the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Investigation of non-equilibrium turbulence decay in the atmospheric boundary layer using Doppler lidar measurements
Abstract. This work concerns analysis of turbulence in the Atmospheric Boundary Layer (ABL) short before and after the sunset. Based on a large set of the Doppler lidar measurements at rural and urban sites we analyze frequency spectra of vertical wind at different heights and show that they increasingly deviate from the −5/3 Kolmogorov’s prediction in the measured low-wavenumber part of the inertial range. We find that before the sunset the integral length scales tend to decrease with time. These findings contrast with a classical model of equilibrium decay of isotropic turbulence, which predicts that the scaling exponent should remain constant and equal to −5/3 and the integral length scale should increase in time. We explain the observations using recent theories of non-equilibrium turbulence. The presence of non-equilibrium suggests that classical parametrization schemes fail to predict turbulence statistics short before the sunset. By comparing the classical and the non-equilibrium models we conclude that the former may underestimate the dissipation rate of turbulence kinetic energy in the initial stages of decay.
- Preprint
(8139 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-1209', Lakshmi Kantha, 16 Jun 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-1209/egusphere-2024-1209-RC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Marta Waclawczyk, 31 Aug 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-1209/egusphere-2024-1209-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Marta Waclawczyk, 31 Aug 2024
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-1209', Anonymous Referee #2, 25 Jun 2024
Review of "Investigation of non-equilibrium turbulence decay in the atmospheric boundary layer using Doppler lidar measurements"
This is a well-written manuscript containing thought-provoking results. However, there are several fundamental issues which need to be addressed before the paper can be accepted.
- The authors borrowed newly developed non-equilibrium theories from turbulence literature and applied them to boundary layer turbulence. In the original theoretical development, the buoyancy effects are not included. So, the authors neglected the effects of stratification altogether (see their comment on page 11). In a transitional boundary layer, the impacts of atmospheric stability cannot be neglected. In the revised manuscript, some efforts must be made to include the effects of stability in the derivations [e.g., Eq. (8)].
- The authors briefly mentioned 3rd-order structure functions in the manuscript. I would like to see evidence that the Lidar data conform to the 4/5th law (Karman-Howarth equation) prior to evening transition.
- Give at least a few examples of EDR estimated via second-order and third-order structure functions and compare them against Equations (1) and (2). Please clearly show the structure functions and fitted slopes in the revised manuscript. [Add these materials in Section 5.3].
- Elaborate on the (relative) accuracy of longitudinal and vertical velocity estimation from Lidar observations. Give references.
- Do the results hold for the longitudinal velocity component? Why not?
- The empirical Equation (1) is conventionally used in conjunction with TKE. What is the justification for using it only for the vertical velocity scale? One cannot invoke isotropy here.
- Figure 4 (left panel): in the entire convective boundary layer, the inertial-range slope is close to -2. Why? Can we trust the observational data?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1209-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Marta Waclawczyk, 31 Aug 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-1209/egusphere-2024-1209-AC2-supplement.pdf
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-1209', Lakshmi Kantha, 16 Jun 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-1209/egusphere-2024-1209-RC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Marta Waclawczyk, 31 Aug 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-1209/egusphere-2024-1209-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Marta Waclawczyk, 31 Aug 2024
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-1209', Anonymous Referee #2, 25 Jun 2024
Review of "Investigation of non-equilibrium turbulence decay in the atmospheric boundary layer using Doppler lidar measurements"
This is a well-written manuscript containing thought-provoking results. However, there are several fundamental issues which need to be addressed before the paper can be accepted.
- The authors borrowed newly developed non-equilibrium theories from turbulence literature and applied them to boundary layer turbulence. In the original theoretical development, the buoyancy effects are not included. So, the authors neglected the effects of stratification altogether (see their comment on page 11). In a transitional boundary layer, the impacts of atmospheric stability cannot be neglected. In the revised manuscript, some efforts must be made to include the effects of stability in the derivations [e.g., Eq. (8)].
- The authors briefly mentioned 3rd-order structure functions in the manuscript. I would like to see evidence that the Lidar data conform to the 4/5th law (Karman-Howarth equation) prior to evening transition.
- Give at least a few examples of EDR estimated via second-order and third-order structure functions and compare them against Equations (1) and (2). Please clearly show the structure functions and fitted slopes in the revised manuscript. [Add these materials in Section 5.3].
- Elaborate on the (relative) accuracy of longitudinal and vertical velocity estimation from Lidar observations. Give references.
- Do the results hold for the longitudinal velocity component? Why not?
- The empirical Equation (1) is conventionally used in conjunction with TKE. What is the justification for using it only for the vertical velocity scale? One cannot invoke isotropy here.
- Figure 4 (left panel): in the entire convective boundary layer, the inertial-range slope is close to -2. Why? Can we trust the observational data?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1209-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Marta Waclawczyk, 31 Aug 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-1209/egusphere-2024-1209-AC2-supplement.pdf
Data sets
Turbulence properties for June-September period at rural and urban environment Maciej Karasewicz et al. https://doi.org/10.18150/LSLM10
Doppler lidar vertical wind profiles from Rzecin during POLIMOS 2018 Pablo Ortiz-Amezcua and Lucas Alados-Arboledas https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8181343
Custom collection of doppler lidar data from Warsaw between 1 Jun and 30 Sep 2023. ACTRIS Cloud remote sensing data centre unit (CLU) P. Ortiz-Amezcua et al. https://doi.org/10.60656/9d58dca11d6e4122
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
340 | 124 | 105 | 569 | 16 | 14 |
- HTML: 340
- PDF: 124
- XML: 105
- Total: 569
- BibTeX: 16
- EndNote: 14
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1