Zhang, L.; Xin, J.; Yin, Y.; Chang, W.; Xue, M.; Jia, D.; Ma, Y. Understanding the Major Impact of Planetary Boundary Layer Schemes on Simulation of Vertical Wind Structure. Atmosphere2021, 12, 777.
Zhang, L.; Xin, J.; Yin, Y.; Chang, W.; Xue, M.; Jia, D.; Ma, Y. Understanding the Major Impact of Planetary Boundary Layer Schemes on Simulation of Vertical Wind Structure. Atmosphere 2021, 12, 777.
Zhang, L.; Xin, J.; Yin, Y.; Chang, W.; Xue, M.; Jia, D.; Ma, Y. Understanding the Major Impact of Planetary Boundary Layer Schemes on Simulation of Vertical Wind Structure. Atmosphere2021, 12, 777.
Zhang, L.; Xin, J.; Yin, Y.; Chang, W.; Xue, M.; Jia, D.; Ma, Y. Understanding the Major Impact of Planetary Boundary Layer Schemes on Simulation of Vertical Wind Structure. Atmosphere 2021, 12, 777.
Abstract
The accuracy of wind field simulation and prediction is one of the most significant parameters in the field of atmospheric science and wind energy. Limited by the observation data, there are few researches on wind energy development. A 3D Doppler wind lidar (DWL) providing the high-vertical-resolution wind data over the urban complex underlying surface in February 2018 was employed to evaluated the accuracy of vertical wind field simulation systematically for the first time. 11 PBL schemes of the Weather Research and Forecasting Model (WRF) were employed in simulation. The model results were evaluated in groups separated by weather (sunny days, haze days and windy days), observation height layers, and various observation wind speeds. The test results presented that the vertical layer altitude of the observation point position was the most important factor. The simulation is fairly well at a height of 1000-2000m, as most of the relative mean bias of wind speed and wind direction are less than 20% and 6% respectively. Below 1000 m, the wind speed and direction biases are about 30%-150% m.s-1 and 6%-30% respectively. Moreover, when the observed wind speed was lower than 5 m.s-1, the bias were usually large, and the wind speed relative mean bias is up to 50-300%. In addition, the accuracy of simulated wind profile is better in 10-15m.s-1 than other speed ranges, and is better up 1000m than below 1000m in the boundary layer. We see that the WRF boundary layer schemes have different applicability to different weather conditions. The WRF boundary layer schemes have significant differences in wind field simulation with larger error under the complex topography. A PBL scheme is not likely to maintain its advantages in the long term under different conditions including altitude and weather conditions.
Keywords
3D Doppler Wind Lidar; planetary boundary layer; vertical wind; wind speed; wind direction
Subject
Environmental and Earth Sciences, Atmospheric Science and Meteorology
Copyright:
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
