Atmospheric Environment 33 (1999) 4001}4008

On the in#uence of the urban roughness sublayer

on turbulence and dispersion
Mathias W. Rotach
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Winterthurerstr. 190, CH-8057 Zu( rich, Switzerland

Abstract

The concept of the urban roughness sublayer is discussed and this lowest atmospheric layer over a rough surface is
shown to have a non-negligible vertical extension over typical urban surfaces. The existing knowledge on the turbulence
and #ow structure within an urban roughness sublayer is reviewed, focusing on the height dependence of turbulent #uxes
and a scaling approach for turbulence statistics, such as velocity variances, in the above-roof part of the roughness
sublayer. Finally, the implication of this turbulence and #ow structure upon dispersion characteristics is investigated. The
most prominent di!erence of explicitly taking into account the roughness sublayer in a dispersion simulation (as
compared to assuming a &constant #ux layer') is a clearly enhanced ground level concentration far downwind from the
source. For the example of a tracer release experiment over a (sub) urban surface (Copenhagen) it is shown that
introducing the roughness sublayer clearly improves the model performance.  1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights
reserved.

Keywords: Turbulence; Reynolds stress; Local scaling; Urban dispersion modelling

1. Introduction turbulence structure over real urban or suburban surfa-

On a mesoscale perspective an urban settlement can be
considered a rough, warm &spot' within the surrounding
rural surfaces. Consequently, an internal boundary layer
develops at the rural}urban interface (e.g., Oke, 1988)
that is both mechanical and thermal in origin. In this
contribution we restrict the discussion to areas within the
urban environment that are far enough from this
transitional region so that the urban boundary layer
(UBL) has replaced the former rural boundary layer. The
lowest atmospheric layer of this UBL must be considered
as a roughness sublayer (RS). This layer, that constitutes
the rough-wall counterpart of the viscous sublayer over
&smooth walls' (Raupach et al., 1991) has, unlike the
latter, a vertical extension of several tens of meters over
typical urban settings and is therefore of importance
when modelling #ow or dispersion processes in urban
environments.
Most of the present knowledge on roughness sublayers
over rough surfaces stems from vegetated or arti"cial
surfaces (see Raupach et al., 1991 for an excellent review).
In contrast, relatively little is known about the #ow and
ces. Important di!erences between the two types of surfa-
ces are the characteristic density of roughness elements
and also their sti!ness (or #exibility to react upon drag
forces).
The RS can be regarded as the layer adjacent to the
surface, wherein the #ow and turbulence is in#uenced by
individual roughness elements. Consequently, it has
a fully three-dimensional structure. However, for many
practical applications it is convenient to consider spatial
averages of the variables of interest in order to retain the
simplistic one-dimensional (vertical) description of #ow
and turbulence characteristics. Also, a detailed descrip-
tion of the e!ect of individual buildings can be avoided.
On the other hand it is clear that from full scale obser-
vational programs it is almost impossible to truly
determine spatially averaged properties. Here, the argu-
mentation of Rotach (1993a) is followed by noting that
an observation at a particular point in space represents
a variety of upwind and downwind geometries due to
changing wind direction. Thus spatial averages can be
approximated by averaging over all wind directions of
approaching #ow.

