Abstract

Abstract. Surface roughness parameters, namely the roughness length and displacement height, are an integral input used to model surface fluxes. However, most models assume these parameters to be a fixed property of plant functional type and disregard the governing structural heterogeneity and dynamics. In this study, we use large-eddy simulations to explore, in silico, the effects of canopy-structure characteristics on surface roughness parameters. We performed a virtual experiment to test the sensitivity of resolved surface roughness to four axes of canopy structure: (1) leaf area index, (2) the vertical profile of leaf density, (3) canopy height, and (4) canopy gap fraction. We found roughness parameters to be highly variable, but uncovered positive relationships between displacement height and maximum canopy height, aerodynamic canopy height and maximum canopy height and leaf area index, and eddy-penetration depth and gap fraction. We also found negative relationships between aerodynamic canopy height and gap fraction, as well as between eddy-penetration depth and maximum canopy height and leaf area index. We generalized our model results into a virtual "biometric" parameterization that relates roughness length and displacement height to canopy height, leaf area index, and gap fraction. Using a decade of wind and canopy-structure observations in a site in Michigan, we tested the effectiveness of our model-driven biometric parameterization approach in predicting the friction velocity over heterogeneous and disturbed canopies. We compared the accuracy of these predictions with the friction-velocity predictions obtained from the common simple approximation related to canopy height, the values calculated with large-eddy simulations of the explicit canopy structure as measured by airborne and ground-based lidar, two other parameterization approaches that utilize varying canopy-structure inputs, and the annual and decadal means of the surface roughness parameters at the site from meteorological observations. We found that the classical representation of constant roughness parameters (in space and time) as a fraction of canopy height performed relatively well. Nonetheless, of the approaches we tested, most of the empirical approaches that incorporate seasonal and interannual variation of roughness length and displacement height as a function of the dynamics of canopy structure produced more precise and less biased estimates for friction velocity than models with temporally invariable parameters.

Highlights

  • Our ability to accurately predict mass and energy fluxes from the land surface to the atmosphere at any timescale depends on the accuracy of the surface drag parameterization (Finnigan, 2000; Mahrt, 2010)

  • We found that d was significantly affected by maximum canopy height

  • We found that ha and δe were significantly affected by hmax, LAI, and gap fraction (GF; Table 2). z0 was not found to be significantly affected by any single aspect of canopy structure investigated within this study

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Our ability to accurately predict mass and energy fluxes from the land surface to the atmosphere at any timescale depends on the accuracy of the surface drag parameterization (Finnigan, 2000; Mahrt, 2010). Maurer et al.: Large-eddy simulations of surface roughness parameter sensitivity tical distribution of wind speed These parameters are displacement height, d, and roughness length, z0. D and z0 are linear functions of site-level canopy height (h) – typically d ≈ 0.66 h (Cowan, 1968) and z0 ≈ 0.10 h (Tanner and Pelton, 1960) The accuracy of these estimates may be limited, by the dynamic nature (space and time) of canopy-structure characteristics. Estimates of the canopy-structure characteristics are limited by the typical absence of data about the vertical distribution of leaf area (Massman and Weil, 1999; Shaw and Pereira, 1982) and tree-top heights, as well as the difference between coarse model grid-cell resolution and the finer scale at which canopy-structure characteristics vary and affect roughness and momentum and flux transfer

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call