Boundary-Layer Meteorology

, Volume 163, Issue 3, pp 469–495 | Cite as

Numerical Study of Winter Diurnal Convection Over the City of Krasnoyarsk: Effects of Non-freezing River, Undulating Fog and Steam Devils

Research Article

Abstract

We performed a numerical simulation of penetrative convection of an inversion-topped weakly stratified atmospheric boundary layer over urban terrain with a strong localized source of heat and moisture. With some simplifications, the case mimics the real environment of the Krasnoyarsk region in Russia where the non-freezing river Yenisei acts as a thermal and humidity source during winter, generating an undulating fog pattern along the river accompanied with scattered ‘steam devils’. An idealized full diurnal cycle was simulated using an unsteady Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) three-equation algebraic flux model and the novel buoyancy-accounting functions for treating the ground boundary conditions. The results show a significant effect of the river on the net temperature and moisture distribution. The localized heat and moisture source leads to strong horizontal convection and marked non-uniformity of humidity concentration in the air. An interplay of several distinct large-scale vortex systems leads to a wavy pattern of moisture plumes over the river. The simulations deal with rare natural phenomena and show the capability of the RANS turbulence closure to capture the main features of flow and scalar fields on an affordable, relatively coarse, computational grid.

Keywords

Atmospheric boundary layer Diurnal convection Steam devils Undulating fog pattern Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes modelling 

