Rotation of the velocity measurements: Difference between revisions

From Atomix
mNo edit summary
mNo edit summary
 
(30 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
|level=level 2 segmented and quality controlled
|level=level 2 segmented and quality controlled
}}
}}
Measured velocities must be rotated in the flow's frame of reference since [[Velocity inertial subrange model|inertial subrange model]] differs between the velocity components, and the effects of [[Anisotropic turbulence|anisotropy]] are more pronounced in the transverse and vertical direction.
To estimate <math>\varepsilon</math> from all the different velocity components, the measurements must be rotated into the main direction of the flow. In some instances, the instrument's [[frame of reference]] may be aligned with the direction of flow, which is ideal to account for the varying levels of [[Velocity inertial subrange model#anisotropy|anisotropy]] amongst components <ref name="Gargett.etal1984">{{Cite journal
|authors= A. E. Gargett, T. R. Osborn, and P.W. Nasmyth
|journal_or_publisher= J. Fluid. Mech.
|paper_or_booktitle=  Local isotropy and the decay of turbulence in a stratified fluid
|year= 1984
|doi=10.1017/S0022112084001592
}}</ref><ref name="Bluteau.etal2011">{{Cite journal
|authors= C.E. Bluteau, N.L. Jones, and G. Ivey
|journal_or_publisher=  Limnol. Oceanogr.: Methods
|paper_or_booktitle= Estimating turbulent kinetic energy dissipation using the inertial subrange method in environmental flows
|year= 2011
|doi=10:4319/lom.2011.9.302
}}</ref>. If this isn't the case, then the velocities' measurement frame must be rotated into that of the flow, which we refer to as the analysis frame of reference.  


The velocities are measured in either the instrument's coordinate system, beam coordinates or more rarely in the earth's coordinate system (east, north and up).
= Methods used for rotating into the analysis frame of reference=
* Include a diagram of frame of reference
 
* Scatter of velocities in enu coordinates.
* Using time-averaged velocities in each segment
** Light gray for entire timeseries
* Principal component analysis
** Different colour for points over a given segment.
 
* Describe how the rotation is done (a sketch of an arrow, and a new frame of reference where the new x axis matches the mean flow direction).
 
* What is used as the mean flow
==Recommendations==
{{FontColor|fg=white|bg=red|text=We will update when our final recommendation is set in stone. Also, comment about large vertical velocities on sloped bottoms... The page is too wordy}}
 
If one intends on using only the vertical velocity component to estimate <math>\varepsilon</math>, then the rotation of the velocity measurements into a new frame of reference may be skipped. The analysis frame of reference is thus the same as the measurement frame provided one direction is aligned with gravity.
 
{{FontColor|fg=white|bg=red|text=If not, then which strategy is best ? I think all are OK}}
==References==
<references />
 
----
Return to [[Preparing quality-controlled velocities]]

Latest revision as of 18:54, 5 July 2022


To estimate [math]\displaystyle{ \varepsilon }[/math] from all the different velocity components, the measurements must be rotated into the main direction of the flow. In some instances, the instrument's frame of reference may be aligned with the direction of flow, which is ideal to account for the varying levels of anisotropy amongst components [1][2]. If this isn't the case, then the velocities' measurement frame must be rotated into that of the flow, which we refer to as the analysis frame of reference.

Methods used for rotating into the analysis frame of reference

  • Using time-averaged velocities in each segment
  • Principal component analysis


Recommendations

We will update when our final recommendation is set in stone. Also, comment about large vertical velocities on sloped bottoms... The page is too wordy

If one intends on using only the vertical velocity component to estimate [math]\displaystyle{ \varepsilon }[/math], then the rotation of the velocity measurements into a new frame of reference may be skipped. The analysis frame of reference is thus the same as the measurement frame provided one direction is aligned with gravity.

If not, then which strategy is best ? I think all are OK

References

  1. A. E. Gargett, T. R. Osborn and and P.W. Nasmyth. 1984. Local isotropy and the decay of turbulence in a stratified fluid. J. Fluid. Mech.. doi:10.1017/S0022112084001592
  2. C.E. Bluteau, N.L. Jones and and G. Ivey. 2011. Estimating turbulent kinetic energy dissipation using the inertial subrange method in environmental flows. Limnol. Oceanogr.: Methods. doi:10:4319/lom.2011.9.302

Return to Preparing quality-controlled velocities