Investigation of the pressure–strain-rate correlation and pressure fluctuations in convective and near neutral atmospheric surface layers

The pressure–strain-rate correlation and pressure fluctuations in convective and near neutral atmospheric surface layers are investigated. Their scaling properties, spectral characteristics, the contributions from the different source terms in the pressure Poisson equation and the effects of the wal...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of fluid mechanics 2018-11, Vol.854, p.88-120
Hauptverfasser: Ding, Mengjie, Nguyen, Khuong X., Liu, Shuaishuai, Otte, Martin J., Tong, Chenning
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 120
container_issue
container_start_page 88
container_title Journal of fluid mechanics
container_volume 854
creator Ding, Mengjie
Nguyen, Khuong X.
Liu, Shuaishuai
Otte, Martin J.
Tong, Chenning
description The pressure–strain-rate correlation and pressure fluctuations in convective and near neutral atmospheric surface layers are investigated. Their scaling properties, spectral characteristics, the contributions from the different source terms in the pressure Poisson equation and the effects of the wall are investigated using high-resolution (up to $2048^{3}$ ) large-eddy simulation fields and through spectral predictions. The pressure–strain-rate correlation was found to have the mixed-layer and surface-layer scaling in the strongly convective and near neutral atmospheric surface layers, respectively. Its apparent surface-layer scaling in the moderately convective surface layer is due to the slow variations of the mixed-layer contribution, and is an inherent problem for single-point statistics in a multi-scale surface layer. In the strongly convective surface layer the pressure spectrum has an approximate $k^{-5/3}$ scaling range for small wavenumbers ( $kz\ll 1$ ) due to the turbulent–turbulent contribution, and does not follow the surface-layer scaling, where $k$ and $z$ are the horizontal wavenumber and the distance from the surface respectively. The pressure–strain-rate cospectrum components have a $k^{-1}$ scaling range, consistent with our prediction using the surface layer parameters. It is dominated by the buoyancy contribution. Thus the anisotropy in the surface layer is due to the energy redistribution caused by the density fluctuations of the large eddies, rather than the turbulent–turbulent (inertial) effects. In the near neutral surface layer, the turbulent–turbulent and rapid contributions are primarily responsible for redistribution of energy from the streamwise velocity component to the vertical and spanwise components, respectively. The pressure–strain-rate cospectra peak near $kz\sim 1$ , and have some similarities to those in the strongly convective surface layer for $kz\ll 1$ . For the moderately convective surface layer, the pressure–strain-rate cospectra change signs at scales of the order of the Obukhov length, thereby imposing it as a horizontal length scale in the surface layer. This result provides strong support to the multipoint Monin–Obukhov similarity recently proposed by Tong & Nguyen (J. Atmos. Sci., vol. 72, 2015, pp. 4337–4348). We further decompose the pressure into the free-space (infinite domain), the wall reflection and the harmonic contributions. In the strongly convective surface layer, the free-space contribution to t
doi_str_mv 10.1017/jfm.2018.576
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2216719094</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_jfm_2018_576</cupid><sourcerecordid>2216719094</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c302t-a51d2d81738f4d804bd648ea36c31248bd3e07a674951bddba6d7b8906a57fc43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkLtOwzAUhi0EEqWw8QCWWEmwHcdORlRxqVSJBWbLsZ3WVW7YTqVu7Iy8IU-CexEsLOcM5zvf0fkBuMYoxQjzu3XdpgThIs05OwETTFmZcEbzUzBBiJAEY4LOwYX3a4Rwhko-AZ_zbmN8sEsZbN_BvoZhZeDgjPejM98fXz44abvEyWCg6p0zzYGUnf7FYN2MKoz7gYe2i2C0qmA3Zs91RrpYxqhqoAxt74eVcVbBuFxLZWAjt8b5S3BWy8abq2OfgrfHh9fZc7J4eZrP7heJyhAJicyxJrrAPCtqqgtEK81oYWTGVIYJLSqdGcQl47TMcaV1JZnmVVEiJnNeK5pNwc3BO7j-fYzfi3U_ui6eFIRgxnGJyh11e6CU6713phaDs610W4GR2MUtYtxiF7eIcUc8PeKyrZzVS_Nn_XfhB1rphy4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2216719094</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Investigation of the pressure–strain-rate correlation and pressure fluctuations