Underestimation of Monostatic Sodar Measurements in Complex Terrain

Boundary-Layer Meteorology

Volumn 143, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 97-106

  Behrens, Paul ^a   O'Sullivan, J ^a   Archer, R ^a   Bradley, S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Complex terrain; Flow curvature; Remote sensing; Sodar; Wind energy

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT; COMPLEX TERRAINS; COMPUTATIONAL FLUID; COMPUTATIONAL MODEL; DYNAMICAL SIMULATION; FLOW CURVATURE; INDUSTRY STANDARDS; MONOSTATIC; NEW ZEALAND; OPENFOAM; POTENTIAL FLOW MODEL; SODAR; SODAR MEASUREMENTS;

COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; POTENTIAL FLOW; REMOTE SENSING; WIND EFFECTS; WIND POWER;

LANDFORMS;

ANEMOMETER; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPLEX TERRAIN; COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS; FLOW MODELING; MEASUREMENT METHOD; NUMERICAL MODEL; REMOTE SENSING; SODAR; SOFTWARE; TOPOLOGY; WIND VELOCITY;

NEW ZEALAND;

EID: 84857998544     PISSN: 00068314     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10546-011-9665-6     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Antoniou I, Jørgensen HE (2003) Comparing SODAR to cup anemometer measurements. In: European wind energy conference and exhibition, Madrid, pp 1-9.
2. Behrens P, Bradley S, Wiens T (2010) A multi-sodar approach to wind profiling. J Atmos Ocean Technol 27(7): 1165-1174.
3. Bingol F, Mann J, Foussekis D (2009) Conically scanning lidar error in complex terrain. Meteorol Z 18(2): 189-195.
4. Blocken B, Stathopoulos T, Carmeliet J (2007) CFD simulation of the atmospheric boundary layer: wall function problems. Atmos Environ 41: 238-252.
5. Bowen A, Mortensen N (2004) WAsP prediction errors due to site orography. Technical report, Risø.
6. Bradley S (2007) Atmospheric acoustic remote sensing. Taylor and Frances CRC Press, Florida.
7. Bradley S (2008) Wind speed errors for LIDARs and SODARs in complex terrain. In: IOP Conference. Series: Earth and environmental science, Roskilde, Denmark, vol 1, pp 1-7.
8. Bradley SG, Antoniou I, von Hünerbein S, Kindler D, de Noord M, Jørgensen HE (2005) SODAR calibration for wind energy applications (final reporting on WP3, EU WISE project NNE5-2001-297). Technical report, Salford University. http://www. acoustics. salford. ac. uk/res/vonhunerbein/AntoniouTuC1. pdf.
9. Bradley S, Perrot Y, Behrens P, Oldroyd A (2010) Myres Hill LIDAR/SODAR/Mast intercomparison revisited. In: International symposium for the advancement of boundary layer remote sensing, Paris, pp 1-4.
10. Clive P, Chindurza I, Ravey I, Bass J, Boyle R, Jones P, Lang S, Bradley S, Hay L, Oldroyd A, Stickland M (2008) The Myres Hill remote sensing intercomparison study: preliminary results. In: Proceedings of the 14th international symposium for the advancement of boundary layer remote sensing, Roskilde, Denmark, pp 1-10.
11. Hargreaves D, Wright N (2007) On the use of the κ-ε model in commercial CFD software to model the neutral atmospheric boundary layer. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 95: 355-369.
12. Jasak H, Jemcov A (2007) OpenFOAM: a C++ library for complex physics simulations. In: Terze Z, Lacor C (eds) International workshop on coupled methods in numerical dynamics. IUC, IUC, Coatia, p 291.
13. Launder B, Spalding D (1974) The numerical computation of turbulent flows. Comput Method Appl Mech 3: 269-289.
14. O'Sullivan J, Archer R, Flay R (2010) Consistent boundary conditions for atmospheric boundary layer flows. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 99(1): 65-77.
15. Quinlan R, Wahl D (2010) Experience with LIDAR performance in complex terrain. In: New Zealand wind energy conference, Palmerston North, 30 pp.
16. Richards P, Hoxey R (1993) Appropriate boundary conditions for computational wind engineering models using the κ-ε turbulence model. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 46: 145-153.
17. Streeter V, Wylie E (1981) Fluid mechanics, 1st edn. McGraw-Hill Ryerson Ltd, Toronto, p 549.
18. Tritton D (1988) Physical fluid dynamics. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 544.