References

  1. André JC, De Moor G, Lacarrére P, Therry G, du Vachat R (1978) Modelling the 24-hour evolution of the mean and turbulent structures of the planetary boundary layer. J Atmos Sci 35:1861–1883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrén A, Moeng Ch-H (1994) Single-point closures in a neutrally stratified boundary layer. J Atmos Sci 50(20):3366–3379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Antonelli M, Rotunno R (2007) Large-eddy simulation of the onset of the sea breeze. J Atmos Sci 64:4445–4457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baroud ChN, Plapp BB, Swinney HL, She Zh-S (2003) Scaling in three-dimensional and quasi-two-dimensional rotating turbulent flows. Phys Fluids 15(8):2091–2104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brown RA (1980) Longitudinal instabilities and secondary flows in planetary boundary layers: a review. Rev Geophys Space Phys 18:683–697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Celani A, Musacchio S, Vincenzi D (2010) Turbulence in more than two and less than three dimensions. Phys Rev Lett 104(18):184506. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.184506 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen G, Zhu X, Sha W, Iwasaki T, Seko H, Saito K et al (2015) Toward improved forecasts of sea-breeze horizontal convective rolls at super high resolutions. Part I: configuration and verification of a Down-Scaling Simulation System (DS3). Mon Weather Rev 143(5):1849–1872CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Deardorff JW, Willis GE, Lilly DK (1969) Laboratory investigation of non-steady penetrative convection. J Fluid Mech 35(1):7–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dupont J-C, Haeffelin M, Protat A, Bouniol D, Boyouk N, Morille Y (2012) Stratus-fog formation and dissipation: a 6-day case study. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 143:207–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Forthofer JM, Goodrick SL (2011) Review of vortices in wildland fire. J Combust 2011:984363. doi:10.1155/2011/984363
  11. Gayen B, Griffiths RW, Hughes GO, Saenz JA (2012) Energetics of horizontal convection, JFM Rapids. J Fluid Mech 716:R10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Giridharan R, Kolokotroni M (2009) Urban heat island characteristics in London during winter. Solar Energy 83(9):1668–1682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Haines DA, Smith MC (1987) Three types of horizontal vortices observed in wildland mass and crown fires. J Clim Appl Meteorol 26:1624–1637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hanjalić K (2006) One-point closure models for buoyancy-driven turbulent flows. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 34:321–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hanjalić K, Hrebtov M (2016) Ground boundary conditions for thermal convection over horizontal surfaces at high rayleigh numbers. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 160:41–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hanjalić K, Musemić R (1997) Modelling the dynamics of double-diffusive scalar fields at various stability conditions. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 18(4):360–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hathway EA, Sharples S (2012) The interaction of rivers and urban from in mitigating the urban heat island effect: a UK case study. Build Environ 58:14–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hunt JC, Morrison JF (2000) Eddy structure in turbulent boundary layers. Eur J Mech B Fluid 19(5):673–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ito J, Nino H (2013) Formation mechanism of dust devil-like vortices in idealised convective mixed layers. J Atmos Sci 70:1174–1156Google Scholar
  20. Kenjereš S, Hanjalić K (1999) Transient analysis of Rayleigh–Bénard convection with a RANS model. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 27:329–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kenjereš S, Hanjalić K (2002) Combined effects of terrain orography and thermal stratification on pollutant dispersion in a town valley: a T-RANS simulations. J Turbul 3:1–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kenjereš S, Hanjalić K (2006) LES, T-RANS and hybrid simulations of thermal convection at high Ra number. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 27:800–810CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kenjereš S, Hanjalić K (2009) Tackling complex turbulent flows with transient RANS. Fluid Dyn Res 41:012201. doi:10.1088/0169-5983/41/1/012201
  24. Khlebopros RG, Taseyko YD, Ivanova SV, Mikhailuta SV (2012) Krasnoyarsk. The ecological studies. Siberian Federal University Press, 130 pp (in Russian)Google Scholar
  25. Kuettner JP, Hildebrand PA, Clark TL (1987) Convection waves: observations of gravity wave systems over convectively active boundary layers. Q J Roy Meteorol Soc 113:445–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lappa M (2009) Thermal convection: patterns, evolution and stability. Wiley, New York, 690 ppGoogle Scholar
  27. Liu AQ, Moore GWK, Tsuboki K, Renfrew IA (2004) A high-resolution simulation of convective roll clouds during a cold-air outbreak. Geophys Res Lett 31(3):L03101. doi:10.1029/2003GL018530
  28. Lyons WA, Pease SR (1972) ‘Steam Devils’ over Lake Michigan during a January arctic outbreak. Mon Weather Rev 100(3):235–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mellor GL, Yamada T (1974) A hierarchy of turbulence closure models for planetary boundary layers. J Atmos Sci 31:1791–1806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mikhailuta SV, Taseyko OV, Zakharov YV (2011) Pollutant dispersion dynamics in urban environment. Lambert Academic Publishing, Germany, 136 pp (in Russian)Google Scholar
  31. Nakanishi M, Shibuya R, Ito J, Niino H (2014) Large-eddy simulation of a residual layer: low-level jet, convective rolls and Kelvin–Helmholtz Instability. J Atmos Sci 71:4473–4491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Navarro MC, Herrero H (2011) Effects of thermal gradients on the intensity of vortices generated in a cylindrical annulus. Chaos 21(4):043132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Park SB, Baik JJ (2014) Large-eddy simulations of convective boundary layers over flat and urban-like surfaces. J Atmos Sci 71:1880–1892CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pope SB (2000) Turbulent flows. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 771 ppGoogle Scholar
  35. Pope SB (2004) Ten questions concerning the large-eddy simulation of turbulent flows. New J Phys 6(35):1–24Google Scholar
  36. Raasch S, Franke T (2011) Structure and formation of dust devil-like vortices in the atmospheric boundary layer: a high-resolution numerical study. J Geophys Res 116:D16120. doi:10.1029/2011JD016010
  37. Sarris IE, Lekakis I, Vlachos NS (2004) Natural convection in rectangular tanks heated locally from below. Int J Heat Mass Transf 47(14):3549–3563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Scagliarini A, Gylfason Á, Toschi F (2014) Heat flux scaling in turbulent Rayleigh–Be’nard convection with an imposed longitudinal wind. Phys Rev E 89:043012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sha W, Kawamura T, Ueda H (1991) A numerical study on sea/land breezes as a gravity current: Kelvin–Helmholtz billows and inland penetration of the sea-breeze front. J Atmos Sci 48(14):1649–1665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Shapiro A, Fedorovich E (2007) Katabatic flow along a differentially cooled sloping surface. J Fluid Mech 571:149–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Simpson JE (1994) Sea breeze and local winds. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 234 ppGoogle Scholar
  42. Slotnick J, Khodadoust A, Alonso J, Darmofal D, Gropp W, Lurie E, Mavriplis D (2014) CFD vision 2030 study: a path to revolutionary computational aerosciences. NASA/CR–2014-218178Google Scholar
  43. Weber JE (1978) On the stability of thermally driven shear flow heated from below. J Fluid Mech 87(1):65–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wyngaard JC (1992) Atmospheric turbulence. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 24:205–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Yamada T, Mellor GL (1975) A simulation of the Wangara atmospheric boundary layer data. J Atmos Sci 32:2309–2329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Young GS, Kristovich DA, Hjelmfelt MR, Foster RC (2002) Supplement to rolls, streets, waves, and more. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 83(7):1001–1001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Yu CH, Chang MY, Lin TF (1997) Structures of moving transverse and mixed rolls in mixed convection of air in a horizontal plane channel. Int J Heat Mass Transfer 40(2):333–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zurn-Birkhimer S, Agee EM, Sorbjan Z (2005) Convective structures in a cold air outbreak over Lake Michigan during Lake-ICE. J Atmos Sci 62(7, part 2):2414–2432CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Thermophysics of SB RASNovosibirskRussia
  2. 2.Novosibirsk State UniversityNovosibirskRussia
  3. 3.Delft University of Technology, ChemEDelftThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations