Advertisement

Boundary-Layer Meteorology

, Volume 149, Issue 3, pp 455–481 | Cite as

A Scale-Adaptive Approach for Spatially-Varying Urban Morphology Characterization in Boundary Layer Parametrization Using Multi-Resolution Analysis

  • P. Mouzourides
  • A. Kyprianou
  • M. K.-A. NeophytouEmail author
Article

Abstract

Urban morphology characterization is crucial for the parametrization of boundary-layer development over urban areas. One complexity in such a characterization is the three-dimensional variation of the urban canopies and textures, which are customarily reduced to and represented by one-dimensional varying parametrization such as the aerodynamic roughness length \(z_{0}\) and zero-plane displacement \(d\). The scope of the paper is to provide novel means for a scale-adaptive spatially-varying parametrization of the boundary layer by addressing this 3-D variation. Specifically, the 3-D variation of urban geometries often poses questions in the multi-scale modelling of air pollution dispersion and other climate or weather-related modelling applications that have not been addressed yet, such as: (a) how we represent urban attributes (parameters) appropriately for the multi-scale nature and multi-resolution basis of weather numerical models, (b) how we quantify the uniqueness of an urban database in the context of modelling urban effects in large-scale weather numerical models, and (c) how we derive the impact and influence of a particular building in pre-specified sub-domain areas of the urban database. We illustrate how multi-resolution analysis (MRA) addresses and answers the afore-mentioned questions by taking as an example the Central Business District of Oklahoma City. The selection of MRA is motivated by its capacity for multi-scale sampling; in the MRA the “urban” signal depicting a city is decomposed into an approximation, a representation at a higher scale, and a detail, the part removed at lower scales to yield the approximation. Different levels of approximations were deduced for the building height \(\bar{{H}}\) and planar packing density \(\lambda _\mathrm{p}\). A spatially-varying characterization with a scale-adaptive capacity is obtained for the boundary-layer parameters (aerodynamic roughness length \(z_{0}\) and zero-plane displacement \(d\)) using the MRA-deduced results for the building height and the planar packing density with a morphometric model; an attribute that is shown to be of great advantage to multi-scale and multi-resolution numerical weather prediction models.

Keywords

Building morphology Multi-resolution analysis Multi-scale sampling Multi-scale/multi-resolution numerical weather prediction models Subgrid parametrizations 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to acknowledge Dr Michael J. Brown from Los Alamos National Laboratory for providing access to the urban building data of Oklahoma City. M. Neophytou also acknowledges Dr Jason Ching (formerly at U.S.-EPA now at NCAR) for stimulating discussions as well as the financial support by the Cyprus Research Promotion Foundation through the research project contract ANABA\(\Theta \)MI\(\Sigma \)H/\(\Pi \)A\(\Gamma \)IO/0308/33.

Supplementary material

10546_2013_9848_MOESM1_ESM.doc (362 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (doc 361 KB)
10546_2013_9848_MOESM2_ESM.doc (989 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (doc 989 KB)