1352-2310/99/$ - see front matter  1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 1 3 5 2 - 2 3 1 0 ( 9 9 ) 0 0 1 4 1 - 7
4002 M.W. Rotach / Atmospheric Environment 33 (1999) 4001}4008
Due to the lack of a comprehensive physically based
theory for the (spatially) average vertical structure of
the RS, observational data is often compared to the
predictions of Monin}Obukhov similarity theory, which
is, strictly speaking, only valid for the inertial sublayer
(note that over smoother surfaces, where the RS has
a negligible vertical extension, this layer is often called
surface layer). For the upper part of the RS (i.e. for z'h,
where z is the physical height and h denotes the average
height of the canopy) this approach has become quite
standard for #ow over vegetated surfaces (e.g. Kaimal
and Finnigan, 1994) and was also followed in the few
studies of full scale urban surfaces (see Section 3). How-
ever, it will be pointed out in Section 3 that due to the
non-constancy of turbulent #uxes within the RS, a par-
ticular form of local scaling is much more appropriate to
describe the turbulence variables. Within the canopy (i.e.,
in the lower part of the RS) it is often convenient to
construct (properly scaled) average vertical pro"les for
the variables of interest.
In this contribution the concept of a roughness sub-
layer is described in Section 2, where also its vertical
extension for typical urban settings is discussed. In Sec-
tion 3, the vertical turbulence and #ow structure in the
urban RS is investigated, making use of the results from
an extensive "eld study within the Zurich Urban Climate
Program. Wherever possible, the results from this pro-
gram are compared to those from other (including arti"-
cial) rough surfaces. Finally, in Section 4, the e!ect of
including the turbulence structure of the roughness sub-
layer upon dispersion of passive scalars is demonstrated.
2. The vertical extension of the Roughness Sublayer
From its de"nition, the roughness sublayer extends
from the surface (z"0) up to a height z , at which the
H
in#uence of individual roughness elements on the #ow
is &mixed up' by turbulence (Raupach et al., 1991), and
the #ow can be considered horizontally homogeneous if
the density, height and distribution of roughness ele-
ments do not vary over the upwind area of in#uence. The
remaining part of the surface layer is usually termed
inertial sublayer (IS). Note that the present de"nition of
the RS is di!erent from that of Oke (1988) who has
de"ned the lower boundary of the RS as the top of the
urban canopy layer (UCL), i.e. roughly the average build-
ing height. Here, the more general concept of Oke et al.
(1989) or Raupach et al. (1991) is adopted, in which the
UCL is part of the RS. A number of criteria have been
proposed in the literature to determine the height
z (Table 1). These were derived from wind tunnel experi-
H  
ments (obviously, deriving rules to describe z from full-
H
scale measurements would require an enormous number
of observational programs) and can be seen from Table 1
to rely on the distribution and geometry of roughness
Table 1
De"nitions of the roughness sublayer height, z , according to various
H
authors. &D' refers to the average inter-element spacing
Site/Characteristics z Author(s)
H
Wind tunnel, various roughness' h#1.5D Raupach et al. (1980)
Tall vegetation 3D Garratt (1978)
Tall vegetation 4.5 h Garratt (1980)
Review 2}5 h Raupach et al. (1991)
elements. It is clear that the average spacing of buildings
in real cities is less well de"ned than that of roughness
elements in a wind tunnel experiment, so that in most
applications the simpler relationships that are based only
on h, the average building height, are used. From the
available recent full-scale observational programs the
following can be deduced:
E Roth and Oke (1993) found evidence that their upper
level at z/h"2.65 was still within the RS over a subur-
ban surface in Vancouver.
E The level at z/h"1.54 in the ZuK rich Urban climate
Program (Rotach, 1993a) was clearly within the RS.
From the same data set there are also indications that
z /h'2.1.
H
E From the measurements over a suburban surface in
Sapporo by Oikawa and Meng (1995) a value of z /h is
H
di$cult to derive. However, a maximum in Reynolds
stress was observed at a height of z /h+1.5 and this
H
level might be regarded as an estimate for z for this
H
particular type of surface geometry.
In Fig. 1 an attempt is made to display the various
layers over rough surfaces in a non-dimensional form, i.e.
as a function of z/z (where z denotes the height of the
boundary layer) and z /h. The upper boundary of the
inertial sublayer is chosen at z/z "0.1, therefore assum-
ing that the argument of &double matching' is valid over
very rough surfaces too, i.e. the inertial sublayer is de-
"ned as the region where simultaneously zz , with

z the roughness length and zz is valid (see Tennekes

and Lumley, 1972). For z an intermediate value of
H
z "3h has been chosen (see Table 1 and the above
H
discussion for urban evidence). Note that any other as-
sumption concerning z would simply move the corre-
H
sponding line in Fig. 1 in the vertical direction or } if z is
H
di!erent for plant canopies and urban type settlements
} give it another slope. The arrows denoted &city', &forest'
and &crop', respectively in Fig. 1 are based on typical
heights for the involved variables, for example z "
1000 m, h "20 m, h "10 m, h "1 m (or corre-
 
