Atmospheric boundary layer flows: Their structure and measurement
Atmospheric boundary layer flows: Their structure and measurement
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/bf00712396
复制
发表时间：
1995
影响因子：
4.3
通讯作者：
P. Mason
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
P. Mason
审查一本书的任务有时是容易的准确目标和作者的序言中的自白;这本书是一个例外，在这方面。作者指出，它将对大气边界中观察到的基本流动结构的描述与可用于研究它们的技术结合在一起。如此广泛的范围显然需要限定，如果能知道作者对预定读者的看法，将是有益的。我自己的判断是，一个研究生或对边界层湍流不熟悉的人，他希望为自己的测量或为更好地利用研究文献获得背景知识。我不会推荐这本书用于本科教学，也不会把它看作是观测或其他边界层结果的原始资料。对于前一种应用，则过于详细，缺乏充分的理论解释。对于后一个应用程序，它没有给出更多的选择，虽然我会尊重作者的判断，使选择一个好的，我担心引用的结果会被接受太容易。从我的疑虑开始，我必须赞扬作者试图汇集一个精心挑选和基于观测的大气边界层观点。带着一些谨慎的话，我也会真诚地推荐给一个开始观察边界层的研究人员。有几个最新的文本，以帮助这些研究人员，我毫不怀疑，将学到很多从这篇文章。通过讨论本书的内容可以最好地说明我的观点。第1章和第2章考虑平坦地形上边界层的基本性质和谱性质。重点是在陆地上的流动和在地面层的注意力限于经典的无云边界层类型，中性，稳定和对流。假设一个基本的理论背景。你必须知道为什么u，/f与中性边界层深度有关，并对对数区域的标度科普一个非常简洁的解释。更麻烦的是一些初始假设，例如使热和动量的湍流扩散率相等。我不高兴，不仅仅是语义上，在断言，因为理查森数是不是一个已知的函数的高度，它不适合作为一个稳定性参数。与此相反，莫宁-奥布霍夫长度与高度之比显然是一个合适的“稳定性”参数。在经验函数和特定的无量纲比方面，如Prandl数，作者提供了他们的最佳选择，我认为鉴于文献中的分歧，这是一个过于个人化的观点。我在快速阅读中注意到错误并不可靠，但我怀疑很少有。我对热通量相关性的奇怪行为感到困惑
The task of reviewing a book is sometimes made easy by the accurate aims and confessions in the authors' preface; this book is an exception in that respect. The authors note that it brings together a description of the basic flow structures that are observed in the atmospheric boundary with the techniques available for studying them. Such a broad ambit clearly needs qualification and it would have been helpful to know the authors' view of the intended reader. My own judgement would be a postgraduate or someone new to boundary-layer turbulence who wishes to obtain a background for either his own measurements or to enable better use of the research literature. I would not recommend this book for use in undergraduate teaching and would have misgivings about it being seen as a source book for observational or other boundary-layer results. For the former application it is much too detailed and lacks sufficient theoretical explanation. For the latter application, it fails to give more than a selection of available results, and although I would respect the authors' judgement in making that selection a good one, I am nervous that the results cited would be accepted too easily. Having started with my misgivings I must praise the authors for trying to bring together a well selected and observationally based view of the atmospheric boundary layer. With some words of caution, I would also genuinely recommend it to a researcher making a start in observations of the boundary layer. There are few up-to-date texts to help such researchers and I have no doubt that much will be learnt from this text. My view is best illustrated by discussing the contents of the book.Chapters 1 and 2 consider the basic and spectral properties of the boundary layer over flat terrain. The emphasis is on flow over land and in the surface layer with attention restricted to the classic cloud-free boundary-layer types, neutral, stable and convective. A basic theoretical background is assumed. You must know why u,/fis related to neutral boundary-layer depth, and cope with a very succinct explanation of the scaling of the logarithmic region. More bothersome are initial assumptions such as equating the turbulent diffusivities for heat and momentum. I was unhappy, not just semantically, at assertions that since the Richardson number is not a known function of height, it is unsuitable as a stability parameter. In contrast, the ratio of the Monin-Obukhov length to height is apparently a suitable" stability" parameter. In terms of empirical functions and specific nondimensional ratios such as the Prandl number, the authors offer their best choice with what I thought was an overly personal view given the divergence in the literature. I am not reliable in noting errors in quick reading but I suspect that there are few. I was puzzled by the curious behaviour of the heat flux correlation