in convective and near neutral atmospheric surface layers</title><source>Cambridge Journals</source><creator>Ding, Mengjie ; Nguyen, Khuong X. ; Liu, Shuaishuai ; Otte, Martin J. ; Tong, Chenning</creator><creatorcontrib>Ding, Mengjie ; Nguyen, Khuong X. ; Liu, Shuaishuai ; Otte, Martin J. ; Tong, Chenning</creatorcontrib><description>The pressure–strain-rate correlation and pressure fluctuations in convective and near neutral atmospheric surface layers are investigated. Their scaling properties, spectral characteristics, the contributions from the different source terms in the pressure Poisson equation and the effects of the wall are investigated using high-resolution (up to $2048^{3}$ ) large-eddy simulation fields and through spectral predictions. The pressure–strain-rate correlation was found to have the mixed-layer and surface-layer scaling in the strongly convective and near neutral atmospheric surface layers, respectively. Its apparent surface-layer scaling in the moderately convective surface layer is due to the slow variations of the mixed-layer contribution, and is an inherent problem for single-point statistics in a multi-scale surface layer. In the strongly convective surface layer the pressure spectrum has an approximate $k^{-5/3}$ scaling range for small wavenumbers ( $kz\ll 1$ ) due to the turbulent–turbulent contribution, and does not follow the surface-layer scaling, where $k$ and $z$ are the horizontal wavenumber and the distance from the surface respectively. The pressure–strain-rate cospectrum components have a $k^{-1}$ scaling range, consistent with our prediction using the surface layer parameters. It is dominated by the buoyancy contribution. Thus the anisotropy in the surface layer is due to the energy redistribution caused by the density fluctuations of the large eddies, rather than the turbulent–turbulent (inertial) effects. In the near neutral surface layer, the turbulent–turbulent and rapid contributions are primarily responsible for redistribution of energy from the streamwise velocity component to the vertical and spanwise components, respectively. The pressure–strain-rate cospectra peak near $kz\sim 1$ , and have some similarities to those in the strongly convective surface layer for $kz\ll 1$ . For the moderately convective surface layer, the pressure–strain-rate cospectra change signs at scales of the order of the Obukhov length, thereby imposing it as a horizontal length scale in the surface layer. This result provides strong support to the multipoint Monin–Obukhov similarity recently proposed by Tong &amp; Nguyen (J. Atmos. Sci., vol. 72, 2015, pp. 4337–4348). We further decompose the pressure into the free-space (infinite domain), the wall reflection and the harmonic contributions. In the strongly convective surface layer, the free-space contribution to the pressure–strain-rate correlation is dominated by the buoyancy part, and is the main cause of the surface-layer anisotropy. The wall reflection enhances the anisotropy for most of the surface layer, suggesting that the pressure source has a large coherence length. In the near neutral surface layer, the wall reflection is small, suggesting a much smaller source coherence length. The present study also clarifies the understanding of the role of the turbulent–turbulent pressure, and has implications for understanding the dynamics and structure as well as modelling the atmospheric surface layer.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-1120</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1469-7645</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/jfm.2018.576</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Anisotropy ; Atmospheric boundary layer ; Atmospheric models ; Behavior ; Buoyancy ; Coherence length ; Components ; Computer simulation ; Correlation ; Dynamics ; Eddies ; Fluctuations ; Fluid mechanics ; JFM Papers ; Large eddy simulation ; Length ; Modelling ; Oceanic eddies ; Physics ; Poisson equation ; Pressure ; Reflection ; Scaling ; Statistical methods ; Strain rate ; Studies ; Surface layers ; Velocity ; Wavelengths</subject><ispartof>Journal of fluid mechanics, 2018-11, Vol.854, p.88-120</ispartof><rights>2018 Cambridge University Press</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c302t-a51d2d81738f4d804bd648ea36c31248bd3e07a674951bddba6d7b8906a57fc43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c302t-a51d2d81738f4d804bd648ea36c31248bd3e07a674951bddba6d7b8906a57fc43</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-3086-5027</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0022112018005761/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,314,780,784,27924,27925,55628</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ding, Mengjie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nguyen, Khuong X.