Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-rnpqb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-26T11:22:29.610Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Impact of height heterogeneity on canopy turbulence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2017

A. M. Hamed ,
M. J. Sadowski ,
H. M. Nepf  and
L. P. Chamorro
A. M. Hamed
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Science and Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801, USA
M. J. Sadowski
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Science and Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801, USA
H. M. Nepf
Affiliation:
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139-4307, USA
L. P. Chamorro*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Science and Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801, USA Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801, USA Department of Aerospace Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801, USA
*
†Email address for correspondence: lpchamo@illinois.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The flow development above and within homogeneous and heterogeneous canopies was experimentally studied using particle image velocimetry in a refractive-index-matching channel. The experiments were designed to gain insight into the effect of height heterogeneity on the structure and spatial distribution of the turbulence. The homogeneous model (base case) is constituted of elements of height $h$ arranged in a staggered configuration; whereas the heterogeneous canopy resembled a row canopy and consisted of elements of two heights $h_{1}=h+(1/3)h$ and $h_{2}=h-(1/3)h$ alternated every two rows. Both canopies had the same density, element geometry and mean height. The flow was studied under three submergences $H/h=2$, 3 and 4, where $H$ denotes the flow depth. The experiments were performed at Reynolds number $Re_{H}\simeq 6500$, 11 300 and 12 300 and nearly constant Froude number $Fr\simeq 0.1$. Turbulence statistics complemented with quadrant analysis and proper orthogonal decomposition reveal richer flow dynamics induced by height heterogeneity. Topography-induced spatially periodic mean flows are observed for the heterogeneous canopy. Furthermore, and in contrast to the homogeneous case, non-vanishing vertical velocity is maintained across the entire length of the heterogeneous canopy with increased levels at lower submergence depths. Further alternations were induced in the magnitude and distribution of the turbulent kinetic energy, Reynolds shear stress and characteristics of the canopy mixing layer, evidencing enhanced mixing and turbulent transport for the heterogeneous canopy especially at lower submergence depths. Overall, the results indicate that heterogeneous canopies exhibit greater vertical turbulent exchange at the canopy interface, suggesting a potential for greater scalar exchange and a greater impact on channel hydraulic resistance than a homogeneous canopy of similar roughness density.

