Idealized global nonhydrostatic atmospheric test cases on a reduced-radius sphere

Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems

Volumn 7, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 1155-1177

  Klemp, J B ^a   Skamarock, W C ^a   Park, S H ^a  

^a NATIONAL CENTER FOR ATMOSPHERIC RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

global model; global model test cases; nonhydrostatic model; reduced radius sphere

Indexed keywords

ATMOSPHERIC TURBULENCE; DYNAMICS; GEOMETRY; LANDFORMS;

ATMOSPHERIC SIMULATIONS; CARTESIAN GEOMETRY; CLOUD MICROPHYSICS; CONVERGENT BEHAVIOR; GLOBAL MODELING; NONHYDROSTATIC MODEL; QUANTITATIVE COMPARISON; SUPERCELL THUNDERSTORMS;

SPHERES;

ATMOSPHERIC MODELING; CLOUD MICROPHYSICS; DYNAMIC ANALYSIS; GEOMETRY; MODEL TEST; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; SPHERE; SUPERCELL; THUNDERSTORM;

EID: 84944884296     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19422466     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/2015MS000435     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Ching, J., R. Rotunno, M. LeMone, A. Martilli, B. Kosovic, P. A. Jimenez, and, J. Dudhia, (2014), Convectively induced secondary circulations in fine-grid mesoscale numerical weather prediction models, Mon. Weather Rev., 142, 3284-3302.
2. Gal-Chen, T., and, R. C. J. Sommerville, (1975), Numerical solutions of the Navier-Stokes equations with topography, J. Comput. Phys., 17, 276-310.
3. Kain, J. S., et al., (2008), Some practical considerations regarding horizontal resolution in the first generation of operational convection-allowing NWP, Weather Forecast., 23, 931-952.
4. Kessler, E., (1969), On the Distribution and Continuity of Water Substance in Atmospheric Circulation, Meteorol. Monogr., vol. 32, 84 pp., Am. Meteorol. Soc., Boston, Mass.
5. Klemp, J. B., and, R. B. Wilhelmson, (1978), The simulation of three-dimensional convective storm dynamics, J. Atmos. Sci., 35, 1070-1096.
6. Klemp, J. B., W. Skamarock, and, O. Fuhrer, (2003), Numerical consistency of metric terms in terrain-following coordinates, Mon. Weather Rev., 131, 1229-1239.
7. Klemp, J. B., J. Dudhia, and, A. D. Hassiotis, (2008), An upper gravity-wave absorbing layer for NWP applications, Mon. Weather Rev., 136, 3987-4004.
8. Malardel, S., (2013), Physics/dynamics coupling at very high resolution: Permitted versus parametrized convection, in ECMWF Seminar on Recent Developments in Numerical Methods for Atmosphere and Ocean Modelling, pp. 83-98, ECMWF, Reading, U. K. [Available at http://old.ecmwf.int/publications/library/ecpublications/-pdf/seminar/2013/Malardel.pdf.]
9. Rayleigh, L., (1916), LIX. On convection currents in a horizontal layer of fluid, when the higher temperature is on the under side, Philos. Mag., 32, 529-546.
10. Rotunno, R., and, J. B. Klemp, (1982), The influence of the shear-induced pressure gradient on thunderstorm motion, Mon. Weather Rev., 110, 136-151.
11. Rotunno, R., and, J. B. Klemp, (1985), On the rotation and propagation of simulated supercell thunderstorms, J. Atmos. Sci., 42, 271-292.
12. Schär, C., D. Leuenberger, O. Fuhrer, D. Lüthi, and, C. Girard, (2002), A new terrain-following vertical coordinate formulation for atmospheric prediction models, Mon. Weather Rev., 130, 2459-2480.
13. Schlesinger, R. E., (1975), A three-dimensional numerical model of an isolated deep convective cloud: Preliminary results, J. Atmos. Sci., 32, 934-957.
14. Schlesinger, R. E., (1980), A three-dimensional numerical model of an isolated thunderstorm. Part II: Dynamics of updraft splitting and mesovortex couplet evolution, J. Atmos. Sci., 37, 395-420.
15. Skamarock, W. C., and, A. Gassmann, (2011), Conservative transport schemes for spherical geodesic grids: High-order flux operators for ODE-based time integration, Mon. Weather Rev., 139, 2962-2975.
16. Skamarock, W. C., J. B. Klemp, M. G. Duda, L. Fowler, S.-H. Park, and, T. D. Ringler, (2012), A Multi-scale nonhydrostatic atmospheric model using centroidal Voronoi tesselations and C-grid staggering, Mon. Weather Rev., 240, 3090-3105.
17. Soong, S.-T., and, Y. Ogura, (1973), A comparison between axisymmetric and slab-symmetric cumulus cloud models, J. Atmos. Sci., 30, 879-893.
18. Ullrich, P. A., C. Jablonowski, J. Kent, P. H. Lauritzen, R. D. Nair, and, M. A. Taylor, (2012), Dynamical Core Model Intercomparison Project (DCMIP) Test Case Document, Earth System CoG. [Available at www.earthsystemcog.org.]
19. Wedi, P. W., and, P. K. Smolarkiewicz, (2009), A framework for testing global non-hydrostatic models, Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc., 35, 46-484.
20. Weisman, M. L., and, J. B. Klemp, (1982), The dependence of numerically simulated convective storms on vertical wind shear and buoyancy, Mon. Weather Rev., 110, 504-520.
21. Weisman, M. L., and, J. B. Klemp, (1984), The structure and classification of numerically simulated convective storms in directionally varying wind shears, Mon. Weather Rev., 112, 2479-2498.
22. Weisman, M. L., and, J. B. Klemp, (1986), Characteristics of isolated convective storms, in Mesoscale Meteorology and Forecasting, pp. 331-358, Am. Meteorol. Soc., Boston, Mass.
23. Weisman, M. L., J. B. Klemp, and, R. Rotunno, (1988), The structure and evolution of numerically simulated squall lines, J. Atmos. Sci., 45, 1990-2013.
24. Weisman, M. L., W. C. Skamarock, and, J. B. Klemp, (1997), The resolution dependence of explicitly modeled convective systems, Mon. Weather Rev., 125, 527-548.
25. Weisman, M. L., C. Davis, W. Wang, K. W. Manning, and, J. B. Klemp, (2008), Experiences with 0-36-h explicit convective forecasts with the WRF-ARW Model, Weather Forecas., 23, 407-437.
26. Wilhelmson, R., (1974), The life cycle of a thunderstorm in three dimensions, J. Atmos. Sci., 31, 1629-1651.