A framework for testing global non-hydrostatic models

Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society

Volumn 135, Issue 639, 2009, Pages 469-484

  Wedi, Nils P ^a   Smolarkiewicz, Piotr K ^b  

^a EUROPEAN CENTRE FOR MEDIUM RANGE WEATHER FORECASTS   (United Kingdom)

^b NATIONAL CENTER FOR ATMOSPHERIC RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

EULAG; IFS; Non hydrostatic modelling; Numerical weather prediction; Reduced planetary radius simulation; Scale analysis

Indexed keywords

EULAG; IFS; NON-HYDROSTATIC MODELLING; NUMERICAL WEATHER PREDICTION; REDUCED PLANETARY RADIUS SIMULATION; SCALE ANALYSIS;

ATMOSPHERICS; CLIMATOLOGY; DYNAMICS; HYDRAULICS; LARGE EDDY SIMULATION; SIMULATORS; STATISTICS; WAVES;

HYDRODYNAMICS;

BENCHMARKING; CLIMATE PREDICTION; CLIMATE VARIATION; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONVECTIVE BOUNDARY LAYER; GRAVITY WAVE; LARGE EDDY SIMULATION; SHEAR FLOW; TESTING METHOD; TURBULENT BOUNDARY LAYER; WEATHER FORECASTING;

