Editorial Type:
Corrigendum
Article Type:
Correction

Corrigendum

Jan Kleissl Department of Geography and Environmental Engineering, and Center for Environmental and Applied Fluid Dynamics, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland

Search for other papers by Jan Kleissl in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Marc B. Parlange Department of Geography and Environmental Engineering, and Center for Environmental and Applied Fluid Dynamics, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland

Search for other papers by Marc B. Parlange in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
, and
Charles Meneveau Department of Mechanical Engineering, and Center for Environmental and Applied Fluid Dynamics, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland

Search for other papers by Charles Meneveau in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
Print Publication:
01 Jan 2005
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-V62N1A05.1
Page(s):
257
Full access

Corresponding author address: Charles Meneveau, JHU, 3400 N. Charles St., Baltimore, MD 21218-2681 Email: meneveau@jhu.edu

Corresponding author address: Charles Meneveau, JHU, 3400 N. Charles St., Baltimore, MD 21218-2681 Email: meneveau@jhu.edu

Because of a production error, Figs. 2, 5, and 10 in Kleissl et al. (2004) appeared in black and white instead of in color. The color figures that should have appeared are reproduced below.

REFERENCES

Kleissl, J., M. B. Parlange, and C. Meneveau, 2004: Field experimental study of dynamic Smagorinsky models in the atmospheric surface layer. J. Atmos. Sci., 61 , 2296–2307.

  • Search Google Scholar
  • Export Citation

Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.

Contour plots of conditional PDF of (csΔ,emp)2, P(cs2|Δ/L), for array 2 (Δ/z ∼ 1.1). The contours show log10 P(cs2|Δ/L). The averaging time to compute cs(Δ) is Tc = 3.2 s ∼ 2.0Δ/<u>. The solid line is the empirical fit of Eq. (14). The dashed line shows (csΔ)2 = 0.

Citation: Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences 62, 1; 10.1175/JAS-V62N1A05.1

Fig. 5.
Fig. 5.

Contour plots of the PDF of (csΔ,dyn)2 conditioned on Δ/L for array 2 (Δ/z ∼ 1.1). The contours show log10 P(cs2|Δ/L). The averaging time to compute cs(Δ) is Tc = 3.2 s ∼ 2.0Δ/<u>. The solid line is the empirical fit of Eq. (14). The dashed line shows (csΔ)2 = 0.

Citation: Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences 62, 1; 10.1175/JAS-V62N1A05.1

Fig. 10.
Fig. 10.

Contour plots of conditional PDF of (a) β and (b) (cs(Δ,sd-dyn))2 from the scale-dependent dynamic model. The contours show (a) log10 P(β|Δ/L) and (b) log10 P(cs2|Δ/L). The averaging time to compute cs(Δ) is Tc = 3.2 s ∼ 2.0Δ/<u>. The dashed line in (a) shows β = 0.327 [cf. Eq. (15)]. The dashed and solid lines in (b) show (csΔ)2 = 0 and the empirical fit of Eq. (14), respectively.

Citation: Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences 62, 1; 10.1175/JAS-V62N1A05.1

Save
Cover Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences
Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences

  • Kleissl, J., M. B. Parlange, and C. Meneveau, 2004: Field experimental study of dynamic Smagorinsky models in the atmospheric surface layer. J. Atmos. Sci., 61 , 2296–2307.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • <sc>Fig</sc>. 2.
    View in gallery
    Fig. 2.

    Contour plots of conditional PDF of (csΔ,emp)2, P(cs2|Δ/L), for array 2 (Δ/z ∼ 1.1). The contours show log10 P(cs2|Δ/L). The averaging time to compute cs(Δ) is Tc = 3.2 s ∼ 2.0Δ/<u>. The solid line is the empirical fit of Eq. (14). The dashed line shows (csΔ)2 = 0.

  • <sc>Fig</sc>. 5.
    View in gallery
    Fig. 5.

    Contour plots of the PDF of (csΔ,dyn)2 conditioned on Δ/L for array 2 (Δ/z ∼ 1.1). The contours show log10 P(cs2|Δ/L). The averaging time to compute cs(Δ) is Tc = 3.2 s ∼ 2.0Δ/<u>. The solid line is the empirical fit of Eq. (14). The dashed line shows (csΔ)2 = 0.

  • <sc>Fig</sc>. 10.
    View in gallery
    Fig. 10.

    Contour plots of conditional PDF of (a) β and (b) (cs(Δ,sd-dyn))2 from the scale-dependent dynamic model. The contours show (a) log10 P(β|Δ/L) and (b) log10 P(cs2|Δ/L). The averaging time to compute cs(Δ) is Tc = 3.2 s ∼ 2.0Δ/<u>. The dashed line in (a) shows β = 0.327 [cf. Eq. (15)]. The dashed and solid lines in (b) show (csΔ)2 = 0 and the empirical fit of Eq. (14), respectively.

Fig. 2.

Contour plots of conditional PDF of (csΔ,emp)2, P(cs2|Δ/L), for array 2 (Δ/z ∼ 1.1). The contours show log10 P(cs2|Δ/L). The averaging time to compute cs(Δ) is Tc = 3.2 s ∼ 2.0Δ/<u>. The solid line is the empirical fit of Eq. (14). The dashed line shows (csΔ)2 = 0.
Fig. 5.

Contour plots of the PDF of (csΔ,dyn)2 conditioned on Δ/L for array 2 (Δ/z ∼ 1.1). The contours show log10 P(cs2|Δ/L). The averaging time to compute cs(Δ) is Tc = 3.2 s ∼ 2.0Δ/<u>. The solid line is the empirical fit of Eq. (14). The dashed line shows (csΔ)2 = 0.
Fig. 10.

Contour plots of conditional PDF of (a) β and (b) (cs(Δ,sd-dyn))2 from the scale-dependent dynamic model. The contours show (a) log10 P(β|Δ/L) and (b) log10 P(cs2|Δ/L). The averaging time to compute cs(Δ) is Tc = 3.2 s ∼ 2.0Δ/<u>. The dashed line in (a) shows β = 0.327 [cf. Eq. (15)]. The dashed and solid lines in (b) show (csΔ)2 = 0 and the empirical fit of Eq. (14), respectively.
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 105 30 3
PDF Downloads 24 16 1