References

  1. Benediktsson JA, Pesaresi M, Amason K (2003) Classification and feature extraction for remote sensing images from urban areas based on morphological transformations. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 41(9):1940–1949CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bottema M (1997) Urban roughness modelling in relation to pollutant dispersion. Atmos Environ 31:3059–3075CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bou-Zeid E, Parlange MB, Meneveau C (2007) On the parameterization of surface roughness at regional scales. J Atmos Sci 64:216–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bracewell R (2000) The Fourier transform and its applications, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York, 616 ppGoogle Scholar
  5. Britter RE, Hanna SR (2003) Flow and dispersion in urban areas. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 35(1):469–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown M (2000) Urban parameterizations for mesoscale models. In: Boybeyi Z (ed) Mesoscale atmospheric dispersion. WIT Press, Southampton, pp 193–255Google Scholar
  7. Burian SJ, Han WS, Brown MJ (2003) Morphological analyses using 3D building databases: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. LA-UR, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, 63 ppGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen F, Kusaka H, Bornstein R, Ching J, Grimmond CSB, Grossman-Clarke S, Loridan T, Manning KW, Martilli A, Miao S, Sailor D, Salamanca FP, Taha H, Tewari M, Wang X, Wyszogrodzki AA, Zhang C (2011) The integrated WRF/urban modelling system: development, evaluation, and applications to urban environmental problems. Int J Climatol 31(2):273–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cheng H, Castro IP (2002) Near-wall flow development after a step change in surface roughness. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 105:411–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ching J (2012) WUDAPT: conceptual framework for an international community urban morphology database to support meso-urban and climate models. Newsletters IAUC. http://urban-climate.com/
  11. Couloigner I, Ranchin T (2000) Mapping of urban areas: a multiresolution modeling approach for semi-automatic extraction of streets. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 66(7):867–874Google Scholar
  12. Daubechies I (1992) Ten lectures on wavelets. CBMS-NSF regional conference series in applied mathematics, vol 61. SIAM, Philadelphia, 343 ppGoogle Scholar
  13. Di Sabatino S, Leo LS, Cataldo R, Ratti C, Britter RE (2010) Construction of digital elevation models for a southern European city and a comparative morphological analysis with respect to Northern European and North American cities. J Appl Meteorol 49(7):1377–1396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Domingues MO, Mendes O, da Costa AM (2005) On wavelet techniques in atmospheric sciences. Adv Space Res 35(5):831–842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Farge M (1992) Wavelet transforms and their applications to turbulence. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 24(1):395–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Farge M, Rabreau G (1988) Wavelet transform to detect and analyze coherent structures in two-dimensional turbulent flows. CR Acad Sci Paris II 307:1479–1486Google Scholar
  17. Grimmond CSB (1998) Aerodynamic roughness of urban areas derived from wind observations. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 89(1):1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Grimmond CSB, Oke TR (1999) Aerodynamic properties of urban areas derived from analysis of surface form. J Appl Meteorol 38(9):1262–1292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hagishima A, Tanimoto J, Nagayama K, Meno S (2009) Aerodynamic parameters of regular arrays of rectangular blocks with various geometries. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 132(2):315–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hamlyn D, Hilderman T, Britter R (2007) A simple network approach to modelling dispersion among large groups of obstacles. Atmos Environ 41(28):5848–5862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Holland DE, Berglund JA, Spruce JP, McKellip RD (2008) Derivation of effective aerodynamic surface roughness in urban areas from airborne lidar terrain data. J Appl Meteorol 47:2614–2626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Horner MW (2007) A multi-scale analysis of urban form and commuting change in a small metropolitan area (1990–2000). Ann Reg Sci 41(2):315–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hudgins L, Friehe CA, Mayer ME (1993) Wavelet transforms and atmospheric turbulence. Phys Rev Lett 71(20):3279–3282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jia YQ, Sill BL, Reinhold TA (1998) Effects of surface roughness element spacing on boundary-layer velocity profile parameters. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 73:215–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Josso B, Burton DR, Lalor MJ (2001) Wavelet strategy for surface roughness analysis and characterisation. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 191(8):829–842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kaiser G (2010) A friendly guide to wavelets. Birkhäuser, Boston, 321 ppGoogle Scholar
