Boundary-Layer Meteorology

, Volume 60, Issue 1–2, pp 49–76 | Cite as

The turbulent kinetic energy budget in the atmospheric surface layer: A review and an experimental reexamination in the field

  • Paul Frenzen
  • Christoph A. Vogel
Article
Revised:

Abstract

The one-dimensional equation for the turbulent kinetic energy budget in steady, horizontally-homogeneous flow near the ground is reviewed, and some of the many experimental evaluations of its stability-dependent terms obtained during the last twenty years are compared. Uncertainties attributable to instrument error and inadequate sites are discussed, and it is demonstrated that improved equipment makes it possible to evaluate contributions to the budget with comparatively simple experiments. A preliminary field study finds a von Karman constant of k=0.387±0.016 and a wind shear function for the unstable surface layer% MathType!MTEF!2!1!+-% feaafeart1ev1aaatCvAUfeBSjuyZL2yd9gzLbvyNv2CaerbuLwBLn% hiov2DGi1BTfMBaeXatLxBI9gBaerbd9wDYLwzYbItLDharqqtubsr% 4rNCHbGeaGqiVu0Je9sqqrpepC0xbbL8F4rqqrFfpeea0xe9Lq-Jc9% vqaqpepm0xbba9pwe9Q8fs0-yqaqpepae9pg0FirpepeKkFr0xfr-x% fr-xb9adbaqaaeGaciGaaiaabeqaamaabaabaaGcbaGaeqOXdy2aaS% baaSqaaiaad2gaaeqaaOGaeyypa0JaaiikaiaaigdacqGHsislcaaI% YaGaaGOmaiaac6cacaaI2aGaamOEaiaac+cacaWGmbGaaiykamaaCa% aaleqabaGaeyOeI0IaaGymaiaac+cacaaI0aaaaaaa!4587!\[\phi _m = (1 - 22.6z/L)^{ - 1/4} \]: the form % MathType!MTEF!2!1!+-% feaafeart1ev1aaatCvAUfeBSjuyZL2yd9gzLbvyNv2CaerbuLwBLn% hiov2DGi1BTfMBaeXatLxBI9gBaerbd9wDYLwzYbItLDharqqtubsr% 4rNCHbGeaGqiVu0Je9sqqrpepC0xbbL8F4rqqrFfpeea0xe9Lq-Jc9% vqaqpepm0xbba9pwe9Q8fs0-yqaqpepae9pg0FirpepeKkFr0xfr-x% fr-xb9adbaqaaeGaciGaaiaabeqaamaabaabaaGcbaGaaiikaiaaig% dacqGHsislcaaIXaGaaGynaiaac6cacaaIXaGaamOEaiaac+cacaWG% mbGaaiykamaaCaaaleqabaGaeyOeI0IaaGymaiaac+cacaaIZaaaaa% aa!419C!\[(1 - 15.1z/L)^{ - 1/3} \] fits equally well over the limited range of instability observed. Turbulence dissipation is found to be 15 to 20% too small to balance the production of energy by wind shear in the neutral surface layer, and this deficit appears to remain approximately constant relative to the total rate of energy production as instability increases to% MathType!MTEF!2!1!+-% feaafeart1ev1aaatCvAUfeBSjuyZL2yd9gzLbvyNv2CaerbuLwBLn% hiov2DGi1BTfMBaeXatLxBI9gBaerbd9wDYLwzYbItLDharqqtubsr% 4rNCHbGeaGqiVu0Je9sqqrpepC0xbbL8F4rqqrFfpeea0xe9Lq-Jc9% vqaqpepm0xbba9pwe9Q8fs0-yqaqpepae9pg0FirpepeKkFr0xfr-x% fr-xb9adbaqaaeGaciGaaiaabeqaamaabaabaaGcbaGaamOEaiaac+% cacaWGmbGaeyypa0JaeyOeI0IaaGimaiaac6cacaaIXaGaaGOmaaaa% !3D45!\[z/L = - 0.12\]. Renormalized dissipation rates originally measured by others are shown to exhibit similar behavior beyond this narrow range. Combining these results with those of the present study suggests a dissipation function of the form % MathType!MTEF!2!1!+-% feaafeart1ev1aaatCvAUfeBSjuyZL2yd9gzLbvyNv2CaerbuLwBLn% hiov2DGi1BTfMBaeXatLxBI9gBaerbd9wDYLwzYbItLDharqqtubsr% 4rNCHbGeaGqiVu0Je9sqqrpepC0xbbL8F4rqqrFfpeea0xe9Lq-Jc9% vqaqpepm0xbba9pwe9Q8fs0-yqaqpepae9pg0FirpepeKkFr0xfr-x% fr-xb9adbaqaaeGaciGaaiaabeqaamaabaabaaGcbaGaeqOXdy2aaS% baaSqaaiabew7aLbqabaGccqGH9aqpcqaHgpGzdaWgaaWcbaGaamyB% aaqabaGccqGHsislcaWG6bGaai4laiaadYeacqGHRaWkcaWGJbaaaa!42A3!\[\phi _\varepsilon = \phi _m - z/L + c\] in which c = -0.16 represents a near constant, net negative contribution made by the sum of the divergent transport terms.

