Optimal windbreak design for wind-erosion control

Abstract In order to find the optimal windbreak design in terms of its porosity, its distribution with height and the number of rows needed, a wind-tunnel study was conducted. Measurements of the total wind-velocity reduction coefficient of windbreaks with a porosity ranging from 0 to 1 m 2  m −2 showed that a Gaussian peak function fitted very well to the data. It was concluded that a porosity of 0.20–0.35 m 2  m −2 is optimal in terms of wind-velocity reduction. With regards to the distribution of porosity with height, an evenly distributed porosity of stem and canopy resulted in the longest protected area, i.e. the area where the wind-velocity reduction is more than 50%. This was also the case for single-row barriers compared to two- and three-row windbreaks. Experiments with dry loose dune sand were conducted to deduce zones of erosion and deposition behind differently designed windbreaks. The observed zones could be well explained by considering the threshold wind velocity that was computed for the dune sand used in combination with isowind-velocity lines. The results are useful for construction of windbreaks. However, one should bear in mind that the optimal design depends strongly on the purpose for which it is constructed, viz. protection of a field from being eroded or protection of infrastructure from being buried.

[1]  H. Blenk,et al.  Strömungstechnische Beiträge zum Windschutz : Strömungsuntersuchungen an Windhindernissen am Modell und in der freien Natur ; Teil 2, Tafeln , 1956 .

[2]  R. Baltaxe,et al.  Air flow patterns in the lee of model windbreaks , 1967 .

[3]  Fuh-Min Fang,et al.  On the flow around a vertical porous fence , 1997 .

[4]  William H. Press,et al.  Numerical recipes in C , 2002 .

[5]  N. J. Rosenberg,et al.  Microclimate: The Biological Environment. , 1976 .

[6]  N. P. Woodruff,et al.  The Physics of Wind Erosion and its Control1 , 1963 .

[7]  John D. Wilson,et al.  Numerical studies of flow through a windbreak , 1985 .

[8]  Wim Cornelis,et al.  The I.C.E. wind tunnel for wind and water erosion studies , 1997 .

[9]  M. Perera,et al.  Shelter behind two-dimensional solid and porous fences , 1981 .

[10]  Erich J. Plate,et al.  The aerodynamics of shelter belts , 1971 .

[11]  L. J. Hagen,et al.  Evaporation in sheltered areas as influenced by windbreak porosity. , 1970 .

[12]  H. Tsoar,et al.  Bagnold, R.A. 1941: The physics of blown sand and desert dunes. London: Methuen , 1994 .

[13]  D. C. Stevenson,et al.  Wind protection by model fences in a simulated atmospheric boundary layer , 1977 .

[14]  P. Haff,et al.  Simulation of Eolian Saltation , 1988, Science.

[15]  L. J. Hagen,et al.  Turbulent Velocity Fluctuations and Vertical Flow as Affected by Windbreak Porosity , 1971 .

[16]  Wim Cornelis,et al.  A wind tunnel study on wind speed reduction of technical textiles used as windscreen , 2001 .

[17]  Wim Cornelis,et al.  A simple model for the prediction of the deflation threshold shear velocity of dry loose particles , 2004 .

[18]  E. Skidmore,et al.  Windbreak Drag as Influenced by Porosity , 1971 .

[19]  H. B. Schultz,et al.  Studies on wind protection efficiency of slatted fence windbreakers , 1960 .

[20]  Andreas Buerkert,et al.  Soil tillage and windbreak effects on millet and cowpea. I : Wind speed, evaporation, and wind erosion , 1992 .

[21]  E. B. Moysey,et al.  Effect of Porosity on Performance of Windbreaks , 1966 .

[22]  William G. Nickling,et al.  Direct field measurement of wind drag on vegetation for application to windbreak design and modelling , 1998 .

[23]  R. Bagnold,et al.  The Physics of Blown Sand and Desert Dunes , 1941 .

[24]  D. W. Fryrear,et al.  Comparative performance of forage sorghum, grain sorghum, kenaf, switchgrass, and slat-fence windbarriers in reducing wind velocity , 1997 .

[25]  B. Gardiner,et al.  WINDBREAKS AND SHELTERBELTS , 2004 .

[26]  C. Neuman.  Effects of temperature and humidity upon the transport of sedimentary particles by wind , 2004 .