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Shuaishuai</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Otte, Martin J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tong, Chenning</creatorcontrib><title>Investigation of the pressure–strain-rate correlation and pressure fluctuations in convective and near neutral atmospheric surface layers</title><title>Journal of fluid mechanics</title><addtitle>J. Fluid Mech</addtitle><description>The pressure–strain-rate correlation and pressure fluctuations in convective and near neutral atmospheric surface layers are investigated. Their scaling properties, spectral characteristics, the contributions from the different source terms in the pressure Poisson equation and the effects of the wall are investigated using high-resolution (up to $2048^{3}$ ) large-eddy simulation fields and through spectral predictions. The pressure–strain-rate correlation was found to have the mixed-layer and surface-layer scaling in the strongly convective and near neutral atmospheric surface layers, respectively. Its apparent surface-layer scaling in the moderately convective surface layer is due to the slow variations of the mixed-layer contribution, and is an inherent problem for single-point statistics in a multi-scale surface layer. In the strongly convective surface layer the pressure spectrum has an approximate $k^{-5/3}$ scaling range for small wavenumbers ( $kz\ll 1$ ) due to the turbulent–turbulent contribution, and does not follow the surface-layer scaling, where $k$ and $z$ are the horizontal wavenumber and the distance from the surface respectively. The pressure–strain-rate cospectrum components have a $k^{-1}$ scaling range, consistent with our prediction using the surface layer parameters. It is dominated by the buoyancy contribution. Thus the anisotropy in the surface layer is due to the energy redistribution caused by the density fluctuations of the large eddies, rather than the turbulent–turbulent (inertial) effects. In the near neutral surface layer, the turbulent–turbulent and rapid contributions are primarily responsible for redistribution of energy from the streamwise velocity component to the vertical and spanwise components, respectively. The pressure–strain-rate cospectra peak near $kz\sim 1$ , and have some similarities to those in the strongly convective surface layer for $kz\ll 1$ . For the moderately convective surface layer, the pressure–strain-rate cospectra change signs at scales of the order of the Obukhov length, thereby imposing it as a horizontal length scale in the surface layer. This result provides strong support to the multipoint Monin–Obukhov similarity recently proposed by Tong &amp; Nguyen (J. Atmos. Sci., vol. 72, 2015, pp. 4337–4348). We further decompose the pressure into the free-space (infinite domain), the wall reflection and the harmonic contributions. In the strongly convective surface layer, the free-space contribution to the pressure–strain-rate correlation is dominated by the buoyancy part, and is the main cause of the surface-layer anisotropy. The wall reflection enhances the anisotropy for most of the surface layer, suggesting that the pressure source has a large coherence length. In the near neutral surface layer, the wall reflection is small, suggesting a much smaller source coherence length. The present study also clarifies the understanding of the role of the turbulent–turbulent pressure, and has implications for understanding the dynamics and structure as well as modelling the atmospheric surface layer.