Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 5575-5586 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | Atmospheric chemistry and physics |
| Volume | 9 |
| Issue number | 15 |
| Publication status | Published - 6 Aug 2009 |
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.
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Earth and Planetary Sciences(all)
- Atmospheric Science
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
In: Atmospheric chemistry and physics, Vol. 9, No. 15, 06.08.2009, p. 5575-5586.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of conventional Lagrangian stochastic footprint models against les driven footprint estimates
AU - Markkanen, T.
AU - Steinfeld, G.
AU - Kljun, N.
AU - Raasch, S.
AU - Foken, T.
N1 - Funding Information: We thank German Science Foundation for funding of Tiina Markkanen and Gerald Steinfeld (projects FO 226/10-1,2 and RA 617/16-1,2). We also gratefully acknowl- edge the two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments.
PY - 2009/8/6
Y1 - 2009/8/6
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=75249100217&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.5194/acp-9-5575-2009
DO - 10.5194/acp-9-5575-2009
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:75249100217
VL - 9
SP - 5575
EP - 5586
JO - Atmospheric chemistry and physics
JF - Atmospheric chemistry and physics
SN - 1680-7316
IS - 15
ER -