Author:
Kunadi Ashvath Singh,Silberstein Richard P.,Thompson Sally E.
Abstract
AbstractZero plane displacement height ($$d_0$$
d
0
) and momentum roughness length ($$z_{0m}$$
z
0
m
), describe the aerodynamic characteristics of a vegetated surface. Usually, $$d_0$$
d
0
and $$z_{0m}$$
z
0
m
are assumed to be constant functions of the physical characteristics of the surface. Prior evidence collected from the literature and our examination of flux tower data show that $$d_0$$
d
0
and $$z_{0m}$$
z
0
m
vary in time at sites with tree and shrub canopies, but not grasslands. The conventional explanations of these variations are based on linear functions of wind velocity and friction velocity, with little theoretical basis. This study explains the variation in aerodynamic parameters by matching four analytical canopy velocity models to a logarithmic above-canopy velocity profile at canopy height. $$d_0$$
d
0
and $$z_{0m}$$
z
0
m
come out as functions of 2 non-dimensional terms, the canopy momentum absorption capacity (parameter) and a (measurable) Péclet number. To test the theories of variation, we analysed the velocity profiles from Ozflux and Ameriflux sites. None of the theories could recreate $$d_0$$
d
0
and $$z_{0m}$$
z
0
m
at half-hourly intervals. However, the canopy velocity models were able better to recreate the distribution of the variations in $$d_0$$
d
0
and $$z_{0m}$$
z
0
m
. Additionally, the estimates of canopy momentum absorption capacity varied consistently with phenological changes in the canopies, whereas, the fitting parameters of the linear regression of using wind speed and friction velocity did not exhibit physically interpretable variations. The canopy velocity models may offer better predictions with an accurate estimation of the canopy height, a horizontally homogeneous and rigid canopy, and incorporation of the roughness sublayer.
Funder
University of Western Australia
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference121 articles.
1. Allen RG, Pereira LS, Raes D, Smith M et al (1998) Crop evapotranspiration-guidelines for computing crop water requirements-FAO irrigation and drainage paper 56. FAO, Rome 300(9):D05109
2. Arnqvist J, Bergström H (2015) Flux-profile relation with roughness sublayer correction. Q J R Meteorol Soc 141(689):1191–1197
3. Bache D, Unsworth MH (1977) Some aerodynamic features of a cotton canopy. Q J R Meteorol Soc 103(435):121–134
4. Baldocchi DD, Verma SB, Rosenberg NJ (1983) Characteristics of air flow above and within soybean canopies. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 25(1):43–54
5. Baldocchi D, Falge E, Gu L, Olson R, Hollinger D, Running S, Anthoni P, Bernhofer C, Davis K, Evans R et al (2001) FLUXNET: a new tool to study the temporal and spatial variability of ecosystem-scale carbon dioxide, water vapor, and energy flux densities. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 82(11):2415–2434