</description><subject>Anisotropy</subject><subject>Atmospheric boundary layer</subject><subject>Atmospheric models</subject><subject>Behavior</subject><subject>Buoyancy</subject><subject>Coherence length</subject><subject>Components</subject><subject>Computer simulation</subject><subject>Correlation</subject><subject>Dynamics</subject><subject>Eddies</subject><subject>Fluctuations</subject><subject>Fluid mechanics</subject><subject>JFM Papers</subject><subject>Large eddy simulation</subject><subject>Length</subject><subject>Modelling</subject><subject>Oceanic eddies</subject><subject>Physics</subject><subject>Poisson equation</subject><subject>Pressure</subject><subject>Reflection</subject><subject>Scaling</subject><subject>Statistical methods</subject><subject>Strain rate</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Surface layers</subject><subject>Velocity</subject><subject>Wavelengths</subject><issn>0022-1120</issn><issn>1469-7645</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNptkLtOwzAUhi0EEqWw8QCWWEmwHcdORlRxqVSJBWbLsZ3WVW7YTqVu7Iy8IU-CexEsLOcM5zvf0fkBuMYoxQjzu3XdpgThIs05OwETTFmZcEbzUzBBiJAEY4LOwYX3a4Rwhko-AZ_zbmN8sEsZbN_BvoZhZeDgjPejM98fXz44abvEyWCg6p0zzYGUnf7FYN2MKoz7gYe2i2C0qmA3Zs91RrpYxqhqoAxt74eVcVbBuFxLZWAjt8b5S3BWy8abq2OfgrfHh9fZc7J4eZrP7heJyhAJicyxJrrAPCtqqgtEK81oYWTGVIYJLSqdGcQl47TMcaV1JZnmVVEiJnNeK5pNwc3BO7j-fYzfi3U_ui6eFIRgxnGJyh11e6CU6713phaDs610W4GR2MUtYtxiF7eIcUc8PeKyrZzVS_Nn_XfhB1rphy4</recordid><startdate>20181110</startdate><enddate>20181110</enddate><creator>Ding, Mengjie</creator><creator>Nguyen, Khuong X.</creator><creator>Liu, Shuaishuai</creator><creator>Otte, Martin J.</creator><creator>Tong, Chenning</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7U5</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0W</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3086-5027</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20181110</creationdate><title>Investigation of the pressure–strain-rate correlation and pressure fluctuations in convective and near neutral atmospheric surface layers</title><author>Ding, Mengjie ; Nguyen, Khuong X. ; Liu, Shuaishuai ; Otte, Martin J. ; Tong, Chenning</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c302t-a51d2d81738f4d804bd648ea36c31248bd3e07a674951bddba6d7b8906a57fc43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Anisotropy</topic><topic>Atmospheric boundary layer</topic><topic>Atmospheric models</topic><topic>Behavior</topic><topic>Buoyancy</topic><topic>Coherence length</topic><topic>Components</topic><topic>Computer simulation</topic><topic>Correlation</topic><topic>Dynamics</topic><topic>Eddies</topic><topic>Fluctuations</topic><topic>Fluid mechanics</topic><topic>JFM Papers</topic><topic>Large eddy simulation</topic><topic>Length</topic><topic>Modelling</topic><topic>Oceanic eddies</topic><topic>Physics</topic><topic>Poisson equation</topic><topic>Pressure</topic><topic>Reflection</topic><topic>Scaling</topic><topic>Statistical methods</topic><topic>Strain rate</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Surface layers</topic><topic>Velocity</topic><topic>Wavelengths</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ding, Mengjie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nguyen, Khuong X.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Shuaishuai</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Otte, Martin J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tong, Chenning</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Mechanical &amp; Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy &amp; Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>DELNET Engineering &amp; Technology Collection</collection><jtitle>Journal of fluid mechanics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ding, Mengjie</au><au>Nguyen, Khuong X.</au><au>Liu, Shuaishuai</au><au>Otte, Martin J.</au><au>Tong, Chenning</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Investigation of the pressure–strain-rate correlation and pressure fluctuations in convective and near neutral atmospheric surface layers</atitle><jtitle>Journal of fluid mechanics</jtitle><addtitle>J. Fluid Mech</addtitle><date>2018-11-10</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>854</volume><spage>88</spage><epage>120</epage><pages>88-120</pages><issn>0022-1120</issn><eissn>1469-7645</eissn><abstract>The pressure–strain-rate correlation and pressure fluctuations in convective and near neutral atmospheric surface layers are investigated. Their scaling properties, spectral characteristics, the contributions from the different source terms in the pressure Poisson equation and the effects of the wall are investigated using high-resolution (up to $2048^{3}$ ) large-eddy simulation fields and through