高级搜索
唐玉琪, 麻炳欣, 王晓峰, 岳彩军, 谈建国. 2020: 形态学方法在上海城市下垫面空气动力学参数估算中的适用性分析. 暴雨灾害, 39(4): 382-391. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-9045.2020.04.008
引用本文: 唐玉琪, 麻炳欣, 王晓峰, 岳彩军, 谈建国. 2020: 形态学方法在上海城市下垫面空气动力学参数估算中的适用性分析. 暴雨灾害, 39(4): 382-391. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-9045.2020.04.008
TANG Yuqi, MA Bingxin, WANG Xiaofeng, YUE Caijun, TAN Jianguo. 2020: Analysis on applicability of morphology methods in the estimation of aerodynamic parameter of urban areas in Shanghai. Torrential Rain and Disasters, 39(4): 382-391. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-9045.2020.04.008
Citation: TANG Yuqi, MA Bingxin, WANG Xiaofeng, YUE Caijun, TAN Jianguo. 2020: Analysis on applicability of morphology methods in the estimation of aerodynamic parameter of urban areas in Shanghai. Torrential Rain and Disasters, 39(4): 382-391. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-9045.2020.04.008

形态学方法在上海城市下垫面空气动力学参数估算中的适用性分析

Analysis on applicability of morphology methods in the estimation of aerodynamic parameter of urban areas in Shanghai

  • 摘要: 基于上海市奉贤、青浦和宝山三座梯度观测铁塔半径1 000 m区域的下垫面粗糙元几何形态参数,使用四种形态学方法(Rt,Ra,Ma,Ka)进行空气动力学参数估算,分析各方法计算结果及其对计算参数的敏感性,并以基于铁塔梯度观测数据的动力学计算方法(Lw)结果为参考,进行对比分析。结果表明:(1)在本文研究区域内,形态学方法与动力学方法计算结果在数值和分布趋势上都有差异。其中,形态学方法的零平面位移显著小于动力学方法,Ka方法结果最大,与动力学方法也最为接近;动力学与形态学方法的粗糙度差异相对较小,Ma和Ka与动力学方法结果较为接近。(2)通过对四种形态学方法对计算参数的敏感性的对比,Ka方法对建筑高度及其变化率、建筑排列方式等最敏感。首先,Ka方法计算结果与zHmaxσHzH的相关性均较高,其中zd对建筑高度的非均匀分布更敏感,z0则与zH的相关关系更显著。其次,在本文研究区域中,Ka方法随λFλP变化最显著,即对建筑排列方式最敏感。(3)通过与动力学方法的对比,认为Ka方法的方案一最适用于以本文研究区域为代表的、上海典型城市下垫面的动力学参数估算。此外,在观测资料、形态学数据较少的情况下,Rt方法可作替代方案进行计算和分析。

     

    Abstract: The aerodynamic parameters at Fengxian, Qingpu and Baoshan sites with a radius of 1 km from the gradient observations at gradient towers in Shanghai are estimated and analyzed by 4 morphometric methods (Rt, Ra, Ma, Ka) using surface morphometric parameters. The results estimated by different morphometric methods and the sensitivity to morphometric parameters are then analyzed and compared with aerodynamic parameters calculated by dynamic method (Lw) based on gradient observation of the tower. The results are as follows. (1) Both the values and the distribution of the aerodynamic parameters calculated by morphometric methods are different compared to the ones by dynamic method. Firstly, the value of zero-plane displacement calculated by morphometric method is smaller than the one by Lw method, while the one by Ka method is closest to Lw method among 4 morphometric methods. The differences in roughness length by dynamic and morphological methods are relatively small, and the results of Ma and Ka are similar to those of Lw. (2) By comparing the sensitivity of the four morphological methods to the related input parameters, we conclude that the Ka method is the most sensitive to building height, building height change rate and building layout. Firstly, the aerodynamic parameters by Ka method is highly sensitive to zHmax, σH and zH, where zd is more sensitive to the non-uniform distribution of building height, while z0 is more sensitive to zH. Secondly, the Ka method is highly sensitive to λF and λP, that is, sensitive to the building layout in the studied areas. (3) By comparison with the dynamic method results, the scheme 1 of Ka method (Ka_M1) is considered to be the most suitable morphometric method for estimation of aerodynamic parameters of the typical city of Shanghai studied here. In addition, the Rt method can be used as an alternative to the calculation and analysis of aerodynamic parameters in the case of lacking observation and morphological data.

     

/

返回文章
返回