Boundary-layer flow over analytical two-dimensional hills: A systematic comparison of different models with wind tunnel data

Finardi, S.; Basso, Giuseppe; Morselli, M. G.; Trombetti, F.; Tampieri, F.

doi:10.1007/bf00710462

Cited by 43 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the latter case, MINERVE wind fields were used in the evaluation of material transport and diffusion and resulted in very good agreement with tracer data. Also, using wind tunnel data, Finardi et al (1993) concluded that errors were within 20% and considered suitable for practical applications. For this study, MINERVE was designed for operation on a workstation.…”

Section: Minerve Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of atmospheric transport calculations over complex terrain using a mobile profiling system and rawinsondes

Cox¹,

Cogan

Sontowski³

et al. 2000

Meteorological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A comparison of atmospheric transport and dispersion calculations over complex terrain was investigated using a mobile profiling system (MPS) versus standard meteorological balloons. Meteorological and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) concentration data were collected and used to evaluate the performance of a transport and diffusion model coupled with a mass consistency wind field model. Meteorological data were collected throughout April 1995, and parts of August 1995. Both meteorological and concentration data were measured in December 1995. Once the models were validated, the comparison of performance with different upper‐air data were accomplished. The models used included the SCIPUFF (Second‐order Closure Integrated Puff) transport and diffusion model and the MINERVE mass consistency wind model. Evaluation of the models was focused primarily on their effectiveness as a short‐term (one to four hours) predictive tool. These studies showed how the combination of weather and transport models could be used to help direct emergency response following a hazardous material release. The models were used in tandem to direct the deployment of mobile sensors intended to intercept and measure tracer clouds. The MINERVE model was validated for the specific terrain of interest using April 1995 data. The capability of SCIPUFF driven by realistic three‐dimensional wind fields generated by MINERVE is demonstrated using data collected in December 1995. Copyright © 2000 Royal Meteorological Society

show abstract

Section: Minerve Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of atmospheric transport calculations over complex terrain using a mobile profiling system and rawinsondes

Cox¹,

Cogan

Sontowski³

et al. 2000

Meteorological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, while an increase in the complexity of the model generally results in an increase of the computational cost, it does not necessary imply that better results are obtained [6,18,19,26]. Indeed, linear models, such as the ones based on the Jackson and Hunt model [27] of flow over low hills, i.e., WAsP [10] and MsMicro [9], require a fraction of the computational cost of the RANS methods and are proven to be as capable to reproduce the average neutral ABL velocity fields over gentle terrains, i.e., when the slope of the surface is lower than 0.3 (values at which separation of the flow becomes highly probable) [6,9,18,19,28]. WAsP and MsMicro differ in their approach to include surface roughness and roughness changes, where the method used by WAsP appears to be slightly more evolved [9,18,29].…”

Section: Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…WAsP and MsMicro differ in their approach to include surface roughness and roughness changes, where the method used by WAsP appears to be slightly more evolved [9,18,29]. Furthermore, in comparison to microscale models based on mass conservation only, such as MINERVE [28] or WindMap [30], linear models are less dependent of the input data location and density [28]. At the opposite end, more advanced CFD approaches are generally used when the site topography is more complex, when a more detailed picture of the turbulence over a site is needed, or in order to better take into account the thermal stratification in the ABL [6,18,19,26].…”

Section: Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of Wind Flow Models for Wind Resource Assessment in Wind Energy Applications

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The objective of this work was to assess the accuracy of various coupled mesoscale-microscale wind flow modeling methodologies for wind energy applications. This is achieved by examining and comparing mean wind speeds from several wind flow modeling methodologies with observational measurements from several 50 m met towers distributed across the study area. At the mesoscale level, with a 5 km resolution, two scenarios are examined based on the Mesoscale Compressible Community Model (MC2) model: the Canadian Wind Energy Atlas (CWEA) scenario, which is based on standard input data, and the CWEA High Definition (CWEAHD) scenario where high resolution land cover input data is used. A downscaling of the obtained mesoscale wind climate to the microscale level is then performed, where two linear microscale models, i.e., MsMicro and the Wind Atlas Analysis and Application Program (WAsP), are evaluated following three downscaling scenarios: CWEA-WAsP, CWEA-MsMicro and CWEAHD-MsMicro. Results show that, for the territory studied, with a modeling approach based on the MC2 and MsMicro models, also known as Wind Energy Simulation Toolkit (WEST), the use of high resolution land cover and topography data at the mesoscale level helps reduce modeling errors for both the mesoscale and microscale models, albeit only marginally. At the microscale level, results show that the MC2-WAsP modeling approach gave substantially better results than both MC2 and MsMicro modeling approaches due to tweaked meso-micro coupling. OPEN ACCESSEnergies 2012, 5 4289

show abstract

“…COMPLEX and NOABL have been used to model multiple hilly regions in the United Kingdom, including Blashaval Hill [11,26]. MATHEW was used to model the ASCOT experiments in the California Geysers and Colorado Brush Creek [27], flow in the Appennine Mountains [28], and the EPA-RUSHIL wind-tunnel experiment [29]. WOCSS has been used to model the Los Angeles Basin [25] and the San Francisco Bay area [30].…”

Section: Diagnostic Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Flow Over Complex Terrain, Numerical Modeling Of

Lundquist¹,

Chow²

2012

Encyclopedia of Environmetrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article provides a general description of numerical modeling over complex terrain, including both diagnostic and prognostic approaches and their associated advantages and limitations. Diagnostic models solve simplified versions of the equations of motion and are widely used in the engineering community for simulations of flow over complex terrain. These models produce a description of the steady‐state flow, while requiring few inputs and being computationally efficient. Diagnostic models do not predict time evolution of flow, and are often only appropriate for terrain with small slopes. Prognostic models solve the full equations of motion and are used for both engineering and numerical weather prediction applications. Details of the implementation of prognostic models vary widely, but they are capable of producing time‐varying descriptions of the flow and handling very complex terrain with no limitations on terrain slope. These models can require detailed three‐dimensional inputs and large computational resources. Additional simplifications can reduce these requirements, but generally at the expense of functionality, such as producing a steady‐state solution or the inability to handle arbitrarily complex terrain.

show abstract

Boundary-layer flow over analytical two-dimensional hills: A systematic comparison of different models with wind tunnel data

Cited by 43 publications

References 21 publications

Comparison of atmospheric transport calculations over complex terrain using a mobile profiling system and rawinsondes

Comparison of atmospheric transport calculations over complex terrain using a mobile profiling system and rawinsondes

A Comparison of Wind Flow Models for Wind Resource Assessment in Wind Energy Applications

Flow Over Complex Terrain, Numerical Modeling Of

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About