Boundary-Layer Meteorology

, Volume 145, Issue 2, pp 329–349 | Cite as

A Method for Increasing the Turbulent Kinetic Energy in the Mellor–Yamada–Janjić Boundary-Layer Parametrization



A method for enhancing the calculation of turbulent kinetic energy in the Mellor–Yamada–Janjić planetary boundary-layer parametrization in the Weather Research and Forecasting numerical model is presented. This requires some unconventional selections for the closure constants and an additional stability dependent surface length scale. Single column model and three-dimensional model simulations are presented showing a similar performance with the existing boundary-layer parametrization, but with a more realistic magnitude of turbulence intensity closer to the surface with respect to observations. The intended application is an enhanced calculation of turbulence intensity for the purposes of a more accurate wind-energy forecast.


Boundary-layer parametrization Mellor–Yamada–Janjić scheme Turbulence closure Turbulence intensity Turbulent kinetic energy Weather Research and Forecasting model Wind energy forecasting 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Businger J, Wyngaard J, Iyumi Z, Bradley E (1971) Flux–profile relationships in the atmospheric surface layer. J Atmos Sci 28: 181–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Buzzi M, Rotach MW, Holtslag M, Holtslag AAM (2011) Evaluation of the COSMO-SC turbulence scheme in a shear-driven stable boundary layer. Meteorol Z 20: 335–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carlier J, Stanislas M (2005) Experimental study of eddy structures in a turbulent boundary layer using particle image velocimetry. J Fluid Mech 535: 143–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carson DJ, Richards PJR (1978) Modelling surface turbulent fluxes in stable conditions. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 14: 67–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Charnock H (1955) Wind stress on a water surface. Q J R Meteorol Soc 81: 639–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Csanady G (1974) Equilibrium theory of the planetary boundary layer with an inversion lid. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 6: 63–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. DeGraaff D, Eaton J (2000) Reynolds-number scaling of the flat-plate turbulent boundary layer. J Fluid Mech 422: 319–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Elliott DL (1991) Status of wake and array loss research. In: 21st American wind energy association conference: windpower 1991, Palm Springs, 24–27 Sep 1991Google Scholar
  9. EWEA (2012) The european offshore wind industry key 2011 trends and statistics.
  10. Fernholz H, Finley P (1996) The incompressible zero-pressure-gradient turbulent boundary layer: an assessment of the data. Prog Aerospace Sci 32: 245–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Galperin B, Sukoriansky S, Anderson PS (2007) On the critical Richardson number in stably stratified turbulence. Atmos Sci Let 8: 65–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Garratt JR (1987) The stably stratified internal boundary layer for steady and diurnally varying offshore flow. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 38: 369–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Holt T, Raman S (1988) A review and comparative evaluation of multi-level boundary layer parameterizations for first order and turbulent kinetic energy closure schemes. Rev Geophys 26: 761–780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hutchins N, Nickels T, Marusic I, Chong M (2009) Hot-wire spatial resolution issues in wall-bounded turbulence. J Fluid Mech 635: 103–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Janjić ZI (1990) The step-mountain coordinate: physical package. Mon Weather Rev 118: 1429–1443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Janjić Z (1994) The step-mountain eta coordinate model: further developments of the convection, viscous sublayer, and turbulence closure schemes. Mon Weather Rev 122: 927–945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Janjić Z (2002) Nonsingular implementation of the Mellor–Yamada level 2.5 scheme in the NCEP Meso model. Technical Report, National Centers for Environmental Prediction, Office Note No. 437Google Scholar
  18. Klebanoff P (1955) Characteristics of turbulence in a boundary layer with zero pressure gradient. Technical Report 1247, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  19. Kunkel G, Marusic I (2006) Study of the near-wall-turbulent region of the high-reynolds-number boundary layer using an atmospheric flow. J Fluid Mech 548: 375–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Laufer J (1954) The structure of turbulence in a fully developed pipe flow. Technical Report 1174, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  21. Luhar AK, Hurley PJ, Rayner KN (2009) Modelling near-surface low winds over land under stable conditions: sensitivity tests, flux–gradient relationships, and stability parameters. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 130: 249–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mahrt L (1998) Stratified atmospheric boundary layers and breakdown of models. J Theor Comp Fluid Dyn 11: 263–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mahrt L (1999) Stratified atmospheric boundary layers. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 90: 375–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mahrt L, Vickers D (2002) Contrasting vertical structures of nocturnal boundary layers. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 105: 351–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mellor G (1973) Analytic prediction of the properties of stratified planetary surface layers. J Atmos Sci 30: 1061–1069CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mellor G, Yamada T (1974) A hierarchy of turbulence closure models for planetary boundary layers. J Atmos Sci 31: 1791–1806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mellor GL, Yamada T (1982) Development of a turbulence closure model for geophysical fluid problems. Rev Geophys Space Phys 20: 851–875CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mulhearn P (1981) On the formation of a stably stratified internal boundary-layer by advection of warm air over a cooler sea. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 21: 247–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nakanishi M (2001) Improvement of the Mellor–Yamada turbulence closure model based on large-eddy simulation data. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 99: 349–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Neumann T, Nolopp K (2007) Three years operation of far offshore measurements at FINO1. DEWI Mag 30: 42–46Google Scholar
  31. Österlund J (1999) Experimental studies of zero pressure-gradient turbulent boundary layer flow. PhD thesis, Royal Institute of Technology, Department of Mechanics, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  32. Perry A, Abell C (1975) Scaling laws for pipe-flow turbulence. J Fluid Mech 67: 257–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Poulos GS, Blumen W, Fritts DC, Lundquist JK, Sun J, Burns SP, Nappo C, Banta R, Newsom R, Cuxart J, Terradellas E, Balsley B, Jensen M (2002) CASES-99: a comprehensive investigation of the stable nocturnal boundary layer. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 83: 555–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Skamarock WC, Klemp JB, Dudhia J, Gill DO, Barker DM, Duda MG, Huang X, Wang W, Powers J (2008) A description of the advanced research WRF version 3. Technical Report, National Center for Atmospheric Research, BoulderGoogle Scholar
  35. Stull R (1988) An introduction to boundary layer meteorology. Kluwer, Dordrecht, 666 ppGoogle Scholar
  36. Svensson G, Holtslag A, Kumar V, Mauritsen T, Steeneveld G, Angevine W, Bazile E, Beljaars A, de Bruijn E, Cheng A, Conangla L, Cuxart J, Ek M, Falk M, Freedman F, Kitagawa H, Larson V, Lock A, Mailhot J, Masson V, Park S, Pleim J, Söderberg S, Weng W, Zampieri M (2011) Evaluation of the diurnal cycle in the atmospheric boundary layer over land as represented by a variety of single-column models: The second GABLS experiment. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 140: 177–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Türk M, Emeis S (2010) The dependence of offshore turbulence intensity on wind speed. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 98: 466–471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yamada T, Mellor G (1975) A simulation of the Wangara atmospheric boundary layer data. J Atmos Sci 32: 2309–2329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Zilitinkevich S, Baklanov A (2002) Calculation of the height of the stable boundary layer in practical applications. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 105: 389–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Meteorology and Climate ResearchKarlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT)KarlsruheGermany

Personalised recommendations