Reply to comments by Wood, Hewer and Belcher on 'Stably Stratified Boundary–Layer Flow over Low Hills: a Comparison of Model Results and Field Data' (1997)
I appreciate Wood, Hewer and Belcher's interest in my paper. Their comments on the paper focus on two subjects: the concepts and formula used to define the middle-layer height, h sub(m) , and an argument that wavenumber-dependent scaling should be used instead of bulk scaling in stable boundary...
Saved in:
| Published in | Boundary-layer meteorology Vol. 88; no. 2; pp. 333 - 340 |
|---|---|
| Main Author | |
| Format | Journal Article |
| Language | English |
| Published |
Dordrecht
Springer Nature B.V
01.08.1998
|
| Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
| Summary: | I appreciate Wood, Hewer and Belcher's interest in my paper. Their comments on the paper focus on two subjects: the concepts and formula used to define the middle-layer height, h sub(m) , and an argument that wavenumber-dependent scaling should be used instead of bulk scaling in stable boundary-layer flow over hills. The original definition of the middle layer is that part of the effectively inviscid outer region, where the velocity shear (velocity curvature) has a dominant effect on the (vertical) velocity perturbation (see Hunt et al., 1988a, for neutrally stratified flow, and 1988b, for stably stratified flow, referred to here as HLR and HRB respectively). |
|---|---|
| Bibliography: | SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-1 content type line 14 ObjectType-Article-2 content type line 23 |
| ISSN: | 0006-8314 1573-1472 |
| DOI: | 10.1023/A:1017157514402 |