Keywords

Dissipation Rate Wind Shear Atmospheric Surface Layer Dissipation Function Simple Experiment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bradley, E. F., Antonia, R. A., and Chambers, A. J.: 1981, ‘Turbulence Reynolds Number and the TKE Balance in the Atmospheric Surface Layer’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 21, 183–197.Google Scholar
  2. Busch, N. E. and Kristensen, L.: 1976, ‘Cup Anemometer Overspeeding’, J. Appl. Meteorol. 15, 1328–1332.Google Scholar
  3. Businger, J. A.: 1982, Equations and Concepts, in F. T. M. Nieuwstadt and H. van Dop (eds.), Atmospheric Turbulence and Air Pollution Modelling, Reidel, Boston, pp. 1–36.Google Scholar
  4. Businger, J. A., Wyngaard, J. C., Izumi, Y., and Bradley, E. F.: 1971, ‘Flux- Profile Relationships in the Atmospheric Surface Layer’, J. Atmos. Sci. 28, 181–189.Google Scholar
  5. Businger, J. A.: 1966, ‘Transfer of Heat and Momentum in the Atmospheric Surface Layer’, in Proc. Arctic Hear Budget and Atmos. Circ., RAND Corp., pp. 305–332.Google Scholar
  6. Carl, M. D., Tarbell, T. C., and Panofsky, H. A.: 1973, ‘Profiles of Wind and Temperature from Towers over Homogeneous Terrain’, J. Atmos. Sci. 30, 788–794.Google Scholar
  7. Caughey, S. J. and Wyngaard, J. C.: 1979, ‘The Turbulent Kinetic Energy Budget in Convective Conditions’, Quart. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc. 105, 231–239.Google Scholar
  8. Champagne, F. H., Friehe, C. A., LaRue, J. C., and Wyngaard, J. C.: 1977, ‘Flux Measurements, Flux Estimation Techniques, and Fine-Scale Measurements in the Unstable Surface Layer over Land’, J. Atmos. Sci. 34, 515–530.Google Scholar
  9. Coppin, P. A. and Taylor, K. J.: 1983, ‘A Sonic Anemometer/Thermometer System for General Micrometeorological Research’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 27, 27–42.Google Scholar
  10. Coppin, P. A.: 1982, ‘An Examination of Cup Anemometer Overspeeding’, Meteorol. Rdsch. 35, 1–11.Google Scholar
  11. Dyer, A. J.: 1974, ‘A Review of Flux-Profile Relationships’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 7, 363–372.Google Scholar
  12. Dyer, A. J. and Bradley, E. F.: 1982, ‘An Alternative Analysis of Flux-Gradient Relationships at 1976 ITCE’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 22, 3–19.Google Scholar
  13. Dyer, A. J. and Hicks, B. B.: 1970, ‘Flux-Gradient Relationships in the Constant Flux Layer’, Quart. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc. 96, 715–721.Google Scholar
  14. Francey, R. J. and Garratt, J. R.: 1981, ‘Interpretation of Flux-Profile Relationships at ITCE-76’, J. Appl. Meteorol. 20, 603–618.Google Scholar
  15. Frenzen, P.: 1966, ‘Limitations to the Use of Cup Anemometers in Micrometeorological Measurement’, Radiol. Phys. Div. Ann. Rpt., Jul 65–Jun 66, Argonne Natl. Lab., pp. 100–103.Google Scholar
  16. Frenzen, P.: 1973, ‘The Observed Relation between Kolmogorov and von Karman Constants in the Boundary Layer’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 3, 348–358.Google Scholar
  17. Frenzen, P.: 1977, ‘A Generalization of the Kolmogorov-von Karman Relation and Further Implications on the Values of the Constants’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 11, 375–380.Google Scholar
  18. Frenzen, P.: 1983a, On the Role of Flux-Divergence Terms in the Turbulent Energy Equation, in: Sixth Symp. on Turbc. and Diffusion, Boston, MA, Mar. 1983, Amer. Meteorol. Soc., pp. 24–27.Google Scholar
