首页|期刊导航|大气科学|湍流相干结构与通量附加项对白天地表能量平衡的影响

湍流相干结构与通量附加项对白天地表能量平衡的影响OA

Effects of Turbulent Coherent Structures and an Additional Flux Term on the Diurnal Surface Energy Balance

中文摘要英文摘要

涡动相关法的不足是导致地表能量不平衡的重要原因.本文对文献中提出的能显著提升涡动相关法计算精度,并能使地表能量实现平衡的大涡平均法与Durand法展开研究,在白天通过 5组试验对比研究了两者的异同、综合效应与改进方法.结果发现:(1)白天地表能量闭合水平与序列长度有一定关系,序列长度过长,闭合水平变差;过短,闭合水平则不一致,两者之间存在一个转折点.在此转折点长度上,闭合水平可达最优.(2)原始的能量闭合率(Energy balance ratio,简称EBR)为 0.80,能量残差(Residual,简称Res)为 64.9 W m−2,占可用能量的 23.8%,远未平衡.(3)考虑大涡平均法后,EBR提高了 0.18,达到 0.98,Res降低到可用能量的 5.3%(14.5 W m−2),达到平衡.(4)考虑Durand法后,EBR提高了 0.15,达到 0.95,Res降低到 25.1 W m−2,占可用能量的 9.2%,效果逊于大涡平均法.(5)既考虑大涡平均法、又考虑Durand法后,EBR提高到 1.17,Res降低到−35.1 W m−2,严重过闭合.分析发现,严重过闭合的原因是Durand法的感热附加项在白天过度累加了气体膨胀做功项所致.(6)去除Durand法的感热附加项这一累加部分,只考虑其潜热附加项,并同时考虑大涡平均法,结果可使EBR达到 1.0,Res降低到只占可用能量 3.2%(8.7 W m−2)的理想闭合状况.分析发现,大涡平均法是实现地表能量闭合的主导因素.

The limitations of the eddy covariance method contribute substantially to surface energy imbalance.This paper evaluates two existing approaches(large-eddy averaging method and the Durand method)for improving the computational accuracy of the eddy covariance method and enhancing surface energy balance.Through five sets of daytime experiments,their similarities,differences,comprehensive effects,and improvement strategies of the two methods were comparatively studied.Results reveal the following:(1)the level of diurnal surface energy closure is related to the sequence length.If the sequence length is too long,the closure level deteriorates;if it is too short,the closure level becomes inconsistent.Thus,a turning point exists between the two extremes,at which an optimal closure level can be achieved.(2)The original EBR(energy balance ratio)is 0.80,with an energy Res(residual)of 64.9 W m−2,accounting for 23.8%of the available energy,indicating a severe imbalance.(3)After considering the large-eddy averaging method,the EBR increases by 0.18 and the Res decreases to 14.5 W m−2(representing 5.3%of the available energy),thereby achieving balance.(4)After considering the Durand method,the EBR increases by 0.15,and the Res decreases to 25.1 W m−2,accounting for 9.2%of the available energy.This effectiveness is inferior to that of the large-eddy averaging method.(5)When considering both methods,the EBR increases to 1.17,and the Res decreases to −35.1 W m−2,resulting in severe over-closure.Subsequent analysis reveals that this over-closure is due to the excessive accumulation of the additional sensible-heat term in the Durand method during the day.(6)By removing the accumulation part and only considering the additional latent-heat term while applying both methods,the EBR can reach 1.0,and the Res can be reduced to 8.7 W m−2,accounting for only 3.2%of the available energy,thereby achieving an ideal closure state.Further analysis confirms that the large-eddy averaging method is the dominant factor in achieving surface energy closure.

赵建华;张强;梁芸;隆霄;韩晖;牛丽娟

中国气象局兰州干旱气象研究所甘肃省干旱气候变化与减灾重点实验室,兰州 730020中国气象局兰州干旱气象研究所甘肃省干旱气候变化与减灾重点实验室,兰州 730020兰州区域气候中心,兰州 730020兰州大学大气科学学院,兰州 730000中国气象局兰州干旱气象研究所甘肃省干旱气候变化与减灾重点实验室,兰州 730020张掖国家气候观象台,张掖 734000

天文与地球科学

白天地表能量平衡大涡平均法Durand法

Daytime surface energy balanceLarge eddy averaging methodDurand method

《大气科学》 2026 (1)

111-121,11

气象能力提升联合研究专项23NLTSZ008,国家自然科学基金项目42230611、41375019,甘肃省自然科学基金项目22JR5RA746、22JR5RA748 Funded by Joint Research Project on Meteorological Capacity Enhancement(Grant 23NLTSZ008),National Natural Science Foundation of China(Grants 42230611,41375019),Gansu Provincial Natural Science Foundation(Grants 22JR5RA746,22JR5RA748)

10.3878/j.issn.1006-9895.2501.24074

评论