110025
 
18th September 2015
PRESENTATION OUTLINE
Introduction

I. The objectives of study set forth.

II. The objectives achieved so far.

III. The methodology adopted to achieve the objectives.

IV. The results of study obtained so far and progress from

the previous presentation.

V. The remaining objectives likely to be achieved.

INTRODUCTION
 Motor vehicles emit large quantities of
◦ CO2, CO, HCs, NOx, PM, Benzene, Formaldehyde,
Acetaldehyde, 1,3-Butadiene, and Lead.

 Each of these can cause adverse effects on the

environment.

 The quantification of motor-vehicle emissions is critical

in estimating their impact on local air quality and traffic-
related exposures.

 It requires the collection of travel-activity data over

space and time and the development of emissions
inventories.
INTRODUCTION…..
 Studies that have sampled the exhaust of moving
vehicles in real-world situations have calculated
emissions rates of the current motor-vehicle fleet.

 This has allowed the evaluation of the impact of new

emission control technologies and fuels on emissions.
I. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY SET
FORTH
 To provide a viable method for quantifying the contribution of traffic
emission to regional air quality of specified urban area,

 an integrated Traffic Emission Information System (TEIS) is developed

which allows prediction of traffic induced air pollution in real-time.

 As key components to TEIS, the traffic flow model, traffic emission

model and atmospheric dispersion model are to be developed.

 Real-time traffic flow monitoring and air quality monitoring (for CO,
NOX and PM10) is to be done at specified sampling points.

 The predicted emission rates are to be correlated with observed

concentrations of CO, NOX and PM10 at specified sampling points.
 TEIS DATABASE

TRAFFIC FEATURE GEOGRAPHIC AND

METEOROLOGICAL DATA
ROAD ( TRAFFIC FLOW RATE, TRAFFIC
DIMENSION (ROAD HEIGHT, WIND
DENSITY, JAM DENSITY, SPEED)
SPEED, DIRECTION,
AND EMISSION DATABASE
ATMOSPHERIC STABILITY,
COPERT
ETC..)

EMISSION MODEL
TRAFFIC FLOW MODEL SEMIEMPIRICAL MODEL
SEMIEMPIRICAL MODEL
(EMISSION RATE =
(TRAFFIC FLOW = FN(DENSITY, JAM DENSITY
FN(DENSITY, JAM AND AVERAGE EMISSION
ENSITY, SPEED) RATE)
AVG ER =FN(SPEED) , CAL
FRM COPERT
ATMOSPHERIC
DISPERSION MODEL
GAUSSIAN MODEL
CALINE4/CLv2.1
( CO CONCENTRATION
= FN (EMISSION RATE)

POLLUTANT EMISSION AIR QUALITY

EMISSION PREDICTION
RATE
CONTROL
STRATEGY
II. THE OBJECTIVES ACHIEVED SO
FAR
 TRAFFIC FLOW MODEL IS DEVELOPED.

 TRAFFIC EMISSION MODEL IS DEVELOPED.

 RESULTS OF WEIGHTED EMISSION FACTOR FROM

ACTUAL EMISSION FACTOR DATA AND FROM MODELED
EMISSION FACTOR ARE ESTABLISHED.

 CO CONCENTRATION FROM WEF DATA IS LEFT TO BE

FOUND USING ATMOSPHERIC DISPERSION MODEL
CALINE4.

 COMPARISON OF PREDICTED CO CONCENTRATION AND

ACTUAL CO CONCENTRATION IS LEFT.
III. THE METHODOLOGY ADOPTED TO
ACHIEVE THE OBJECTIVES
1. Calculation of traffic density from traffic flow data of mathura road
of 2010 for all type of vehicles.

