2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.jweia.2017.09.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessing methods to extrapolate the vertical wind-speed profile from surface observations in a city centre during strong winds

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
38
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 72 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 74 publications
1
38
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The results indicate that morphometric methods used to determine z 0 and d that incorporate roughness-element height variability agree better with anemometric methods (Kent et al 2017a). Similar conclusions have been attained from the analysis carried out during strong winds (Kent et al 2018a). The above-mentioned results agree with LES modelling (Kanda et al 2013) that the wind profile is better determined if the maximum height of buildings and the standard deviation of their height are taken into account when determining z 0 and d from city morphometry.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 85%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The results indicate that morphometric methods used to determine z 0 and d that incorporate roughness-element height variability agree better with anemometric methods (Kent et al 2017a). Similar conclusions have been attained from the analysis carried out during strong winds (Kent et al 2018a). The above-mentioned results agree with LES modelling (Kanda et al 2013) that the wind profile is better determined if the maximum height of buildings and the standard deviation of their height are taken into account when determining z 0 and d from city morphometry.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 85%
“…The results of these experiments show that the measured wind speed inside cities is influenced by the height of the anemometer and the distribution of roughness elements around the measurement site. Recently, much information on roughness parameters in cities has been obtained through the analysis of wind-speed measurements at three sites (within 60 m of each other) in London, UK (Kent et al 2017a(Kent et al , 2018a. The results indicate that morphometric methods used to determine z 0 and d that incorporate roughness-element height variability agree better with anemometric methods (Kent et al 2017a).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The latter two are calculated using the morphometric method by Kanda et al (2013) (subscript 'K') that directly incorporates the roughness-element height variability. The method has been found to provide good estimates compared to other morphometric approaches when assessed with anemometric data (Kent et al 2017(Kent et al , 2018. The parameters in Table 3 are derived for each model area using a 500-m radius (full scale).…”
Section: Morphometric and Roughness Characteristicsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By comparing results of Engineering Sciences Data Unit (ESDU) models with LiDAR measurements in strong wind conditions, Drew et al [155] suggested conducting assessments regarding the nature of urban surface when ESDU models are adopted to estimate urban wind profiles, as a result the wind loading on tall buildings can be effectively calculated. In the study of Kent et al [156], wind speeds predicted by a logarithmic model, the Deaves and Harris model, a non-equilibrium model, the power law and the Gryning profile were extrapolated to 200 m above the canopy for comparison with LiDAR observations. When the height variability estimated by morphometric models was taken into consideration, results of the Deaves and Harris model and the Gryning profile showed better agreement with LiDAR measurements compared to all other considered models [156].…”
Section: Urban Meteorologymentioning
confidence: 99%