spondingly). Taking the crop as an example, it can be
seen from Fig. 1 that the vertical extension of the rough-
ness sublayer is only a few meters, whereas the inertial
sublayer ranges from 3 up to 100 m (for the example
 M.W. Rotach / Atmospheric Environment 33 (1999) 4001}4008
Fig. 1. Sketch of the vertical extension of the various layers over
rough surfaces and their variation with the non-dimensional
quantities z/z and z /h. A value of z /h"3 is assumed. For the
G G H Rotach (1993a), urban (*). For the de"nition of the reference
meaning of the arrows &city', &forest' and &crop' see text.
given above concerning actual numbers). On the other
hand, Fig. 1 reveals that the vertical extension of an
urban RS can amount to several tens of meters and might
} as opposed to rough vegetated surfaces } even com-
pletely "ll up the former rural surface layer ("RS#IS)
so that no inertial sublayer is present. It is therefore
important to know the turbulence and #ow structure for
a consistent interpretation of observed data or for practi-
cal applications such as dispersion modelling.
3. Turbulence and 6ow structure
3.1. Reynolds stress
One of the major results from the ZuK rich Urban cli-
mate program was the fact that Reynolds stress was
found to increase with height from very small values at
z"d (d being the zero plane displacement) in the lower
part of the RS towards a virtually constant value as
projected for the inertial sublayer aloft (Rotach, 1993a).
This increase in Reynolds stress (i.e. Ruw/Rz(0) was
4003
Fig. 2. Vertical variation of scaled (local) friction velocity from
the observations of Oikawa and Meng (1995), sub-urban (*) and
friction velocity, u , see Rotach (1993a). The data of Oikawa
HP
and Meng (1995) are re-scaled so that the maximum value is the
reference friction velocity. The solid line corresponds to a par-
ametrization for the data of Rotach (1993a).
the measurement site de"nitely does not constitute
a smooth spot within a rougher surrounding. A detailed
quadrant analysis showed (infrequent) sweeps to be re-
sponsible for most of the vertical momentum transport
close to roof level, similar to what can be observed over
other types of rough surfaces (e.g. Raupach, 1981). Also,
the ratio between upward and downward transport of
momentum (&exuberance') is observed to strongly in-
crease (in its absolute value) when approaching the sur-
face, again similar to what is observed in vegetation
canopies (e.g., Baldocchi and Meyers, 1988).
Evidence for a similar behaviour of Reynolds stress
from other sites is discussed in the following. HoK gstroK m
et al. (1982) observed an increase in Reynolds stress
between their 7 and 50 m levels, respectively, over an
urban surface in Uppsala (S). However, their observa-
tional tower was situated about 100 m downwind of
the &edge' of the city. A simple estimate of the height
of the internal boundary layer, h , developing after this


found for all available simultaneous measurements at rough-to-smooth transition (h /z>"0.3(x/z>)
, Kai-

  
two di!erent heights above roof level, and emerged also mal and Finnigan, 1994) yields h +12 m (taking for z>,
from a non-dimensionalized pro"le of Reynolds stress
over the whole range of observations. Since this latter is
the result of averaging over all available runs represent-
ing approaching #ows from all possible wind directions,
it can be considered an estimate for a horizontally aver-
aged pro"le (Rotach, 1993a). For the site under consid-
eration, it can be ruled out that the increasing Reynolds
stress is indicative for a local rough}smooth transition, as