2. Calculation of emission factor from traffic density for each vehicle

type (modeled emission factor)

3. Calculation of weighted emission factor (modeled wef)

4. Calculation of weighted emission factor from ARAI data of

emission factors (actual wef)

5. Comparison of modeled weighted emission factor and actual

emission factor
 1. Calculation of traffic density from traffic flow
data of mathura road of 2010 for all type of
vehicles.
Veh/hr
Veh/km

TWO VALUES OF DENSITY D, Dlower and

Dhigher at a particular traffic flow, T

Maximum speed
Vehicle type PCU Dj V0 (km h-1)
Cars (petrol) 1 2500 60
Cars (Diesel) 1 2500 60
LCV (Diesel) 2 1250 45
LCV (Gasoline) 2 1250 45
HCV 3.3 750 40
BUSES 3.3 750 50
2 WHEELER
(2stroke) 0.3 8000 75
2 WHEELER
(4stroke) 0.3 8000 75
3 WHEELER 0.5 5000 60
 2. Calculation of emission factor from traffic density for
each vehicle type (modeled emission factor)

• A, B, C and VER0 are

constants.
Vehicle emission Average vehicle
rate/emission emission • VER0 is found from
factor, g km-1 veh-1 rate/emission
COPERTIII report of
factor, g km-1 veh-1
European Environmental
• TWO VALUES OF VER FOR, Agency where VER0 = fn
VERlower and VERhigher at two (Speed) for each vehicle
values of density, Dlower and type.
Dhighera particular traffic flow, T
and each vehicle type. • Value of A,B,C for each
vehicle type is obtained by
performing nonlinear
regression between VER
and VER0
2a. Calculations for two wheeler, 2 Stroke and 4
Stroke
TRAFFIC VER VER N*VER(highe
HR OF FLOW, No. of D lower lower 2 N*VER(lower) D higher 2 higher 2 r)*age 2
DAY Veh/hr YEAR 1992 Vehicles 2 stroke stroke *age 2 stroke stroke stroke stroke
2STROKE(4
0—1 302 0%) 0.604 0.008053 25.8125 296.2242615 7999.992 -1.7E+07
AGE OF VER VER N*VER(highe
VEHIC D lower lower 4 N*VER(lower) D higher 4 higher 4 r)*age 4
LE, ky 4stroke stroke *age 4 stroke stroke stroke stroke
4STROKE
19 (60%) 0.5436 0.007248 5.187501 53.57858435 7999.993 4993436 51574204.48

TRAFFIC VER VER N*VER(highe

HR OF FLOW, No. of D lower lower 2 N*VER(lower) D higher 2 higher 2 r)*age 2
DAY Veh/hr YEAR 1993 Vehicles 2 stroke stroke *age 2 stroke stroke stroke stroke
2STROKE(4
01—02 162 0%) 0.604 0.008053 25.8125 280.6335109 7999.992 -1.7E+07
AGE OF VER VER N*VER(highe
VEHIC D lower lower 4 N*VER(lower) D higher 4 higher 4 r)*age 4
LE, ky 4stroke stroke *age 4 stroke stroke stroke stroke
4STROKE
18 (60%) 0.7248 0.009664 5.187501 67.67821575 7999.99 3745070 48859677.05
 2b. Calculation of average vehicle emission
rate/emission factor, VER0, g km-1 vehicle-1 from
COPERT III report and VER from empirical model
and regression

VER VER (mod)

(ACT) from
CAR SPEED DENSITY D = from EMPIRICA (VER(ACT)- SUM (VER(ACT)-
PETROL (V) Dj(1-(V/V0)) COPERT L EQN A -4.9287E-07 VER(MOD))2 VER(MOD))2
Dj         B 0.001372792    
2500 60 0 5.8578 5.8578 C 0.99680697 0 0.007410413
  50 416.6666667 6.072 6.15444722 VER0 5.8578 0.006797544  
  40 833.3333333 6.7818 6.75706523     0.000611809  
  20 1666.666667 9.6882 9.68922981     1.06051E-06  
3. Calculation of weighted emission
factor, gm km-1 veh-1, (modeled wef)
2010
WEF = Ʃ Ʃ(No. of Vehicles*VER*age)
All vehicles92

(Total hourly traffic flow of all vehicles, veh/hr)