  19. Frenzen, P. and Hart, R. L.: 1983b, A Further Note on the Kolmogorov-von Karman Product and the Values of the Constants, in Sixth Symp. on Turbc. and Diffusion, Boston, MA, Mar. 1983, Amer. Meteorol. Soc., pp. 253–254.Google Scholar
  20. Frenzen, P.: 1988, Fast Response Cup Anemometers for Atmospheric Turbulence Research, Proc. Eighth Symp. on Turbc. and Diffusion, San Diego, CA, 25–29, April 1988, Amer. Meteorol. Soc., pp. 112–115.Google Scholar
  21. Garratt, J. R. and Pielke, R. A.: 1989, ‘On the Sensitivity of Mesoscale Models to Surface-Layer Parameterization Constants’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 48, 377–387.Google Scholar
  22. Garratt, J. R.: 1980, ‘Surface Influence upon Vertical Profiles in the Atmospheric Near-Surface Layer’, Quart. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc. 106, 803–819.Google Scholar
  23. Heskestad, G.: 1965, ‘A Generalized Taylor Hypothesis with Application to High Reynolds Number Shear Flows’, J. Appl. Mech. 87, 735–739.Google Scholar
  24. Hicks, B. B.: 1981, ‘An Examination of Turbulence Statistics in the Surface Boundary Layer’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 21, 389–402.Google Scholar
  25. Högström, U.: 1990, Analysis of Turbulence Structure in the Surface Layer in Near-Neutral Conditions, Proc. Ninth Symp. on Turbc. and Diffusion, Roskilde, Denmark, 30 Apr–3 May 1990, Amer. Meteorol. Soc., pp. 235–236.Google Scholar
  26. Högström, U.: 1988, ‘Non-Dimensional Wind and Temperature Profiles in the Atmospheric Surface Layer: A Reevaluation’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 42, 55–78.Google Scholar
  27. Högström, U.: 1986, ‘Reply’, J. Atmos. Sci. 43, 2131–2134.Google Scholar
  28. Kaimal, J. C. and Wyngaard, J. C.: 1990, ‘The Kansas and Minnesota Experiments’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 50, 31–47.Google Scholar
  29. Kondo, J. and Sato, T.: 1982, ‘The Determination of the von Karman Constant’, J. Meteorol. Soc. Japan 60, 461–471.Google Scholar
  30. LeClerc, M. Y. and Thurtell, G. W.: 1990, ‘Footprint Prediction of Scalar Fluxes Using a Markovian Analysis’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 52, 247–258.Google Scholar
  31. Maitani, T.: 1978, ‘On the Downward Transport of Turbulent Kinetic Energy in the Surface Layer over Plant Canopies’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 14, 571–583.Google Scholar
  32. Maitani, T.: 1977, ‘Vertical Transport of Turbulent Kinetic Energy in the Surface Layer over a Paddy Field’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 12, 405–423.Google Scholar
  33. Maitani, T. and Seo, T.: 1985, ‘Estimates of Velocity-Pressure and Velocity-Pressure Gradient Interactions in the Surface Layer over Plant Canopies’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 33, 51–60.Google Scholar
  34. McBean, G. A., Stewart, R. W., and Miyake, M.: 1971, ‘The Turbulent Energy Budget near the Surface’, J. Geoph. Res. 76, 6540–6549.Google Scholar
  35. McBean, G. A. and Elliott, J. A.: 1975, ‘Vertical Transports of Kinetic Energy by Turbulence and Pressure in the Boundary Layer’, J. Atmos. Sci. 32, 753–766.Google Scholar
  36. Oliver, H. R. and Wright, I. R.: 1990, ‘Correction of Errors Associated with Measurement of Net All-Wave Radiation with Double-Domed Radiometers’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 53, 401–407.Google Scholar
  37. Oncley, S. P.: 1989, Flux Parameterization Techniques in the Atmospheric Surface Layer, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Irvine, CA, 202 pp.Google Scholar