 
the larger of the two roughness lengths, 1 m according to
HoK gstroK m et al., 1982). Thus, this increase in Reynolds
stress re#ects the adaptation to the new (non-urban)
surface at the lower measurement level of 7 m, rather
than giving support for a roughness sublayer e!ect.
In a recent study over a suburban surface in Sapporo
(J), Oikawa and Meng (1995) also found Reynolds stress
to vary with height (Fig. 2). Similar to the observations
4004 M.W. Rotach / Atmospheric Environment 33 (1999) 4001}4008
from the ZuK rich site, the measurements from Sapporo
reveal a maximum of Reynolds stress (expressed as the
local friction velocity, u in Fig. 2) above roof level (at
H
z/h"1.54 in this case) with the norm of momentum
transport (&uw) decreasing when approaching the &sur-
face'. Again, in this experiment the measuring tower was
e!ectively located 30 m downwind of the suburban sur-
face. The above simple analysis yields h +4 m for
(1993b) and later by Oikawa and Meng (1995). In these
two studies it was shown that not only a function of local
scaling variables can be derived to describe the data;
rather, the relationships that are appropriate for the
surface layer can be used as long as local #uxes (and
stability measures) are employed. Taking into account
that the above-cited earlier studies usually worked with
only one level of observations, their common conclusion