3a. Calculation of number of vehicles of a particular
year of manufacture YEAR 0—1
302
2STROKE(40%) 4STROKE (60%)
NO. OF VEHICLES OF A PARTICULAR
AGE
1992 0.604 0.5436
1993 0.604 0.7248
1994 1.47376 1.93884
1995 1.59456 2.1744
1996 0.85768 2.1744
1997 0.85768 1.30464
1998 1.71536 1.812
1999 2.57304 3.11664
2000 1.208 6.2514
2001 2.57304 3.11664
2002 4.2884 3.11664
2003 5.60512 15.61944
2004 14.58056 34.37364
2005 12.85312 6.2514
2006 16.28384 12.5028
2007 11.99544 21.70776
2008 13.97656 27.9048
2009 14.56848 18.73608
2010 12.58736 17.83008
 3b. Calculations for two wheeler, 2 Stroke and
4 Stroke
TRAFFIC VER VER N*VER(highe
HR OF FLOW, No. of D lower lower 2 N*VER(lower) D higher 2 higher 2 r)*age 2
DAY Veh/hr YEAR 1992 Vehicles 2 stroke stroke *age 2 stroke stroke stroke stroke
2STROKE(4
0—1 302 0%) 0.604 0.008053 25.8125 296.2242615 7999.992 -1.7E+07
AGE OF VER VER N*VER(highe
VEHIC D lower lower 4 N*VER(lower) D higher 4 higher 4 r)*age 4
LE, ky 4stroke stroke *age 4 stroke stroke stroke stroke
4STROKE
19 (60%) 0.5436 0.007248 5.187501 53.57858435 7999.993 4993436 51574204.48

TRAFFIC VER VER N*VER(highe

HR OF FLOW, No. of D lower lower 2 N*VER(lower) D higher 2 higher 2 r)*age 2
DAY Veh/hr YEAR 1993 Vehicles 2 stroke stroke *age 2 stroke stroke stroke stroke
2STROKE(4
01—02 162 0%) 0.604 0.008053 25.8125 280.6335109 7999.992 -1.7E+07
AGE OF VER VER N*VER(highe
VEHIC D lower lower 4 N*VER(lower) D higher 4 higher 4 r)*age 4
LE, ky 4stroke stroke *age 4 stroke stroke stroke stroke
4STROKE
18 (60%) 0.7248 0.009664 5.187501 67.67821575 7999.99 3745070 48859677.05
 TOTAL HRLY
2W HR OF DAY 0—1 TRAFFIC FLOW
TOTAL FOR ALL
TRAFFIC VEHICLES 2581
FLOW 302 N*VERlower*age
2STROKE(4 4STROKE 0—1
0%) (60%) TOTAL N*VER lower
N*VER(lower)*a 2W * age 25711.33173
1992 ge 2 stroke 296.2242615 0 TOTAL
N*VER(lower)*a 3W N*VERlow*age 3854.623657
ge 4 stroke 53.57858435 TOTAL
N*VER(lower)*a 4W N*VERlower*age 11190.8714
1993 ge 2 stroke 280.6335109 TOTAL
BUS N*VERlow*age 423.7211291
N*VER(lower)*a
TOTAL
ge 4 stroke 67.67821575
LCV N*VERlow*age 1447.442638
N*VER(lower)*a TOTAL
1994 ge 2 stroke 646.7043715 HCV N*VERlow*age 7852.398643
N*VER(lower)*a TOTAL OF ALL
ge 4 stroke 170.9815589 VEH
N*VER(lower)*a (N*VERlow*age) 50480.3892
1995 ge 2 stroke 658.5533477 WEF lower 19.55846153

N*VER(lower)*ag
2010 e 2 stroke 324.9114938
N*VER(lower)*ag
e 4 stroke 92.49391362

TOTAL N*VER
lower * age 25711.33173
 4. Calculation of weighted emission
factor from ARAI data of emission
factors (actual wef)

YEAR 1992 1993

EF
Traffic No. of EF No. of ACTU N*EF(ac
Flow, Traffic Flow, Vehicles, ACTUAL, N*EF(act)*k Vehicles, AL, t)*ky(ag
Vehicles/hr Vehicles/hr Age, 19 N EF(act) y(age of veh) Age, 18 N EF(act) e of veh)
2STROKE 2STROKE
65.232
0—1 302 120.8 40% 0.604 6 68.856 (40%) 0.604 6
4STROKE 4STROKE
40.70477
181.2 (60%) 0.5436 3.12 32.224608 (60%) 0.7248 3.12
2STROKE 2STROKE
34.992
1—2 162 64.8 40% 0.324 6 36.936 (40%) 0.324 6
4STROKE 4STROKE
21.83501
97.2 (60%) 0.2916 3.12 17.286048 (60%) 0.3888 3.12
  HR OF DAY 0-1
         