  27. Kastner-Klein P, Rotach MW (2004) Mean flow and turbulence characteristics in an urban roughness sublayer. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 111:55–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. MacDonald RW, Griffiths RF, Hall DJ (1998) An improved method for the estimation of surface roughness of obstacle arrays. Atmos Environ 32:1857–1864CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mallat S (1989) Multiresolution approximations and wavelet orthonormal bases of L2 (R). Trans Am Math Soc 315(1):69–87Google Scholar
  30. Mallat S (1999) A wavelet tour of signal processing. Academic Press, New York, 637 ppGoogle Scholar
  31. Martilli A, Santiago JL (2007) CFD simulation of airflow over a regular array of cubes. Part II: Analysis of spatial average properties. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 122:635–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Meyer Y (1992) Wavelets and operators, vol 2. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 244 ppGoogle Scholar
  33. Millward-Hopkins JT, Tomlin AS, Ma L, Ingham DB, Pourkashanian M (2012) Aerodynamic parameters of a UK city derived from morphological data. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 146:447–468Google Scholar
  34. Mouzourides P, Kyprianou A, Neophytou MK-A (2012) Searching for the distinctive signature of a city: could the MRA be the DNA of a city? In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Urban Climate, 6–10 August 2012, Dublin, IrelandGoogle Scholar
  35. Neophytou MK-A, Goussis D, Van Loon M, Mastorakos E (2004) Reduced chemical mechanisms for atmospheric pollution using computational singular perturbation analysis. Atmos Environ 38(22):3661–3673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Neophytou MK-A, Goussis D, Mastorakos E, Britter RE (2005) The development of a scale-adaptive reactive pollutant dispersion model. Atmos Environ 39(15):2787–2794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Neophytou MK-A, Gowardan A, Brown MJ (2011) An inter-comparison of three urban wind models using the Oklahoma City Joint Urban 2003 wind field measurements. Int J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 99(4):357–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Nievergelt Y (1999) Wavelets made easy. Birkhauser, Boston, 297 ppGoogle Scholar
  39. Oke TR (1988) Street design and urban canopy layer climate. Energy Build 11(1):103–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Panagiotou I, Neophytou MK-A, Hamlyn D, Britter RE (2013) City breathability as quantified by the exchange velocity and its spatial variation in real inhomogeneous urban geometries: an example from central London area. Sci Total Environ 442:466–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ratti C, Di Sabatino S, Britter R, Brown M, Caton F, Burian S (2002) Analysis of 3-D urban databases with respect to pollution dispersion for a number of European and American cities. Water Air Soil Pollut 2(5):459–469Google Scholar
  42. Raupach MR (1992) Drag and drag partition on rough surfaces. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 60:375–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Raupach MR (1994) Simplified expressions for vegetation roughness length and zero-plane displacement as functions of canopy height and area index. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 71:211–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Raupach MR (1995) Corrigenda. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 76:303–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Salamanca F, Martilli A, Tewari M, Chen F (2011) A study of the urban boundary layer using different urban parameterizations and high-resolution urban canopy parameters with WRF. J Appl Meteorol 50(5):1107–1128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schmid HP (1994) Source areas for scalars and scalar fluxes. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 67:293–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schmid HP, Oke TR (1990) A model to estimate the source area contributing to turbulent exchange in the surface-layer over patchy terrain. Q J R Meteorol Soc 116:965–988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Shao Y, Yang Y (2005) A scheme for drag partition over rough surfaces. Atmos Environ 39(38):7351–7361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Solazzo E, Di Sabatino S, Aquilina N, Dudek A, Britter R (2010) Coupling mesoscale modelling with a simple urban model: the Lisbon case study. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 137(3):441–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Torrence C, Compo GP (1998) A practical guide to wavelet analysis. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 79(1):61–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Vannier E, Gademer A, Ciarletti V (2006) A new approach for roughness analysis of soil surfaces. In: Proceedings of 14th European signal processing conference (EUSIPCO 2006), Florence, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  52. Zaki SA, Hagishima A, Tanimoto J, Ikegaya N (2011) Aerodynamic parameters of urban building arrays with random geometries. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 138(1):99–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. Mouzourides
    • 1
  • A. Kyprianou
    • 2
  • M. K.-A. Neophytou
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Environmental Fluid Mechanics Laboratory, Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringUniversity of CyprusNicosiaCyprus
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing EngineeringUniversity of CyprusNicosiaCyprus

Personalised recommendations