Identification and Estimation of the Period of Non-Turbulent Oscillatory Processes in the Stable Boundary layer Through Autocorrelation Functions
Keywords:Stable boundary layer. Meandering. Autocorrelation function.
The autocorrelation function of the flow speed components, measures the relationship that the speed in a certain instant, has with the speed at an earlier instant. In some conditions, in the atmospheric flow, this autocorrelation presents a low frequency oscillatory shape, presenting negative lobes. This behavior is known as meandering phenomenon and becomes prevalent in low wind conditions. The objective of this study is to compare the adjustments of autocorrelation functions, present in the literature, with trial of the experimental data of FLOOSS II experiment, for determining the meandering oscillation period. Initially, three selection criteria were used to select the windows of analysis. Among the criteria the magnitude of the wind showed the most satisfactory. The fitting curves showed that both autocorrelation functions performed well, even with a large variability of oscillation periods that were found. The great variability in the oscillation period of the meandering phenomena can be associated with the nature of the physical phenomenon that is responsible for its origin. However, this hypothesis needs confirmation.
Anfossi, D., Oettl, D., Degrazia, G., Goulart, l. (2005). An analysis of sonic anemometer observations in low wind speed conditions. Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 114(1), 179–203.
Brett, A. C., Tuller, S. E. (1991). The autocorrelation of hourly wind speed observations. Journal of Applied Meteorology, 30(6), 823–833.
Degrazia, G. A., Buligon, L., Szinvelski, C. R. P., Moor, L., Acevedo, O. C. (2014). A theoretical review of autocorrelation functions applied to high and low wind speed. Ciencia & Natura, 36(3), 101–107.
Frenkiel, F. (1953). Flow field of homogeneous turbulence. Advances in applied mechanics, 3, 61.
Kaimal, J. C., Finnigan, J. J. (1994). Atmospheric boundary layer flows: their structure and measurement. Oxford University Press.
Mahrt, L. (1999). Stratified atmospheric boundary layers. Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 90(3), 375–396.
Mahrt, L. (2007). Weak-wind mesoscale meandering in the nocturnal boundary layer. Environmental Fluid Mechanics, 7(4), 331–347.
Moor, L., Degrazia, G., Stefanello, M., Mortarini, L., Acevedo, O., Maldaner, S., Szinvelski, C., Roberti, D., Buligon, L., Anfossi, D. (2015). Proposal of a new
autocorrelation function in low wind speed conditions. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 438, 286–292.
Mortarini, L., Ferrero, E., Falabino, S., Trini Castelli, S., Richiardone, R., Anfossi, D. (2013). Low-frequency processes and turbulence structure in a perturbed boundary layer. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 139(673), 1059–1072.
Oettl, D., Goulart, A., Degrazia, G., Anfossi, D. (2005). A new hypothesis on meandering atmospheric flows in low wind speed conditions. Atmospheric Environment, 39(9), 1739–1748.
How to Cite
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.