几种典型地表粗糙度计算方法的比较研究

doi:10.11821/yj2007050004

地理研究 ›› 2007, Vol. 26 ›› Issue (5): 887-896.doi: 10.11821/yj2007050004

几种典型地表粗糙度计算方法的比较研究

周艳莲^1,2, 孙晓敏¹, 朱治林¹, 温学发¹, 田静^1,2, 张仁华¹

1. 中国科学院地理科学与资源研究所生态系统网络观测与模拟重点试验室,北京 100101;
2. 中国科学院研究生院,北京 100049

收稿日期:2006-11-13 修回日期:2007-05-15 出版日期:2007-09-25 发布日期:2007-09-25
作者简介:周艳莲(1980-),女,湖北人,博士研究生。GIS专业。 *通讯作者 : 孙晓敏,研究员。主要从事地表通量观测与尺度转换研究。E-mail:sunxm@igsnrr.ac.cn
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金资助项目(40471099)

Comparative research on four typical surface roughness length calculation methods

ZHOU Yan-lian^1,2, SUN Xiao-min¹, ZHU Zhi-lin¹, WEN Xue-fa¹, TIAN Jing^1,2, ZHANG Ren-hua¹

1. Key Laboratory of Ecosystem Network Observation and Modeling, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research,CAS, Beijing 100101, China;
2. Graduate University of the CAS, Beijing 100049, China

Received:2006-11-13 Revised:2007-05-15 Online:2007-09-25 Published:2007-09-25
Supported by:
国家自然科学基金资助项目(40471099)

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 本文分别利用最小二乘拟合迭代法、牛顿迭代法、TVM法和Martano法计算2003年长白山森林地表粗糙度。结果表明,Martano法计算结果偏小,其他三种方法结果基本一致。不确定性分析表明,Martano法的不确定性与参与计算的数据量有关。拟合迭代法和牛顿迭代法的不确定性在于,通常假设u_*不随观测高度而变化,而实际u_*随观测高度变化。若相邻两个观测高度之间的u_*变化1％,地表粗糙度计算误差8.3%。TVM法由于参数C₁的选取范围为0.9~1.05,引起地表粗糙度不确定性平均值为29.9%。经计算得到长白山森林在各种大气层结条件下的地表粗糙度,拟合迭代法得到的2003年稳定、中性和不稳定条件下的地表粗糙度年平均值分别为2.642、2.103和1.616m。

关键词: 地表粗糙度, 森林下垫面, 计算方法比较, 不确定性分析, 大气稳定度

Abstract: There are four typical surface roughness length calculation methods, which are iterative method by least-square fit, Newton iterative method, Temperature Variance Method (TVM method) and a method proposed by Martano. The former two methods need wind speed and temperature profiles in several levels, while the latter two methods use three-dimensional sonic anemometer data in a single level. In this paper, the surface roughness length in various atmospheric stratifications over forest underlying in Changbai Mountains Experimental Station is calculated by the four methods respectively, with wind speed and temperature profiles and three-dimensional sonic anemometer data in 2003. Discrepancy among the four methods and uncertainty of each method are analyzed. The results indicate that, except Martano method, there is minor difference between surface roughness lengths calculated by the other three methods, while roughness length calculated by Martano method is obviously much smaller. By uncertainty analysis of Martano method, it is found out that smaller roughness length calculated by Martano method is probably related to data amount, and calculation results change obviously with data amount. Otherwise, by making uncertainty analysis for the other three methods, it is found out that as for iterative method by least-square fit and Newton iterative method, calculation roughness length is influenced by friction velocity u_*, and if u_* changes 1% between two neighborhood measurement heights, the calculated roughness length would change by 8.3%. As for TVM method, parameter of C₁ changes in such a certain range from 0.9 to 1.05 that the calculated roughness length changes by about 29.9%. By calculating surface roughness length in various atmospheric stratifications with four methods, it is verified that surface roughness length changes with atmospheric stratifications. Surface roughness length in unstable stratification is the smallest, the one in stable stratification is the highest, and in the neutral stratification is medium. Also in this paper specific values in various stratifications are calculated, The results are 2.642, 2.103 and 1.616m for stable, neutral and unstable stratification roughness length, respectively.

Key words: surface roughness length, forest underlying, comparison for calculation methods, uncertainty analysis, atmospheric stratification

周艳莲, 孙晓敏, 朱治林, 温学发, 田静, 张仁华. 几种典型地表粗糙度计算方法的比较研究[J]. 地理研究, 2007, 26(5): 887-896.

ZHOU Yan-lian, SUN Xiao-min, ZHU Zhi-lin, WEN Xue-fa, TIAN Jing, ZHANG Ren-hua. Comparative research on four typical surface roughness length calculation methods[J]. GEOGRAPHICAL RESEARCH, 2007, 26(5): 887-896.

参考文献

[1] 陈镜明.植物与大气间的湍流交换——方法介绍研究状况综述.地理研究,1988,7(3):89~102.

[2] 孙卫国,刘树华.农田植被上方湍流通量输送特征分析.南京气象学院学报,1998,21(2):251~257.

[3] Takagi K,Akira Miyata,Harazono Y,et al.An alternative approach to determining zero-plane displacement, and its application to a lotus paddy field.Agricultural and Forest Meteorology,2003,115:173~181.

[4] Dolman A J.Estimates of roughness length and zero plane displacement for a foliated and non-foliated oak canopy.Agriculture and Forest Meteorology,1986,36:241~248.

[5] 赵晓松,关德新,吴家兵,等.长白山阔叶红松林的零平面位移和粗糙度.生态学杂志,2004,23(5):84~88.

[6] DeBruin H A R,Moore C J.Zero-plane displacement and roughness length for tall vegetation derived from a simple mass conservation hypothesis.Boundary Layer Meteorology,1985,31:39~49.

[7] LO A K.On the determination of zero-plane displacement and roughness length for flow over forest canopies.Boundary-Layer Meteorology,1990,51:255~268.

[8] 刘和平,刘树华,朱廷曜,等.森林冠层空气动力学参数的确定.北京大学学报(自然科学版),1997,33(4):522~538.

[9] Rotach M W.Determination of the zero plane displacement in an urban environment.Boundary-layer Meteorology,1994,67:187~193.

[10] 张宏升,陈家宜.非单一水平均匀下垫面空气动力学参数的确定.应用气象学报,1997,8(3):310~315.

[11] Martano P.Estimation of surface roughness length and displacement height from single-level sonic anemometer data.Journal of Applied Meteorology,2000,39:708~715.

[12] 高志球,卞林根,逯昌贵,等.城市下垫面空气动力学参数的估算.应用气象学报,2002,13:26~33.

[13] 周艳莲,孙晓敏,朱治林,等.几种不同下垫面地表粗糙度动态变化及其对通量机理模型模拟的影响.中国科学,D辑,2006,36(增刊Ⅰ ):244~254.

[14] 苗曼倩,朱超群,季劲钧.近地层相似理论适用的分析研究.气象学报,1997,55(2):210~218.

[15] Prueger J H,Kustas W P,Hipps L E,et al.Aerodynamic parameters and sensible heat flux estimates for a semi-arid ecosystem.Journal of Arid Environments,2004,57:87~100.

[16] Monteith J L. Principles of Environmental Physics.London: Edward Arnold, 1973.89.

几种典型地表粗糙度计算方法的比较研究

Comparative research on four typical surface roughness length calculation methods

PDF (PC)

赞

可视化

被引次数

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 1

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0