2W ƩN*EF*KY 1927.877 1461.481 
3W ƩN*EF*KY 943.3562   
4W ƩN*EF*KY 14612.8 656.2755 4.849677
BUS ƩN*EF*KY 551.4948   
LCV ƩN*EF*KY 4859.904 30.144 5432.568
HCV ƩN*EF*KY 21924.76 74.3256 22978.2
TOTAL ƩN*EF*KY 75458.04   

TOTAL HRLY
TRAFFIC FLOW   2581   
WEF ACTUAL   29.23597   
 WEF WEF
MODELED MODELED WEF
5. Comparison of lower, gm km-1
Hour of day veh-1
higher, gm
km-1 veh-
ACTUAL, gm
km- veh-1

modeled weighted 0—1 19.55846 287559.8 29.23597

1—2 16.47719 379853.1 26.74396
emission factor and 2—3 12.97867 409371.9 39.92547

actual emission factor 3—4

4—5
13.44539
14.86631
442834.6
395606.3
17.89362
29.2702
5—6 22.01634 284099.8 10.73985
6—7 27.46982 193838.1 12.72036
7—8 31.31797 142495.4 11.61223
8—9 37.40861 83267.82 14.05568
9—10 40.26936 73398.78 13.12267
10—11 40.12476 80171.26 14.97837
11—12 39.27604 77653.08 12.76869
12—13 37.4854 78338.43 12.68133
13—14 38.5366 89462.3 12.98798
14—15 38.2736 87366.26 16.98543
15—16 37.14481 82856.17 14.62944
16—17 37.40727 77831.53 12.21189
17—18 37.30799 74253.11 12.3109
18—19 40.17431 74558.09 12.34949
19—20 39.30626 71223.23 12.35752
20—21 39.8366 87241.37 12.32395
21—22 37.02086 101859.8 12.52257
22—23 29.60072 143565.7 13.11213
23—24 24.65665 190220.4 13.5094
IV. THE RESULTS OF STUDY OBTAINED SO
FAR AND PROGRESS FROM THE PREVIOUS
PRESENTATION.

 Traffic flow model and emission model is developed.

 Weighted emission factor calculated from model as well

as from actual emission factor is calculated.

 In last presentation only literature review was

performed.
V. THE REMAINING OBJECTIVES
LIKELY TO BE ACHIEVED
PCU value and jam density Dj of each vehicle type needs to be
calculated.

After repetition of all calculations, modeled weighted emission

factor needs to be found out.

Carbon monoxide concentration near mathura road, CRRI (400*400

m2) at (25*25 m2, receptor points) area will be estimated based on
weighted emission factor and total traffic flow data of each hour for
whole day, using CALINE4 dispersion software.

Predicted concentration will be compared with actual concentration

and sensitivity analysis shall be performed.
 References
 [1] Eggleston S., Gorißen N., Hassel D.,  [4] Xia L., Shao Y., Modelling of traffic flow
Hickman A.J., Joumard R., Rijkeboer R., and air pollution emission with application to
White L. and Zierock K.-H., 2000. COPERT Hong Kong Island Environmental Modelling
III Computer Programme to Calculate & Software, Vol. 20, pp. 1175–1188
Emissions from Road Transport. Technical
Report No. 49 of European Environment
Agency (EEA).

 [2] Gokhale S, Pandian S., (2007), A semi-

empirical box modeling approach for
predicting the carbon monoxide
concentrations at an urban traffic intersection,
Atmospheric Environment, Vol. 41, pp.
7940–7950

 [3] Dirks K. N., Johns M. D., Hay J. E.,

Sturmand A. P., (2003), A semi-empirical
model for predicting the effect of changes in
traffic flow patterns on carbon monoxide
concentrations, Atmospheric Environment,
Vol. 37 , pp. 2719–2724
THANK YOU…….