ESTIMATING THE MONIN-OBUKHOV LENGTH IN

THE STABLE BOUNDARY LAYER FOR

DISPERSION CALCULATIONS

A. VENKATRAM
Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Air Resources Branch, Toronto, Canada

(Received in final form 11 April, 1980)

Abstract. Analysis of data collected during the Prairie Grass, Kansas and Minnesota experiments reveals
the following empirical relationship between the Monin-Obukhov length L and the friction velocity u*:

L=Aui, A=1.1x103sZm-r.

This result combined with the formulation for the height of the stable boundary layer h suggested by
Zilitinkevich (1972) leads to
hccuit/‘f+

where f is the Coriolis parameter. Data from the Minnesota study (Caughey et al., 1979) provide ample
support for this expression.
These empirical equations for L and h are useful for routine dispersion estimates during stable
conditions.

1. Introduction
There is a great deal of evidence (e.g., Horst, 1979) to indicate that Lagrangian
similarity theory yields good estimates of concentrations associated with near-
surface releases.The theory requires the similarity variables U* and L (and zO),which
cannot be derived from routine meteorological measurements. Typically, the vel-
ocity and temperature at a single height, say 10 m, constitute the information
available for dispersion estimates. In this note we suggest an empirical method to
compute u* and L in the stable boundary layer from this limited information.

2. Data Analysis
The Monin-Obukhov length is defined by

where u* is the surface friction velocity, Q. is the surface heat flux, k is the von
Karman constant and g/7’, is the buoyancy parameter. Obviously, L is highly
correlated with u*. To test the extent of this relationship, we plotted L against u*
using data collected in three experiments. Details of these experiments can be found
elsewhere (Caughey et&., 1979; Barad, 1958; Izumi, 1971). We will refer to them as
the Kansas, Minnesota and Prairie Grass data. L and u* for the Prairie Grass data
were extracted from a report by Horst et al. (1979) who derived these variables from
velocity and temperature profiles collected during the experiment.

Boundary-Layer Meteorology 19 (1980) 481-485. OOOS-8314/80/0194-0481$00.75

Copyright @ 1980 by D. ReidelPublishing Co., Dordrecht, Holland, and Boston, U.S.A.
482 A. VENKATRAM

0 PRAIRIE GRASS
!- A MINNESOTA
6- + KANSAS
s-
4-

3-

2-

102-
S-
;-
6-
L(m) 5-
4-

3-

2-

IO’ -
S-
;-
6-
J-
4-

3-

z-

II9 I 1 I I,,,,, , I t Ill,,, -I

10-E 2 3 4 S 6 7 6914’ 2 3 4 5 6 76611 00
u,(m/s)

Fig. 1. Variation of L with U* for data collected during the Prairie Grass, Kansas and Minnesota
experiments (stable conditions).

Figure 1 shows the results. It is clear that there is a definite one-to-one relationship
between L and u*. Specifically the analysis indicates that
L = 1.1 x lo3 L& . (2)
The variation of L for a given U* is not small everywhere. However, in the absence of
any information on Qo, we believe that Equation (2) gives an acceptable estimate of
L for dispersion applications.
To understand the possible reason for Equation (2), let us rewrite (1) in terms of
T%= - Qo/u,:

L=- To& (3)

&T, ’
We see from Equation (3) that the only way (2) can make sense is that there is some
mechanism in the stable boundary layer which appears to keep the T* variation
within a very small range. Note that (2) suggests that T* = 0.08 C. This means that
there is a positive correlation between Q0 and u,; an increase in u* results in an
increase in the downward heat flux into the ground. At the present time, we are
unable to offer a better explanation for this relationship between Qo and u*.
 ESTIMATING THE MONIN-OBUKHOV LENGTH 483

3. Consequences of Equation (2)

Consider the velocity profile in the surface stable layer:

u(z)
-+ _4 +f; (4)
u* ( 20 >
where .zois the roughness length and /3 = 4.7. We usually know the wind speed u (2,)
at a certain height z,. Let us assume that we have some idea of zo. We can now
readily show that this is all the information we need to derive L and u*. Using
L = Au: and a little algebra, Equation (3) can be reduced to

u; - c&4u* + c&l: =0 (5)

where

and
k
C
DN = In (z/zo) ’