z>"0.45 m (Oikawa and Meng, 1995) thus indicating

that even the lowest measurement level (5.4 m) is above
the internal boundary layer height and the pro"le dis-
played in Fig. 2 re#ects the characteristics of the (upwind)
suburban roughness sublayer.
In another recent investigation in the city of Basel
(CH), Reynolds stress was also observed to be varying
with height with increasing Reynolds stress (norm) be-
tween the lowest two levels at z/h+1.6 and z/h+2.3,
respectively, for most of the stability classes (Feigenwin-
ter et al., 1999). These observations were carried out in
the central part of the city and thus seem to con"rm the
"ndings from the ZuK rich study (even if the uppermost
level (z/h+3.5) might have su!ered from a distinctly
di!erent source area than the two lower ones).
Evidence for Reynolds stress varying with height in
a wind tunnel study, in which an urban surface was
simulated, is given by Rafailidis (1997). In this study it is
shown that Ruw/Rz in the vicinity of roof level is parti-
cularly dependent on the geometry of the roofs, with
much larger vertical variability for slanted roofs than for
#at ones.
Although these studies all seem to con"rm the "nding
that Reynolds stress increases with height in an urban
RS, Fig. 2 that combines the results from Oikawa and
Meng (1995) and Rotach (1993a), shows that a possible
parametrization for the vertical characteristics of
Reynolds stress will have to include (at least) some in-
formation on the urban morphology. In addition, much
work needs to be done on the vertical structure of other
important turbulence statistics such as sensible or latent
heat #ux for a consistent determination of (local, see
below) stability measures within the RS.
3.2. Variances and non-dimensional gradients
In a number of earlier studies the turbulence character-
istics in the lower urban boundary layer (mostly velocity
variances) were found to only marginally deviate from
the predictions of Monin}Obukhov similarity theory
(e.g., Bowne and Ball, 1970; Brook, 1972; Clarke et al.,
1982; Steyn, 1982). HoK gstroK m et al. (1982) were the "rst to
recognize a possible height dependence of turbulent
#uxes and therefore suggested a concept of local scaling
for other turbulence statistics. Further evidence for the
requirement (and success) of the local scaling approach
within the roughness sublayer was presented by Rotach
in favour of surface layer scaling may therefore also be
regarded as supporting evidence for the concept of local
scaling for the roughness sublayer. Local scaling was
found to apply for the velocity and temperature variance
as well as the non-dimensional gradients of wind speed
and temperature and also the relationship between the
Richardson number and z/¸, where L is the Obukhov
length. It is noteworthy that for the scaled vertical
velocity variance, there seems to be a tendency for an
enhanced mechanical contribution as compared to the
surface layer results, thus leading to systematically di!er-
ent constants in the similarity relation (Rotach, 1993b;
Roth, 1993).
Some other, more subtle aspects of RS turbulence,
such as the ratio between the correlation coe$cient of
sensible heat and that for momentum and thus the rela-
tive transport e$ciencies are not well represented by the
Monin}Obukhov similarity relations, but nevertheless
the sparse available data indicates that the concept of
local scaling provides a useful approach to describe these
turbulence characteristics (Roth and Oke, 1995).
It must be noted that local scaling is only applicable
in the upper part of the urban roughness sublayer,
i.e. roughly above roof level (nevertheless, Oikawa
and Meng (1995) reported good correspondence to
Monin}Obukhov predictions at z/h"0.77). Closer
to the surface average vertical pro"les (scaled by, e.g., the
friction velocity from the inertial sublayer) as suggested
by Rotach (1995) may prove to be useful.
3.3. Mean yow
Throughout the urban roughness sublayer the pro"le
of mean wind speed has a similar form as that in rough-
ness sublayers over vegetated surfaces. Wind speed varies
only marginally within the lower part of the canopy, then
rapidly increases close to the roof level and further in-
creases above. However, unlike over vegetated surfaces,
the shape of the wind speed pro"le is very much depen-
dent on the direction of the approaching #ow relative to
the dominant street canyon axis (Rotach, 1995). Above
roof level, the local scaling concept can be used to show
that the (observed and modelled) mean velocity gradient
is smaller than what would be predicted by a constant
#ux assumption, in which the friction velocity from the IS
is employed as a scaling velocity. This is demonstrated in
Fig. 3, where measured average wind speed pro"les from
the ZuK rich site are compared to those obtained from
 M.W. Rotach / Atmospheric Environment 33 (1999) 4001}4008
Fig. 3. Average pro"les of scaled wind speed from the ZuK rich
Urban climate Program. For the two curves, the non-dimen-
