The Effect of Scale on the Applicability of Taylor’s Frozen Turbulence Hypothesis in the Atmospheric Boundary Layer
- 1.5k Downloads
Taylor’s frozen turbulence hypothesis is the central assumption invoked in most experiments designed to investigate turbulence physics with time resolving sensors. It is also frequently used in theoretical discussions when linking Lagrangian to Eulerian flow formalisms. In this work we seek to quantify the effectiveness of Taylor’s hypothesis on the field scale using water vapour as a passive tracer. A horizontally orientated Raman lidar is used to capture the humidity field in space and time above an agricultural region in Switzerland. High resolution wind speed and direction measurements are conducted simultaneously allowing for a direct test of Taylor’s hypothesis at the field scale. Through a wavelet decomposition of the lidar humidity measurements we show that the scale of turbulent motions has a strong influence on the applicability of Taylor’s hypothesis. This dependency on scale is explained through the use of dimensional analysis. We identify a ‘persistency scale’ that can be used to quantify the effectiveness of Taylor’s hypothesis, and present the accuracy of the hypothesis as a function of this non-dimensional length scale. These results are further investigated and verified through the use of large-eddy simulations.
KeywordsAtmospheric boundary layer Humidity Raman lidar Taylor’s frozen turbulence hypothesis
The authors would like to thank the Swiss National Science Foundation (project no. 200021-107910/1, 200021_120238/1, 2008–2011) and the Mobile Information Communication System (MICS) for their support of this research.
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.
- Bahraminasab A, Niry MD, Davoudi J, Tabar MRR, Masoudi AA, Sreenivassan KR (2008) Taylor’s frozen-flow hypothesis in Bergers turbulence. Phys Rev E 77(6):Art No. 065302Google Scholar
- Beare RJ, MacVean MK, Holtslag AAM, Cuxart J, Esau I, Golaz JC, Jimenez MA, Khairoutdinov M, Kosovic B, Lewellen D, Lund TS, Lundquist JK, McCabe A, Moene AF, Noh Y, Raasch S, Sullivan P (2006) An intercomparison of large-eddy simulations of the stable boundary layer. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 118(2): 247–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Froidevaux M, Higgins CW, Simeonov V, Ristori P, Pardyjak E, Serikov I, Parlange MB (2012) A new Raman lidar to measure water vapor in the atmospheric boundary layer. Adv Water Res (under review)Google Scholar
- Higgins CW, Parlange MB, Meneveau C (2004) The heat flux and the temperature gradient in the lower atmosphere. Geophys Res Lett 31(22):Art. No. L22105Google Scholar
- Patton N, Horst ET, Sullivan P, Lenschow D, Oncley S, Brown W, Burns S, Guenther A, Held A, Karl T, Mayor S, Rizzo L, Spuler S, Sun J, Turnipseed A, Allwine E, Edburg S, Lamb B, Avissar R, Calhoun R, Kleissl J, Massman W, Paw-U K, Weil J (2011) The canopy horizontal array turbulence study (CHATS). Bull Am Meteoreol Soc 92:593–611Google Scholar
- Pope SB (2000) Turbulent flows. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK 806 ppGoogle Scholar
- Tennekes H, Lumley JL (1972) A first course in turbulence. MIT Press, Cambridge, USA, 300 ppGoogle Scholar