1983
DOI: 10.1007/bf00239611
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Molecular dissipation of turbulent fluctuations in the convective mixed layer part I: Height variations of dissipation rates

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

4
15
0

Year Published

1983
1983
2001
2001

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
4
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This decrease seems mostly realistic since the horizontal scales of w decrease rapidly with height progressing downwards below z/% N 0.25. Our present values of dimensionless dissipation are similar to those of Guillemet et al (1983) which lay near 0.65 at z/h = 0.2 and decreased to about 0.25 at z/h = 1. The present TKE balance agrees well with that of Lenschow et al (1980) except that term IV here does not become positive again in the upper mixed layer.…”
Section: The Turbulence Kinetic Energy(tke)budgetsupporting
confidence: 76%
“…This decrease seems mostly realistic since the horizontal scales of w decrease rapidly with height progressing downwards below z/% N 0.25. Our present values of dimensionless dissipation are similar to those of Guillemet et al (1983) which lay near 0.65 at z/h = 0.2 and decreased to about 0.25 at z/h = 1. The present TKE balance agrees well with that of Lenschow et al (1980) except that term IV here does not become positive again in the upper mixed layer.…”
Section: The Turbulence Kinetic Energy(tke)budgetsupporting
confidence: 76%
“…Our data show a rapid decrease of E* with height, up to ZlzisO.2, then an almost constant value at about 0.24, right up to z G 0.8 Zi which is the highest level in our data set. In this way, Guillemet et al (1983), and Caughey and Palmer (1979) have obtained similarly constant results, but with large values. For the bulk of the mid-section of the mixed layer, the data of Guillemet et al are between 0.35 and 0.65, while the data of Caughey and Palmer are between about 0.51 and 0.77, as shown in Figure 6(a).…”
Section: Peak Wavelengthsmentioning
confidence: 53%
“…However, our value of A, = 0.5, obtained by eye-fitting the data points, is smaller than the 0.9 value given by Guillemet et al (1983).…”
Section: Peak Wavelengthsmentioning
confidence: 65%
See 2 more Smart Citations