sional gradient of wind speed was numerically integrated down-
ward from the uppermost measurement. &calculated' refers to the
local scaling approach, i.e. using the height dependence of
Reynolds stress, whereas &constant #ux' uses the inertial sublayer
Reynolds stress to derive a constant friction velocity (from
Rotach, 1993a). 1d2 corresponds to the average (over all wind
direction sectors) zero plane displacement.
a numerical procedure. These latter pro"les were cal-
culated by numerically integrating the non-dimensional
gradient of wind speed (U "Ru /Rz ) kz/u , where k is the
H The results from the above hypothetical simulations
von Kàrmàn constant) downward starting from the up-
permost level of measurement. It can be seen from Fig. 3,
that taking into account the local variation of Reynolds
stress (and thus the local friction velocity) is su$cient to
explain the smaller observed velocity gradients as com-
pared to the assumption of constant #uxes. Indirectly,
Fig. 3 is of course again an indication for the success of
local scaling within the upper part of the urban RS, as
U was used according to the semi-empirical predictions
Lyck, 1984 for details). All participating operational dis-
of Monin}Obukhov similarity theory, but in connection
with the local momentum #ux (i.e. u ).
H level concentrations (Olesen, 1995). Similarly, an average
4. Dispersion of pollutants within the roughness sublayer
The mean #ow and turbulence structure within the
urban RS as summarized above has some important
consequences on the characteristics of dispersion for
passive scalars. Rotach (1997) has compared two cases
for which identical input information is assumed to be
given (&measurements' from the inertial sublayer): in
4005
a so-called &urban' (or &rough wall') simulation the turbu-
lence structure of the roughness sublayer is explicitly
taken into account and the lowest part of the model
domain is considered in two parts, namely the roughness
sublayer and the inertial sublayer above. In contrast, in
the &non-urban' (or &smooth wall') simulation the lowest
part of the model domain is described entirely in terms of
surface layer similarity (as it is common for essentially all
dispersion models). Both the simulations were performed
using a Lagrangian stochastic dispersion model (Rotach
et al., 1996). For a low level source, the following charac-
teristics are observed:
E the downwind distance of the peak ground level con-
centration is slightly farther away from the source in
the urban case.
E the peak concentrations are very close to each other
for both simulations.
E the roll-o! of the surface concentration after the peak
is much less pronounced in the &urban' simulation
leading to a factor of two between the two simulations
at some 20 source heights downwind from the source.
E both the average height and width of the plume in-
crease less (with increasing time or distance from the
source) in the &urban' case.
It is immediately clear that for elevated sources (e.g.
single industrial plants) these e!ects will be less pro-
nounced (Rotach, 1997). However, in view of the fact that
in typical cities signi"cant contributions to the total
emissions arise from a large number of small sources,
which are predominantly close to the surface, it is argued
here that the e!ects of RS turbulence are important for
modelling dispersion in an urban environment.
may now be compared to those of a real situation. The
Copenhagen tracer experiment was selected as one of
the &standard data sets' for a dispersion model inter-
comparison exercise in a series of workshops on &har-
monisation within atmospheric dispersion modelling for
regulatory purposes'. Tracer release was at 115 m above
a (sub) urban part of Copenhagen (DK) under meteoro-
logical conditions of forced convection (see Gryning and
persion models underestimated on average the ground
underestimation was found for simulations with a one-
dimensional (Tassone et al., 1994) or a two-dimensional
(Rotach et al., 1996) Lagrangian stochastic dispersion
model, respectively. In the above terminology, all these
simulations correspond to the &non-urban' setting. Intro-
ducing the turbulence characteristics of the roughness
sublayer in the two-dimensional Lagrangian dispersion
model (i.e. performing the corresponding &urban' simula-
tions) Rotach and de Haan (1997) showed that the average
mean bias can be removed (Fig. 4) and all the statistical
4006 M.W. Rotach / Atmospheric Environment 33 (1999) 4001}4008
Fig. 4. Crosswind integrated ground level concentrations, CW as
observed in the Copenhagen tracer experiment and predicted by
a two-dimensional Lagrangian stochastic dispersion model. (*)
no roughness sublayer present in the simulation (&non-urban'
simulation), (*) simulation includes the turbulence structure of
the roughness sublayer (&urban' simulation).
measures for model performance are better for the &ur-
ban' simulations. Although the improvement is only mi-
