1 / 13

Content: Motivation Observations Fetch Conditions Corrections Surface Energy Budget Advection

Regional scale flux observations at Cabauw Fred C. Bosveld Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute With contributions of Miranda Braam , Kasper Gerritsen , Claudia Brauwer (Wageningen University) and Jerome Schalkwijk (Delft University). Content: Motivation Observations

trapper
Download Presentation

Content: Motivation Observations Fetch Conditions Corrections Surface Energy Budget Advection

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. Regional scale flux observations at CabauwFred C. BosveldRoyal Netherlands Meteorological InstituteWith contributions of Miranda Braam, Kasper Gerritsen, Claudia Brauwer (Wageningen University) and Jerome Schalkwijk (Delft University) • Content: • Motivation • Observations • Fetch Conditions • Corrections • Surface Energy Budget • Advection • Conclusions EMS2011 September 12-16, Berlin 1

  2. Consortium van 8 instituten: http://www.cesar-observatory.nl http://www.cesar-database.nl EMS2011 September 12-16, Berlin 2

  3. Regional scale fluxes -> Motivation • Surface fluxes at the scale of atmospheric model gridcel • Surface fluxes at the scale of satellite pixel • Surface Energy budget closure studies • Evaluation of advection in models • Cabauw serves as reference case since it is relatively homogeneous and very flat EMS2011 September 12-16, Berlin 3

  4. Flux levels 180 m 100 m 60 m 3 m Regional scale fluxes -> Observation Water budget of the polder Extra LArge Scintillometer (XLAS) over a 10 km path at 60 m height Cabauw 213 m meteorologival tower T,q, CO2 fluxes and concentrations Gill R3 sonic anemo/thermometer Licor 7500 H2O/CO2 sensor EMS2011 September 12-16, Berlin 4

  5. 180m 100m 60m XLAS 10 km 3m Tower Water Budget Regional scale fluxes -> Fetch conditions 2 km EMS2011 September 12-16, Berlin 5

  6. N Sonic E Sonic B Regional scale fluxes->Corrections - Mast interference EMS2011 September 12-16, Berlin 6

  7. Based on Kaimal (1972) surface layer spectra Extended by Schalkwijk et al (2010) 180 m 100 m 60 m 3 m Regional scale fluxes -> Corrections • - Standard corrections for eddy correlation technique • Density, Flow distortion, sensor seperation • High accuracy needed • Calibration issues • - Low frequency flux contribution • Extention of surface layer relations U = 5 m/s T=600 s EMS2011 September 12-16, Berlin 7

  8. Regional scale fluxes -> Surface fluxes Surface flux Advective flux Storage flux Local flux EMS2011 September 12-16, Berlin 8

  9. Regional scale fluxes -> Surface energy budget • Imbalance is independent • of height of flux • observation. • Mean diurnal variation of 8 comparable days • Surface total heat flux (THF=H+LE) estimated from different heights. • Available Energy (Qav=Qnet-G) EMS2011 September 12-16, Berlin 9

  10. Surface and 60 m sensible heat fluxes No constant flux layer Deriving fluxes from XLASat 60 m height and 10 km path • No constant flux layer in the morning • ? Does CT2 at 60 m scales with: • Surface sensible heat flux (s) • Local sensible heat flux at 60 m (l) • Braam et al. (subm. BLM) CT2 from similarity functions with surface and local scaling, compared with CT2 derived directly from XLAS and from sonic at 60 m. EMS2011 September 12-16, Berlin 10

  11. Regional scale fluxes -> Advection (Diurnal variation) Sensible heat flux April-June 2008 Difference in surface flux between 60 – 100 m and 100 – 180 m Some indication of higher local latent heat flux. CO2 Latent heat flux EMS2011 September 12-16, Berlin 11

  12. 60-100m 100-180m CO2 Regional scale fluxes -> Advection(Wind direction) Difference in surface flux between 60 – 100 m and 100 – 180 m April-June 2008 daytime 30 min values and wind direction class mean values Some signature visible Sensible heat flux Latent heat flux EMS2011 September 12-16, Berlin 12

  13. Conclusions • The Cabauw 213 m meteorological tower gives a unique opportunity to perform tower based regional scale flux observations. • The site is flat and rather homogeneous. • Special care for low frequency flux loss correction • Surface energy imbalance independent of measuring height • Scaling of scintillometer at 60 m (outside constant flux layer) investigated • Slightly significant signals in advection found both in time of day and in wind direction. EMS2011 September 12-16, Berlin 13

More Related