spectral predictions. The pressure–strain-rate correlation was found to have the mixed-layer and surface-layer scaling in the strongly convective and near neutral atmospheric surface layers, respectively. Its apparent surface-layer scaling in the moderately convective surface layer is due to the slow variations of the mixed-layer contribution, and is an inherent problem for single-point statistics in a multi-scale surface layer. In the strongly convective surface layer the pressure spectrum has an approximate $k^{-5/3}$ scaling range for small wavenumbers ( $kz\ll 1$ ) due to the turbulent–turbulent contribution, and does not follow the surface-layer scaling, where $k$ and $z$ are the horizontal wavenumber and the distance from the surface respectively. The pressure–strain-rate cospectrum components have a $k^{-1}$ scaling range, consistent with our prediction using the surface layer parameters. It is dominated by the buoyancy contribution. Thus the anisotropy in the surface layer is due to the energy redistribution caused by the density fluctuations of the large eddies, rather than the turbulent–turbulent (inertial) effects. In the near neutral surface layer, the turbulent–turbulent and rapid contributions are primarily responsible for redistribution of energy from the streamwise velocity component to the vertical and spanwise components, respectively. The pressure–strain-rate cospectra peak near $kz\sim 1$ , and have some similarities to those in the strongly convective surface layer for $kz\ll 1$ . For the moderately convective surface layer, the pressure–strain-rate cospectra change signs at scales of the order of the Obukhov length, thereby imposing it as a horizontal length scale in the surface layer. This result provides strong support to the multipoint Monin–Obukhov similarity recently proposed by Tong &amp; Nguyen (J. Atmos. Sci., vol. 72, 2015, pp. 4337–4348). We further decompose the pressure into the free-space (infinite domain), the wall reflection and the harmonic contributions. In the strongly convective surface layer, the free-space contribution to the pressure–strain-rate correlation is dominated by the buoyancy part, and is the main cause of the surface-layer anisotropy. The wall reflection enhances the anisotropy for most of the surface layer, suggesting that the pressure source has a large coherence length. In the near neutral surface layer, the wall reflection is small, suggesting a much smaller source coherence length. The present study also clarifies the understanding of the role of the turbulent–turbulent pressure, and has implications for understanding the dynamics and structure as well as modelling the atmospheric surface layer.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/jfm.2018.576</doi><tpages>33</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3086-5027</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0022-1120
ispartof Journal of fluid mechanics, 2018-11, Vol.854, p.88-120
issn 0022-1120
1469-7645
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2216719094
source Cambridge Journals
subjects Anisotropy
Atmospheric boundary layer
Atmospheric models
Behavior
Buoyancy
Coherence length
Components
Computer simulation
Correlation
Dynamics
Eddies
Fluctuations
Fluid mechanics
JFM Papers
Large eddy simulation
Length
Modelling
Oceanic eddies
Physics
Poisson equation
Pressure
Reflection
Scaling
Statistical methods
Strain rate
Studies
Surface layers
Velocity
Wavelengths
title Investigation of the pressure–strain-rate correlation and pressure fluctuations in convective and near neutral atmospheric surface layers
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T13%3A45%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Investigation%20of%20the%20pressure%E2%80%93strain-rate%20correlation%20and%20pressure%20fluctuations%20in%20convective%20and%20near%20neutral%20atmospheric%20surface%20layers&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20fluid%20mechanics&rft.au=Ding,%20Mengjie&rft.date=2018-11-10&rft.volume=854&rft.spage=88&rft.epage=120&rft.pages=88-120&rft.issn=0022-1120&rft.eissn=1469-7645&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/jfm.2018.576&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2216719094%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2216719094&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_jfm_2018_576&rfr_iscdi=true