AUSTAL2000 ist nicht validiert, Haupt- und Erhaltungssätze

The authors of the AUSTAL2000 define deposition speeds as desired. They do not know that it is a material constant.

For one and the same problem, five different solutions are given, misleadingly

Using individual examples in Schenk (2014), Schenk (2015), Schenk (2015g) and Schenk (2015h) for AUSTAL2000 it was shown that the second law of thermodynamics and the law of conservation of mass are violated. In Trukenmüller et 13 al. (2015) contradicts it and states that AUSTAL is still verified and validated. However, it turns out that the derivation of the reference solution published there is a trivial solution. It is found that this solution is not usable and speculatively introduces Janicke's convention and thus violates the differential equation for balancing. The correct, non-trivial solution that is suitable for describing deposition and sedimentation is given in this article. In addition, valid integral theorems prove the general validity of the objections raised against AUSTAL earlier. You are not restricted to individual cases. Homogeneity tests turn out to be useless trivial cases and are not suitable for validation. Different solutions are given for identical tasks and users are misled. It is claimed to have taken sources in 200m into account, but the simulation results do not reveal the effect of high-altitude sources. Critical terminology shows that the authors of the AUSTAL2000 did little to deal with the fundamentals of momentum, heat and material transport. In connection with further contradictions, the author of this homepage comes to the conclusion that the tests specified by Janicke & Janicke for sedimentation and deposition as well as homogeneity could not have taken place. Solutions given in spite of this are inventions of the authors of the AUSTAL2000. They not only invent different definitions for deposition speeds at will, but also simulate calculations that could not have taken place.

literature

Schenk R (2014) .:

AUSTAL2000-Methode

is questionably validated,

Stein & Kies, edition

132 / September-October

2014, pp. 8 to 9

Schenk (2015) R .:

AUSTAL2000 is not

validated,

Immissionsschutz 01.15,

P. 10 to 21 Schenk (2015g) R.,