nor due to the relatively large source height, the fact that
the mean bias is reduced (now close to zero, see Rotach
and de Haan, 1997) while at the same time the scatter (as
measured through the normalized mean square error) is
diminishing, shows that the improved performance of the
&urban' simulation is not the result of mere &tuning'.
Rather, the improved representation of the physical
properties of the #ow close to the surface is responsible
for this result and this is likely to increase the credibility
of dispersion simulations over urban surfaces.
Having shown the superiority of the &urban' simula-
tions for one single tracer experiment and anticipating
that similar results will be obtained when performing
similar comparisons using tracer data from other urban
experiments, the results from the Lagrangian particle
model may be used to derive parameterizations for &ur-
ban' plume parameters such as the vertical and the hori-
zontal plume widths, p and p , respectively, which are
X W
required in simpler, operational dispersion models. As an
example Fig. 5 compares p for one of the Copenhagen
X
tracer release experiments (experiment of Oct. 19, 1978,
see Gryning and Lyck, 1984) from the &urban' and the
&non-urban' simulations. Clearly, the increase of p with
X
distance from the source of both the &urban' and the
&non-urban' simulations is less pronounced than that
predicted by the appropriate Pasquill-type C curve for
urban conditions (Hanna, 1982; Boubel et al., 1994). This
explains the partly severe underestimation of some of the
Fig. 5. Vertical plume spread for one of the experiments (Octo-
ber 19, 1978) during the Copenhagen tracer releases as a func-
tion of distance from the source. (solid line) &urban' simulation
(see caption of Fig. 4), (dashed line) &non-urban' simulation
(dotted line) Pasquill class C after Hanna (1982) or Boubel et al.
(1994) recommended for urban conditions.
operational dispersion models for the Copenhagen data
set as mentioned above. However, a systematic variation
of surface characteristics (average building height and
density, height of the RS,...) will be necessary in order to
derive explicit &urban' parameterizations for, e.g., p or
X
p which are appropriate for speci"c city structures
W
and/or stability regimes.
5. Summary and conclusions
In this contribution the (still sparse) knowledge on the
turbulence structure within the urban roughness sub-
layer from full scale observations is reviewed. The aver-
age turbulence structure of the urban roughness sublayer
can best be characterized through the non-uniformity of
turbulent #uxes with height. Accordingly, traditional sur-
face layer scaling cannot be appropriate in this region. It
is argued that a speci"c form of local scaling, namely
a formulation that employs the known dimensionless
functions from the surface layer, but in connection with
the local #uxes, can successfully be used within the upper
part of an urban roughness sublayer (i.e. in its above-roof
region). Furthermore, the e!ect of including the turbu-
lence structure of the roughness sublayer upon dispersion
of passive scalars is demonstrated using a two-dimen-
sional Lagrangian stochastic dispersion model. It is
shown that maximum concentrations and the distance
from the source of their occurrence are not severely
altered by the presence of a roughness sublayer.
 M.W. Rotach / Atmospheric Environment 33 (1999) 4001}4008
However, for emissions at small heights above roof level,
the evolution of the concentration downwind of the max-
imum is signi"cantly a!ected. Bearing in mind that pollu-
tant concentrations in urban environments often result
from the sum of a large number of (relatively weak)
sources, rather than being the result of emissions from
one large source, this indicates that it is important to
explicitly include the roughness sublayer in urban disper-
sion models in order to improve the quality of their
predictions.
The above considerations have shown that over urban
surfaces the RS has a non-negligible vertical extension
and } in connection with its modi"ed turbulence struc-
ture as compared to the surface layer } also can signi"-
cantly a!ect the dispersion characteristics (among others)
in such an environment. However, since the observa-
tional evidence on the #ow and turbulence structure in
this layer is still sparse, more experimental and also
theoretical work will have to be done in this area. In
particular, the question of the in#uence of urban mor-
phology upon average pro"les of momentum #ux and
that of probably also non-constant vertical pro"les of
heat (and moisture) #uxes will have to be addressed in
more detail.
Acknowledgements
The present work was partly "nanced by the Swiss
Federal Department of Education and Sciences (BBW)
and the Swiss Federal Department of Environment, For-
est and Landscape (BUWAL) through a project in the
framework of COST 615 (citair).
References
Baldocchi, D.D., Meyers, T.P., 1988. Turbulence structure in