  38. Oncley, S. P., Businger, J. A., Friehe, C. A., LaRue, J. C., Itsweire, E. C., and Chang, S. S.: 1990, Surface Layer Profiles and Turbulence Measurements over Uniform Land in Near-Neutral Conditions, Proc. Ninth Symp. on Turbc. and Diffusion, Roskilde, Denmark, 30 Apr–3 May 1990, Amer. Meteorol. Soc., pp. 237–240.Google Scholar
  39. Panofsky, H. A., Blackadar, A. K., and McVehil, G. E.: 1960, ‘The Diabatic Wind Profile’, Quart. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc. 86, 495–503.Google Scholar
  40. Raupach, M. R., Antonia, R. A., and Rajagopalan, S.: 1991, ‘Rough Wall Turbulent Boundary Layers’, App. Mech. Rev. 44, 1–25.Google Scholar
  41. Raupach, M. R., Coppin, P. A., and Legg, B. J.: 1986, ‘Experiments on Scalar Dispersion within a Plant Canopy, Part I: The Turbulence Structure’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 35, 21–52.Google Scholar
  42. Schols, J. L. J. and Wartena, L.: 1986, ‘A Dynamical Description of Turbulent Structures in the Near-Neutral Surface Layer: The Role of Static Pressure Fluctuations’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 34, 1–15.Google Scholar
  43. Swinbank, W. C.: 1964, ‘The Exponential Profile’, Quart. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc. 90, 119–135.Google Scholar
  44. Troen, I. B. and Mahrt, L.: 1986, ‘A Simple Model of the Atmospheric Boundary Layer: Sensitivity to Evaporation’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 37, 129–148.Google Scholar
  45. Tsvang, L. R., Zubkovski, S. L., Kader, B. A., Kallistratova, M. A., Foken, T., Gerstmann, V., Przadka, A., Pretel, Y., Zeleny, Y., and Keder, J.: 1985, ‘International Turbulence Comparison Experiment (ITCE-81)’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 31.Google Scholar
  46. Webb, E. K.: 1970, ‘Profile Relationships: The Log-Linear Range and Extension to Strong Stability’, Quart. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc. 96, 67–90.Google Scholar
  47. Wieringa, J.: 1980, ‘A Revaluation of Kansas Mast Influence on Measurements of Stress and Cup Anemometer Overspeeding’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 18, 411–30Google Scholar
  48. Wyngaard, J. D. and Coté, O. R.: 1971, ‘The Budgets of Turbulent Kinetic Energy and Temperature Variance in the Atmospheric Surface Layer’, J. Atmos. Sci. 28, 190–201.Google Scholar
  49. Wyngaard, J. C., Businger, J. A., Kaimal, J. C., and Larsen, S. E.: 1982, ‘Comments on “A revaluation of Kansas Mast Influence on Measurements of Stress and Cup Anemometer Overspeeding”’, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 22, 245–250.Google Scholar
  50. Wyngaard, J. C.: 1982, Boundary-Layer Modeling, in F. T. M. Nieuwstadt and H. van Dop (eds.), Atmospheric Turbulence and Air Pollution Modelling, Reidel, Boston, pp. 69–106.Google Scholar
  51. Wyngaard, J. C. and Zhang, S. F.: 1985, ‘Transducer-Shadow Effects on Turbulence Spectra Measured by Sonic Anemometers’, J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol. 2, 545–558.Google Scholar
  52. Zhang, S. F., Wyngaard, J. C., Businger, J. A., and Oncley, S. P.: 1986, ‘Response of the UW Sonic Anemometer’, J. Atmos. Oceanic. Technol. 3, 315–323.Google Scholar
  53. Zhang, S.: 1988, A Critical Evaluation of the von Karman Constant from a New Atmospheric Experiment, Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. of Wash., Seattle, WA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul Frenzen
    • 1
  • Christoph A. Vogel
    • 1
  1. 1.Transducer Research Inc.NapervilleUSA

Personalised recommendations