EID: 67649442690     PISSN: 00359009     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/qj.377     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. ALADIN. 1997. The ALADIN project: mesoscale modelling seen as a basic tool for weather forecasting-and atmospheric research. WMO Bull. 46: 317-324.
2. Bénard P. 2004. On the use of a wider class of linear systems for the design of constant-coefficients semi-implicit time schemes in NWP. Mon. Weather Rev. 132: 1319-1324.
3. Bénard P, Laprise R, Vivoda J, Smolíková P. 2004. Stability of leapfrog constant-coefficients semi-implicit schemes for the fully elastic system of Euler equations: flat-terrain case. Mon. Weather Rev. 132: 1306-1318.
4. Bénard P, Mašek J, Smolíková P. 2005. Stability of leapfrog constant-coefficients semi-implicit schemes for the fully elastic system of Euler equations: case with orography. Mon. Weather Rev. 133: 1065-1075.
5. Bubnova R, Hello G, Bénard P, Geleyn JF. 1995. Integration of the fully elastic equations cast in the hydrostatic pressure terrain-following coordinate in the framework of the ARPEGE/Aladin NWP system. Mon. Weather Rev. 123: 515-535.
6. Buckingham E. 1914. On physically similar systems; illustrations of the use of dimensional equations. Phys. Rev. 4: 345-376.
7. Clark TL, Farley RD. 1984. Severe downslope windstorm calculations in two and three spatial dimensions using anelastic interactive grid nesting: a possible mechanism for gustiness. J. Atmos. Sci. 41: 329-350.
8. Daley R. 1991. Atmospheric data analysis. Cambridge University Press Cambridge.
9. Davies T, Staniforth A, Wood N, Thuburn J. 2003. Validity of anelastic and other equation sets as inferred from normal-mode analysis. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 129: 2761-2775.
10. Durran DR. 1999. Numerical methods for wave equations in geophysical fluid dynamics. Springer-Verlag New York.
11. Grubišić V, Smolarkiewicz PK. 1997. The effect of critical levels on 3D orographic flows: linear-regime. J. Atmos. Sci. 54: 1943-1960.
12. Held I, Hou A. 1980. Nonlinear axially symmetric circulations in a nearly inviscid atmosphare. J. Atmos. Sci. 37; 515-533.
13. Held I, Suarez M. 1994 A proposal for the intercomparison of the dynamical cores of atmospheric general circulation models. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 73: 1825-1830.
14. Holton JR. 1992. An introduction to dynamic meteorology, International Geophysics Series, Vol 23. Academic Press New York, 3rd edn.
15. Hortal M, Simmons A. 1991. Use of reduced Gaussian grids in spectral models. Mon. Weaner Rev. 119: 1057-1074.
16. Hundertmark T, Reich S. 2007. A regularization approach for a vertical slice model and semi-Lagrangian Störmer-Verlet time stepping. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 133: 1575-1587.
17. Keller TL 1994. Implications of the hydrostatic assumption on atmospheric gravity waves. J Atmos. Sci. 51: 1915-1929.
18. Klemp JB, Lilly DK. 1978. Numerical simulation of hydrostatic mountain waves. J. Atmos. Sci. 35: 78-107.
19. Klemp JB, Dudhia J, Hassiotis AD. 2008. An upper gravity-wave absorbing layer for NWP applications. Mon. Weather Rev. 136: 3987-4004.
20. Kuang Z, Blossey P, Bretherton C. 2005. A new approach for 3D cloud-resolving simulations of large-scale atmospheric circulation. Geophys. Res. Lett. 32(L02809): 1-4.
21. Phillips NA. 1990. Dispersion processes in large scale weather prediction. WMO Bulletin 700: 1-126.
22. Prusa JM, Smolarkiewicz PK. 2003. An all-scale anelastic model for geophysical flows: dynamic grid deformation. J. Comput. Phys. 190: 601-622.
23. Prusa JM, Smolarkiewicz PK, Wyszogrodzki AA. 2008. EULAG, a computational model for multiscale flows. Comput. Fluids 37: 1193-1207.
24. Qian JH, Semazzi FHM, Scroggs JS. 1998. A global non-hydrostatic semi-Lagrangian atmospheric model with orography. Mon. Weather Rev. 126: 747-771.
25. Ritchie H. 1988. Application of the semi-Lagrangian method to a spectral model of the shallow water equations. Mon. Weaker Rev. 116: 1587-1598.
26. Ritchie H, Temperton C, Simmons A, Hortal M, Davies T, Dent D, Hamrud M. 1995. Implementation of the semi-Lagrangian method in a high resolution version of the ECMWF forecast model. Mon. Weather Rev. 123: 489-514.
27. Smolarkiewicz PK. 2006. Multidimensional positive definite advection transport algorithm: an overview. Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids 50: 1123-1144.
28. Smolarkiewicz PK, Margolin LG. 1998. MPDATA: a finite difference solver for geophysical flows. J. Comput. Phys. 140: 459-480.
29. Smolarkiewicz PK, Margolin LG. 2000. Variational methods for elliptic problems in fluid models. Proc. 2000 ECMWF Workshop on Developments in Numerical Methods for Very High Resolution Global Models. ECMWF Reading. Pp 137-159.
30. Smolarkiewicz PK, Prusa JM. 2005. Towards mesh adaptivity for geophysical turbulence: continuous mapping approach. Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids 47: 789-801.
31. Smolarkiewicz PK, Grubišić V, Margolin LG, Wyszogrodzki AA. 1999. Forward-in-time differencing for fluids: non-hydrostatic modelling of fluid motions on a sphere. Proc. 1998 Seminar on Recent Developments in Numerical Methods for Atmospheric Modelling. ECMWF Reading. Pp 21-43.
32. Smolarkiewicz PK, Margolin LG, Wyszogrodzki AA. 2001. A class of non-hydrostatic global models. J. Atmos. Sci. 58: 349-364.
33. Temam R. 2006. Suitable initial conditions. J. Comput. Phys. 218: 443-450.
34. Temperton C. 1991. On scalar and vector transform methods for global spectral models. Mon. Weather Rev. 119: 1303-1307.
35. Temperton C, Hortal M, Simmons A. 2001. A two-time-level semi-Lagrangian global spectral model. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 127: 111-127.
36. Tomita H, Satoh M. 2004. A new dynamical framework of non-hydrostatic global model using the icosahedral grid. Fluid Dyn. Res. 34: 357-400,
37. Waite M, Smolarklewicz P. 2008. Instability and breakdown of a vertical vortex pair in a strongly stratified fluid. J. Fluid Mech. 606: 239-273.
38. Wedi NP, Smolarkiewicz PK. 2004. Extending Gal-Chen & Somerville terrain-following coordinate transformation on time-dependent curvilinear boundaries. J. Comput. Phys. 193: 1-20.
39. Wedi NP, Smolarkiewicz PK. 2006. Direct numerical simulation of the Plumb-McEwan laboratory analog of the QBO. J. Atmos. Sci. 63: 3226-3252.
40. White AA, Bromley RA. 1995. Dynamically consistent, quasi-hydrostatic equations for global models with a complete representation of the Coriolis force. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 121: 399-418.
41. White AA, Hoskins BJ, Roulstone I, Staniforth A. 2005. Consistent approximate models of the global atmosphere: shallow, deep, hydrostatic, quasi-hydrostatic and non-hydrostatic. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 131: 2081-2107.
42. Wood N, Staniforth A. 2003. The deep-atmosphere Euler equations with a mass-based vertical coordinate. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 129: 1289-1300.
43. Wurtele MG, Sharman RD, Keller TL. 1987. Analysis and simulations of a troposphere-stratosphere gravity wave model. Part I. J. Atmos. Sci. 44: 3269-3281.
44. Yessad K. 2008. Dynamics. GmapDoc. http://www.cnrm.meteo.fr/gmapdoc/.