JFM classification

Geophysical and Geological Flows: River dynamics Turbulent Flows: Shear layer turbulence Turbulent Flows: Turbulent boundary layers
Type
Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 813 , 25 February 2017 , pp. 1176 - 1196
Check for updates
Copyright
© 2017 Cambridge University Press 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bai, K. & Katz, J. 2014 On the refractive index of sodium iodide solutions for index matching in PIV. Exp. Fluids 55, 1–6.Google Scholar
Bai, K., Katz, J. & Meneveau, C. 2015 Turbulent flow structures inside a canopy with complex multi-scale elements. Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 155 (3), 435–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belcher, E. S. 2005 Mixing and transport in urban areas. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A 363, 2947–2968.Google ScholarPubMed
Belcher, S. E., Harman, I. N. & Finnigan, J. J. 2011 The wind in the willows: flows in forest canopies in complex terrain. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 44, 479–504.Google Scholar
Belcher, S. E., Jerram, N. & Hunt, J. C. R. 2003 Adjustment of a turbulent boundary layer to a canopy of roughness elements. J. Fluid Mech. 488, 369–398.Google Scholar
Berkooz, G., Holmes, P. & Lumley, J. L. 1993 The proper orthogonal decomposition in the analysis of turbulent flows. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 25 (1), 539–575.Google Scholar
Blois, G., Christensen, K. T., Best, J. L., Elliot, G., Austin, J., Dutton, C., Bragg, M., Garcia, M. & Fouke, B.2012 A versatile refractive-index-matched flow facility for studies of complex flow systems across scientific disciplines. AIAA Paper 2012-0736.Google Scholar
Chahine, A., Dupont, S., Sinfort, C. & Brunet, Y. 2014 Wind-flow dynamics over a vineyard. Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 151 (3), 557–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, Z., Jiang, C. & Nepf, H. M. 2013 Flow adjustments at the leading edge of a submerged quatic canopy. Water Resour. Res. 49, 5537–5551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coceal, O. & Belcher, S. E. 2004 A canopy model of mean winds through urban areas. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 130, 1349–1372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dennison, W. C., Orth, R. J., Moore, K. A., Stevenson, J. C., Carter, V., Kollar, S., Bergstorm, P. W. & Batiuk, R. A. 1993 Assessing water quality with submersed aquatic vegetation. BioScience 43 (2), 86–94.Google Scholar
Denny, M. W., Gaylord, B. P. & Cowen, E. A 1997 Flow and flexibility ii. the roles of size and shape in determining wave forces on the bull kelp Nereocystis luetkeana . J. Expl Biol. 200, 3165–3183.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, J. T. & Uittenbogaard, R. E. 2010 Modeling the interaction between flow and highly flexible aquatic vegetation. Water Resour. Res. 46 (12), W12547.Google Scholar
Finnigan, J. 2000 Turbulence in plant canopies. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 32 (1), 519–571.Google Scholar
Fonseca, M. S. & Cahalan, J. A. 1992 A preliminary evaluation of wave attenuation by four species of seagrass. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 35, 565–576.Google Scholar
Ghisalberti, M. 2009 Obstructed shear flows: similarities across systems and scales. J. Fluid Mech. 641, 51–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamed, A. M., Kamdar, A., Castillo, L. & Chamorro, L. P. 2015 Turbulent boundary layer over 2D and 3D large scale wavy walls. Phys. Fluids 27, 106601.Google Scholar
Hawkins, C. P., Murphy, M. L., Anderson, N. H. & Wilzbach, M. A. 1983 Density of fish and salamanders in relation to riparian canopy and physical habitat in streams of the northwestern United States. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heilman, J. L., McInnes, K. J., Savage, M. J., Gesch, R. W. & Lascano, R. J. 1994 Soil and canopy energy balances in a west Texas vineyard. Agric. Forest Meteorol. 71 (1–2), 99–114.Google Scholar
Lai, C., Katul, G., Oren, R., Ellsworth, D. & Schäfer, K. 2000 Modeling CO2 and water vapor turbulent flux distributions within a forest canopy. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 105 (D21), 26333–26351.Google Scholar
Lu, S. S. & Willmarth, W. W. 1973 Measurements of the structure of the Reynolds stress in a turbulent boundary layer. J. Fluid Mech. 60 (03), 481–511.Google Scholar
Luhar, M. & Nepf, H. M. 2011 Flow-induced reconfiguration of buoyant and flexible aquatic vegetation. Limnol. Oceanogr. 56 (6), 2003–2017.Google Scholar
Luhar, M. & Nepf, H. M. 2013 From the blade scale to the reach scale: a characterization of aquatic vegetative drag. Adv. Water Resour. 51, 305–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lumley, J. 1970 Stochastic Tools in Turbulence. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Morse, A. P., Gardiner, B. A. & Marshall, B. J. 2002 Mechanisms controlling turbulence development across a forest edge. Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 103 (2), 227–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nepf, H. M. 2012 Flow and transport in regions with aquatic vegetation. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 44, 123–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nepf, H. M. & Vivoni, E. R. 2000 Flow structure in depth-limited, vegetated flow. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans 105 (C12), 28547–28557.Google Scholar
Nezu, I. & Sanjou, M. 2008 Turbulent structure and coherent motion in vegetated canopy open-channel flows. J. Hydro Environ. Res. 2, 62–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poggi, D., Porporato, A., Ridolfi, L., Albertson, J. D. & Katul, G. G. 2004 The effect of vegetation density on canopy sub-layer turbulence. Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 111 (3), 565–587.Google Scholar
Raupach, M. R., Finnigan, J. J. & Brunet, Y. 1996 Coherent eddies and turbulence in vegetation canopies: the mixing-layer analogy. Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 78 (3–4), 351–382.Google Scholar
Raupach, M. R. & Thom, A. S. 1981 Turbulence in and above plant canopies. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 13 (1), 97–129.Google Scholar
Rominger, J. T. & Nepf, H. M. 2011 Flow adjustment and interior flow associated with a rectangule porous obstruction. J. Fluid Mech. 680, 636–659.Google Scholar
Sen, M., Bhaganagar, K. & Juttijudata, V. 2007 Application of proper orthogonal decomposition (POD) to investigate a turbulent boundary layer in a channel with rough walls. J. Turbul. 8, N41.Google Scholar
Sirovich, L. 1987 Turbulence and the dynamics of coherent structures. Part I: coherent structures. Q. Appl. Maths 45 (3), 561–571.Google Scholar
Souch, C. & Grimmond, S. 2006 Applied climatology: urban climate. Prog. Phys. Geog. 30 (2), 270.Google Scholar
Tanino, Y. & Nepf, H. M. 2008 Laboratory investigation of mean drag in a random array of rigid, emergent cylinders. J. Hydraul. Engng ASCE 134, 34–41.Google Scholar
Weiss, A. & Allen, L. H. 1976 Air-flow patterns in vineyard rows. Agric. Meteorol. 16 (3), 329–342.Google Scholar
White, B. L. & Nepf, H. M. 2007 Shear instability and coherent structures in shallow flow adjacent to a porous layer. J. Fluid Mech. 593, 1–32.Google Scholar
Zhu, W., van Hout, R. & Katz, J. 2007 On the flow structure and turbulence during sweep and ejection events in a wind-tunnel model canopy. Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 124 (2), 205–233.Google Scholar