Articles | Volume 13, issue 9
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4271-2020
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4271-2020
Development and technical paper
 | 
16 Sep 2020
Development and technical paper |  | 16 Sep 2020

Can machine learning improve the model representation of turbulent kinetic energy dissipation rate in the boundary layer for complex terrain?

Nicola Bodini, Julie K. Lundquist, and Mike Optis

Related authors

Observations of wind farm wake recovery at an operating wind farm
Raghavendra Krishnamurthy, Rob Newsom, Colleen Kaul, Stefano Letizia, Mikhail Pekour, Nicholas Hamilton, Duli Chand, Donna M. Flynn, Nicola Bodini, and Patrick Moriarty
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-29,https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-29, 2024
Preprint under review for WES
Short summary
Offshore low-level jet observations and model representation using lidar buoy data off the California coast
Lindsay M. Sheridan, Raghavendra Krishnamurthy, William I. Gustafson Jr., Ye Liu, Brian J. Gaudet, Nicola Bodini, Rob K. Newsom, and Mikhail Pekour
Wind Energ. Sci., 9, 741–758, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-741-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-741-2024, 2024
Short summary
Seasonal variability of wake impacts on US mid-Atlantic offshore wind plant power production
David Rosencrans, Julie K. Lundquist, Mike Optis, Alex Rybchuk, Nicola Bodini, and Michael Rossol
Wind Energ. Sci., 9, 555–583, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-555-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-555-2024, 2024
Short summary
The Effects of Wind Farm Wakes on Freezing Sea Spray in the Mid-Atlantic Offshore Wind Energy Areas
David Rosencrans, Julie K. Lundquist, Mike Optis, and Nicola Bodini
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-2,https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-2, 2024
Preprint under review for WES
Short summary
The 2023 National Offshore Wind data set (NOW-23)
Nicola Bodini, Mike Optis, Stephanie Redfern, David Rosencrans, Alex Rybchuk, Julie K. Lundquist, Vincent Pronk, Simon Castagneri, Avi Purkayastha, Caroline Draxl, Raghavendra Krishnamurthy, Ethan Young, Billy Roberts, Evan Rosenlieb, and Walter Musial
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2023-490,https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2023-490, 2023
Revised manuscript accepted for ESSD
Short summary

Related subject area

Atmospheric sciences
MEXPLORER 1.0.0 – a mechanism explorer for analysis and visualization of chemical reaction pathways based on graph theory
Rolf Sander
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2419–2425, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2419-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2419-2024, 2024
Short summary
Advances and prospects of deep learning for medium-range extreme weather forecasting
Leonardo Olivetti and Gabriele Messori
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2347–2358, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2347-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2347-2024, 2024
Short summary
An overview of the Western United States Dynamically Downscaled Dataset (WUS-D3)
Stefan Rahimi, Lei Huang, Jesse Norris, Alex Hall, Naomi Goldenson, Will Krantz, Benjamin Bass, Chad Thackeray, Henry Lin, Di Chen, Eli Dennis, Ethan Collins, Zachary J. Lebo, Emily Slinskey, Sara Graves, Surabhi Biyani, Bowen Wang, Stephen Cropper, and the UCLA Center for Climate Science Team
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2265–2286, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2265-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2265-2024, 2024
Short summary
cloudbandPy 1.0: an automated algorithm for the detection of tropical–extratropical cloud bands
Romain Pilon and Daniela I. V. Domeisen
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2247–2264, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2247-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2247-2024, 2024
Short summary
PyRTlib: an educational Python-based library for non-scattering atmospheric microwave radiative transfer computations
Salvatore Larosa, Domenico Cimini, Donatello Gallucci, Saverio Teodosio Nilo, and Filomena Romano
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2053–2076, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2053-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2053-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Albertson, J. D., Parlange, M. B., Kiely, G., and Eichinger, W. E.: The average dissipation rate of turbulent kinetic energy in the neutral and unstable atmospheric surface layer, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 102, 13423–13432, 1997. a
Arcos Jiménez, A., Gómez Muñoz, C., and García Márquez, F.: Machine learning for wind turbine blades maintenance management, Energies, 11, 13, 2018. a
Babić, K., Bencetić Klaić, Z., and Večenaj, Ž.: Determining a turbulence averaging time scale by Fourier analysis for the nocturnal boundary layer, Geofizika, 29, 35–51, 2012. a
Barlow, R. J.: Statistics: a guide to the use of statistical methods in the physical sciences, vol. 29, John Wiley & Sons, 1989. a
Berg, L. K., Liu, Y., Yang, B., Qian, Y., Olson, J., Pekour, M., Ma, P.-L., and Hou, Z.: Sensitivity of Turbine-Height Wind Speeds to Parameters in the Planetary Boundary-Layer Parametrization Used in the Weather Research and Forecasting Model: Extension to Wintertime Conditions, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 170, 507–518, 2018. a
Download
Short summary
While turbulence dissipation rate (ε) is an essential parameter for the prediction of wind speed, its current representation in weather prediction models is inaccurate, especially in complex terrain. In this study, we leverage the potential of machine-learning techniques to provide a more accurate representation of turbulence dissipation rate. Our results show a 30 % reduction in the average error compared to the current model representation of ε and a total elimination of its average bias.