Comparison of conventional lagrangian stochastic footprint models against les driven footprint estimates

Zur Kurzanzeige

dc.identifier.uri http://dx.doi.org/10.15488/1141
dc.identifier.uri http://www.repo.uni-hannover.de/handle/123456789/1165
dc.contributor.author Markkanen, T.
dc.contributor.author Steinfeld, Gerald
dc.contributor.author Kljun, N.
dc.contributor.author Raasch, Siegfried
dc.contributor.author Foken, T.
dc.date.accessioned 2017-02-07T10:17:29Z
dc.date.available 2017-02-07T10:17:29Z
dc.date.issued 2009
dc.identifier.citation Markkanen, T.; Steinfeld, G.; Kljun, N.; Raasch, S.; Foken, T.: Comparison of conventional lagrangian stochastic footprint models against les driven footprint estimates. In: Atmospheric Chemistry And Physics 9 (2009), Nr. 15, S. 5575-5586. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-5575-2009
dc.description.abstract In this study we introduce a comparison method for footprint model results by evaluating the performance of conventional Lagrangian stochastic (LS) footprint models that use parameterised flow field characteristics with results of a Lagrangian trajectory model embedded in a large eddy simulation (LES) framework. The two conventional models follow the particles backward and forward in time while the trajectories in LES only evolve forward in time. We assess their performance in two unstably stratified boundary layers at observation levels covering the whole depth of the atmospheric boundary layer. We present a concept for footprint model comparison that can be applied for 2-D footprints and demonstrate that comparison of only cross wind integrated footprints is not sufficient for purposes facilitating two dimensional footprint information. Because the flow field description among the three models is most realistic in LES we use those results as the reference in the comparison. We found that the agreement of the two conventional models against the LES is generally better for intermediate measurement heights and for the more unstable case, whereas the two conventional flux footprint models agree best under less unstable conditions. The model comparison in 2-D was found quite sensitive to the grid resolution. eng
dc.description.sponsorship DFG/FO 226/10-1
dc.description.sponsorship DFG/FO 226/10-2
dc.description.sponsorship DFG/RA 617/16-1
dc.description.sponsorship DFG/RA 617/16-2
dc.language.iso eng
dc.publisher Göttingen : Copernicus GmbH
dc.relation.ispartofseries Atmospheric Chemistry And Physics 9 (2009), Nr. 15
dc.rights CC BY 3.0 Unported
dc.rights.uri https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
dc.subject large-eddy simulation eng
dc.subject convective boundary-layer eng
dc.subject flux measurements eng
dc.subject surface-layer eng
dc.subject quality assessment eng
dc.subject dispersion models eng
dc.subject forest canopies eng
dc.subject particle model eng
dc.subject scalar fluxes eng
dc.subject prediction eng
dc.subject.ddc 550 | Geowissenschaften ger
dc.title Comparison of conventional lagrangian stochastic footprint models against les driven footprint estimates eng
dc.type Article
dc.type Text
dc.relation.issn 1680-7316
dc.relation.doi https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-5575-2009
dc.bibliographicCitation.issue 15
dc.bibliographicCitation.volume 9
dc.bibliographicCitation.firstPage 5575
dc.bibliographicCitation.lastPage 5586
dc.description.version publishedVersion
tib.accessRights frei zug�nglich


Die Publikation erscheint in Sammlung(en):

Zur Kurzanzeige

 

Suche im Repositorium


Durchblättern

Mein Nutzer/innenkonto

Nutzungsstatistiken