1 / 11

Learning from Existing and Developing Test Beds

Learning from Existing and Developing Test Beds. OFCM Challenges of Urban Test Beds 10 th GMU Conference on Atmospheric Transport and Dispersion Modeling Walter Bach Army Research Office 2 August 2006. Acknowledgments. Will Pendergrass – UrbaNet Bruce Hicks – UrbaNet

bert-terry
Download Presentation

Learning from Existing and Developing Test Beds

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Learning from Existing and Developing Test Beds OFCM Challenges of Urban Test Beds 10th GMU Conference on Atmospheric Transport and Dispersion Modeling Walter Bach Army Research Office 2 August 2006

  2. Acknowledgments • Will Pendergrass – UrbaNet • Bruce Hicks – UrbaNet • Ken Crawford – Oklahoma City Urban Micronet • David Kingsmill – NOAA Hydro-Meteorological Test Bed • Jim Anderson – AWS WeatherBug • Maria Pirone – Private sector involvement • Many Others

  3. Community • Community Attention • There are problems ! • Air Quality (ozone, emissions, health) • Public & private safety • Public & private transportation • Urban flooding • WMD • Severe weather – snow, ice, heat, cold, • Tailor the approach to the problems • Community Cooperation • Governmental Agencies • Emergency Services • Public Education • Each Community is different

  4. Purpose / Objectives • Clear objectives for each Test Bed • KISS • Must serve multiple users • Long term • Attainable objectives • Community impact • Users impact • Science impact

  5. Designs • Build the test bed incrementally • Can’t cover all scales • Can’t solve all the problems • Urban Test Beds are measurement driven • Forecast models have difficulty with urban scales • Motions are highly stochastic • Surface features (local & region) • Use in place processing where possible • Use robust wireless data transmission

  6. Observations • QA/QC • Maintenance • Calibration • Precision of measurement • Multiple time & space scales • Highly variable wind statistics • Roof tops can work • Look above canopy – through BL • Provide for Campaigns ( IOP’s)

  7. Correlation of U-components with National Arboretum 7-27-06 12:30 NRL DC EMA DOE NAS

  8. Correlation of U-components with National Arboretum 7-27-06 12:45 NRL DC EMA DOE NAS

  9. Communications • With user communities – joint production and feedback of new products • With science communities – R&D needs being met? developments, testing • With public – Newspapers, Radio –TV, Internet • With education – schools, libraries

  10. Research • Measurements to study the whole boundary layer • Data assimilation in surface and sub-canopy layer. • Correlation lengths / times among network elements • Mixing heights • Scales really represented by measurements • How well does the network satisfy its objectives

  11. Conclusions • The Urban Test Bed serves many masters in many different ways. • Community awareness and involvement are crucial to establishing the test bed. • It can always be improved • Beneficiaries must commit to support the development and maintenance of the test bed. • User and Science driven; Community benefit

More Related