a deciduous forest. Boundary-Layer Meteorology 43,
345}364.
Boubel, R.W., Fox, D.L., Turner, D.B., Stern, A.C., 1994. Funda-
mentals of Air Pollution, Third ed., Academic Press, New
York, 574 pp.
Bowne, N.E., Ball, J.T., 1970. Observational comparison of rural
and urban boundary layer turbulence. Journal of Applied
Meteorology 18, 1072}1077.
Brook, R.R., 1972. The measurement of turbulence in a city
environment. Journal of Applied Meteorology 11, 443}450.
Clarke, C.F., Ching, J.K.S., Godowich, J.M., 1982. A study of
turbulence in an urban environment EPA Technical Report,
EPA 600-S3-82-062.
Feigenwinter, Ch., Vogt, R., Parlow, E., 1999. Vertical structure
of selected turbulence characteristics above an urban
canopy. Theoritical and Applied Climatology 62 (1}2),
51}63.
4007
Garratt, J.R., 1978. Flux pro"le relations above tall vegetation.
Quarterly Journal of Royal Meteorological Society 104,
199}211.
Garratt, J.R., 1980. Surface in#uence upon vertical pro"les in the
atmospheric near surface layer. Quarterly Journal of Royal
Meteorological Society 106, 803}819.
Gryning, S.-E., Lyck, E., 1984. Atmospheric dispersion
from elevated sources in an urban areas: Comparison be-
tween tracer experiments and model calculations.
Journal of Climatology and Applied Meteorology 23,
651}660.
Hanna, S.R., 1982. Applications in modelling, In: Nieuwstadt,
F.T.M., van Dop, H. (Eds.), Atmospheric Turbulence and Air
Pollution. Reidel, Dorrecht, 358 pp.
HoK gstroK m, U., BergstroK m, H., Alexandersson, H., 1982. Turbu-
lence characteristics in a near-neutrally strati"ed
urban atmosphere. Boundary-Layer Meteorology 23,
449}472.
Kaimal, J.C., Finnigan, J.J., 1994. Atmospheric Boundary Layer
Flows. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 289 pp.
Oikawa, S., Meng, Y., 1995. Turbulence characteristics and
organized motion in a suburban roughness sublayer. Bound-
ary-Layer Meteorology 74, 289}312.
Oke, T.R., 1988. The urban energy balance. Progress in Physics
and Geography 12, 471}508.
Oke, T.R., Cleugh, H.A., Grimmond, S., Schnid, H.P., Roth, M.,
1989. Evaluation of spatially-averaged #uxes of heat, mass
and momentum in the urban boundary layer. Weather and
Climate 9, 14}21.
Olesen, H.R., 1995. The model validation exercise at mol: over-
view of results. International Journal Environmental Pollu-
tion 5, 761}784.
Rafailidis, S., 1997. In#uence of building areal density and roof
shape on the wind characteristics above a town. Boundary-
Layer Meteorology 85, 255}271.
Raupach, M.R., 1981. Conditional statistics of Reynolds stress in
rough-wall and smooth-wall turbulent boundary layers.
Journal of Fluid Mechanics 108, 363}382.
Raupach, M.R., Thom, A.S., Edwards, I., 1980. A wind-tunnel
study of turbulent #ow close to regularly arranged
rough surfaces. Boundary-Layer Meteorology 18,
373}397.
Raupach, M.R., Antonia, R.A., Rajagopalan, S., 1991. Rough-
wall turbulent boundary layers. Applied Mechanics
Reviews 44, 1}25.
Rotach, M.W., 1993a. Turbulence close to a rough urban surface
part I: Reynolds stress. Boundary-Layer Meteorology 65,
1}28.
Rotach, M.W., 1993b. Turbulence close to a rough urban surface
part II: variances and gradients. Boundary-Layer Meteoro-
logy 66, 75}92.
Rotach, M.W., 1995. Pro"les of turbulence statistics in and
above an urban street canyon. Atmospheric Environment
29, 1473}1486.
Rotach, M.W., 1997. The turbulence structure in an urban
roughness sublayer. In: Perkins, R.J., Belcher, S.E. (Eds.),
Flow and Dispersion through Groups of Obstacles. Claren-
don Press, Oxford, pp. 143}155.
Rotach, M.W., de Haan, P., 1997. On the urban aspect of the
Copenhagen data set. International Journal of Environ-
mental Pollution 8, 279}286.
4008 M.W. Rotach / Atmospheric Environment 33 (1999) 4001}4008
Rotach, M.W., Gryning, S.-E., Tassone, C., 1996. A two-dimen-
sional stochastic lagrangian dispersion model for daytime
conditions. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological
Society 122, 367}389.
Roth, M., 1993. Turbulent transfer relationships over an urban
surface. II: integral statistics. Quarterly Journal of the Royal
Meteorological Society 119, 1105}1120.
Roth, M., Oke, T.R., 1993. Turbulent transfer relationships over
an urban surface. I: spectral characteristics. Quarterly Journal
of the Royal Meteorological Society 119, 1071}1104.
Roth, M., Oke, T.R., 1995. Relative e$ciencies of
turbulent transfer of heat, mass and momentum over
a patchy urban surface. Journal of Atmospheric Science 52,
1863}1874.
Steyn, D.G., 1982. Turbulence in an unstable surface layer over
suburban terrain. Boundary-Layer Meteorology 22,
183}191.
Tassone, C., Gryning, S.-E., Rotach, M.W., 1994, A random-
walk model for atmospheric dispersion in the daytime
boundary layer. In: Gryning, S.E., Millan, M.M. (Eds.), Air
Pollution Modelling and ist Application X, NATO, vol 18.
pp. 243}251. Challenges of Modern Society.
Tennekes, H., Lumley, J.L., 1972. A First Cours in Turbulence.
MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 300 pp.