2017
DOI: 10.14358/pers.83.6.415
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Aerodynamic Roughness Length Estimation with Lidar and Imaging Spectroscopy in a Shrub-Dominated Dryland

Abstract: The aerodynamic roughness length (Z 0

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
7
0
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
0
7
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…To minimise potential errors and to obtain roughness lengths representative of the conditions at each site, an extensive series of filters were applied to the 30 min values (see Fitzpatrick et al, 2017, for full details). These filters included a 90 • wind direction window centred on the main axis of the EC sensor (to minimise the influence of flow distortion due to the station structure), minimum values for wind speed (> 3 m s −1 ) and u * ec (> 0.1 m s −1 ), minimum differences between measurement and surface height values of air temperature (> 1 • C) and vapour pressure (> 66 Pa) (Calanca, 2001;Conway and Cullen, 2013), a minimum scalar roughness length value of 1 × 10 −7 m based on the mean free path length of molecules (Li et al, 2016), and a precipitation filter. A test for stationarity of the turbulence, following Foken (2008), was also applied.…”
Section: In Situ Roughness Length Valuesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To minimise potential errors and to obtain roughness lengths representative of the conditions at each site, an extensive series of filters were applied to the 30 min values (see Fitzpatrick et al, 2017, for full details). These filters included a 90 • wind direction window centred on the main axis of the EC sensor (to minimise the influence of flow distortion due to the station structure), minimum values for wind speed (> 3 m s −1 ) and u * ec (> 0.1 m s −1 ), minimum differences between measurement and surface height values of air temperature (> 1 • C) and vapour pressure (> 66 Pa) (Calanca, 2001;Conway and Cullen, 2013), a minimum scalar roughness length value of 1 × 10 −7 m based on the mean free path length of molecules (Li et al, 2016), and a precipitation filter. A test for stationarity of the turbulence, following Foken (2008), was also applied.…”
Section: In Situ Roughness Length Valuesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Efforts have been made in previous boundary-layer studies over different land surfaces to determine momentum roughness length values for large areas, including over forestry, scrubland, and outwash plains (e.g. Nield et al, 2013;Li et al, 2017).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The frontal area index (fai) can be defined by integrating positive height changes (∆y) over a cross-sectional line divided by the distance (∆x) in that section length, assuming an isotropic surface [25,56]. fai = ( ∑ ∆y)/( ∑ ∆x) for ∆y > 0 (4)…”
Section: Roughness Length Based On Vegetation Geometry and Wind Conditionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where N is the number of subcells within each grid cell; σi,j is the standard deviation of the LiDAR-derived vegetation height (hi,j) per each subcell I; j. h avg is the average vegetation height calculated from the LiDAR's CHM. It was documented that coarser grid cells reduce the standard deviation of height regardless of the size of the subcells, while larger subcells lead to higher values of Z 0 [25]. Based on these observations, the size of each grid cell was chosen to be equal to 1 m and the segment size inside each grid was 0.25 m, reflecting the maximum expected variance in plant height within a 1 × 1 m cell.…”
Section: Roughness Length Based On Vegetation Height Variabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation