Atmosphere (대기)

Korean Meteorological Society (한국기상학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Performance Comparison of an Urban Canopy Model under Different Meteorological Conditions

기상 조건에 따른 도시 캐노피 모형의 성능 비교

  • Ryu, Young-Hee (School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Seoul National University) ;
  • Baik, Jong-Jin (School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Seoul National University) ;
  • Lee, Sang-Hyun (Department of Atmospheric Science, Kongju National University)
  • 유영희 (서울대학교 지구환경과학부) ;
  • 백종진 (서울대학교 지구환경과학부) ;
  • 이상현 (공주대학교 대기과학과)
  • Received : 2012.10.24
  • Accepted : 2012.12.01
  • Published : 2012.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The performances of the Seoul National University Urban Canopy Model (SNUUCM) under different meteorological conditions (clear, cloudy, and rainy conditions) in summertime are compared using observation dataset obtained at an urban site. The daily-averaged net radiation, sensible heat flux, and storage heat flux are largest in clear days and smallest in rainy days, but the daily-averaged latent heat flux is similar among clear, cloudy, and rainy days. That is, the ratio of latent heat flux to net radiation increases in order of clear, cloudy, and rainy conditions. In general, the performance of the SNUUCM is better in clear days than in cloudy or rainy days. However, the performance in simulating sensible heat flux in clear days is as poor as that in rainy days. For all the meteorological conditions, the performance in simulating latent heat flux is worst among the performances in simulating net radiation, sensible heat flux, and latent heat flux. The normalized mean error for latent heat flux is largest in rainy days in which the relative importance of latent heat flux in the surface energy balance becomes greatest among the three conditions. This study suggests that improvements to the parameterization of processes that are related to latent heat flux are particularly needed.

Keywords

References

  1. Arnfield, A. J., 2003: Two decades of urban climate research: A review of turbulence, exchanges of energy and water, and the urban heat island. Int. J. Climatol., 23, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.859
  2. Ek, M. B., K. E. Mitchell, Y. Lin, E. Rogers, P. Grunmann, V. Koren, G. Gayno, and J. D. Tarpley, 2003: Implementation of Noah land surface model advances in the National Centers for Environmental Prediction operational mesoscale Eta model. J. Geophys. Res., 108, 8851, doi:10.1029/2002JD003296.
  3. Grimmond, C. S. B. and T. R. Oke, 1999: Heat storage in urban areas: Local-scale observations and evaluation of a simple model. J. Appl. Meteor., 38, 922-940. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1999)038<0922:HSIUAL>2.0.CO;2
  4. Grimmond, C. S. B. and Coauthors, 2010: The International Urban Energy Balance Models Comparison Project: First results from phase 1. J. Appl. Meteor. Climatol, 49, 1268-1292. https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JAMC2354.1
  5. Grimmond, C. S. B. and Coauthors, 2011: Initial results from Phase 2 of the international urban energy balance model comparison. Int. J. Climatol., 31, 244-272. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.2227
  6. Kot, S. C. and Y. Song, 1998: An improvement of the Louis scheme for the surface layer in an atmospheric modelling system. Bound.-Layer Meteor., 88, 239-254. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1001119329423
  7. Kusaka, H., H. Kondo, Y. Kikegawa, and F. Kimura, 2001: A simple single-layer urban canopy model for atmospheric models: Comparison with multi-layer and slab models. Bound.-Layer Meteor., 101, 329-358. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019207923078
  8. Lee, S.-H. and S.-U. Park, 2008: A vegetated urban canopy model for meteorological and environmental modelling. Bound.-Layer Meteor., 126, 73-102.
  9. Lee, S.-H., 2011: Further development of the vegetated urban canopy model including a grass-covered surface parametrization and photosynthesis effects. Bound.-Layer Meteor., 140, 315-342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-011-9603-7
  10. Martilli, A., A. Clappier, and M. W. Rotach, 2002: An urban surface exchange parameterisation for mesoscale models. Bound.-Layer Meteor., 104, 261-304. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016099921195
  11. Masson, V., 2000: A physically-based scheme for the urban energy budget in atmospheric models. Bound.-Layer Meteor., 94, 357-397. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1002463829265
  12. MathWorks, 2012: Curve Fitting ToolboxTM: User's Guide (R2012b) . [Available online at ht tp://www.mathworks.com/help/pdf_doc/curvefit/curvefit.pdf].
  13. Offerle, B., C. S. B. Grimmond, and K. Fortuniak, 2005: Heat storage and anthropogenic heat flux in relation to the energy balance of a central European city centre. Int. J. Climatol., 25, 1405-1419. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.1198
  14. Rotach, M. W. and Coauthors, 2005: BUBBLE - An urban boundary layer meteorology project. Theor. Appl. Climatol., 81, 231-261. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-004-0117-9
  15. Rowley, F. B., A. B. Algren, and J. L. Blackshaw, 1930: Surface conductances as affected by air velocity, temperature, and character of surface. ASHRAE Trans., 36, 429-446.
  16. Ryu, Y.-H., J.-J. Baik, and S.-H. Lee, 2011: A new singlelayer urban canopy model for use in mesoscale atmospheric models. J. Appl. Meteor. Climatol., 50, 1773-1794. https://doi.org/10.1175/2011JAMC2665.1
  17. Shepherd, J. M., 2005: A review of current investigations of urban-induced rainfall and recommendations for the future. Earth Interact., 9, 1-27.