Solving for u* we get

Note from Equation (6) that the theory breaks down if u < 2uo/Cgg. To get an idea
of this critical wind speed, let us compute u. and CD, for z. = 0.01 m and z, = 10 m.
Using Equations (5a) and (5b) we find that u has to be greater than 3.1 m s-l for (6)
to hold. At this critical wind speed, ZJ*attains the low value of 0.08 m s-l. We can
speculate that at these low levels of surface shear, the similarity relationship for &,
does not hold at z, = 10 m which is greater than the corresponding L of 6.8 m. In
view of the empirical nature of the relationship just presented, it is not useful to
pursue the physical interpretation of the results.
In a recent paper, Caughey et&. (1979) showed that measured heights of the stable
boundary layer were consistent with the formulation of Zilitinkevich (1972):
h cc(u*L/f)“’ . (7)
Our empirical equation for L suggeststhat h should be proportional to uz”. Figure 2
shows the variation of h as a function of u* for the Minnesota data (Caughey et al.,
1979). The best-fit line in the figure is h = 2.4 x lo3 u:‘~, a result which is consistent
with the postulated behaviour of L. This empirical equation for h should be useful for
dispersion calculations.
 484 A. VENKATRAM

IO' I I I I‘lll
10-z 2 3 4 5 678910-' 2 3 4 5 6 7*9,ob

u,(m/s)

Fig. 2. Variation of h with u* during stable conditions in the Minnesota experiment.

4. Summary

Analysis of micrometeorological data collected during three independent field

studies (Prairie Grass, Kansas, Minnesota) indicates that the Monin-Obukhov length
L during stable conditions can be related to u* through the simple empirical equation

L=Au$, A = 1.1 x lo3 s* m-l . (8)

This is equivalent to assuming a constant T.+ of 0.08 C. In the absence of any

information on the surface heat flux, Equation (8) can provide estimates of L which
should be acceptable for dispersion calculations.
The formulation of Equation (8) suggests that we can compute u* in stable
conditions with knowledge of wind speed at a single level and an estimate of the local
surface roughness zO. This result is clearly useful in view of the routine availability of
wind speeds at most sites; zo is not difficult to estimate.
Using Zilitinkevich’s (1972) formulation for the height of the stable boundary
layer h, it follows from Equation (8) that

h = Bu;‘~. (9)
 ESTIMATING THE MONIN-OBUKHOV LENGTH 485

The Minnesota data (Caughey et al., 1979) confirm our empirical postulate with
B = 2.4 x lo3 (m-l” s3’*). The usefulness of Equation (9) is self evident and need not
be elaborated here.

References

Barad, M. L., (ed.): 1958, ‘Project Prairie Grass. A Field Program in Diffusion’, Geophysical Research
Paper No. 59, Vols. I and II, AFCRF-TR-58-235, Air Force Cambridge Research Center, Bedford,
Massachusetts.
Caughey, S. J., Wyngaard, J. C., and Kaimal, J. C.: 1979, ‘Turbulence in the Evolving Stable Boundary
Layer’, J. Amos. Sci. 36, 1041-1052.
Horst, T. W.: 1979, ‘Lagrangian Similarity Modeling of Vertical Diffusion from a Ground-Level Source’,
J. Appl. Meteorol. 18, 733-740.
Horst, T. W., Doran, J. C., and Nickola, P. W.: 1979, ‘Evaluation of Empirical Atmospheric Diffusion
Data’, Report No. NUREG/CR-0789, PNL-2599, Available from Division of Technical Information
and Document Control, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555.
Izumi, Y.: 1971, ‘Kansas 1968 Field Program Data Report’, Environmental Research Papers, No. 379,
AFCRL-72-0041, Air Force Cambridge Research Laboratories, Bedford, Massachusetts.
Zilitinkevich, S. S.: 1962, ‘On the Determination of Height of the Ekman Boundary Layer’, Boundary-
Layer Meteorol. 3, 141-145.