A Benchmark Simulation for Moist Nonhydrostatic Numerical Models

Abstract

A benchmark solution that facilitates testing the accuracy, efficiency, and efficacy of moist nonhydrostatic numerical model formulations and assumptions is presented. The solution is created from a special configuration of moist model processes and a specific set of initial conditions. The configuration and initial conditions include: reversible phase changes, no hydrometeor fallout, a neutrally stable base-state environment, and an initial buoyancy perturbation that is identical to the one used to test nonlinearly evolving dry thermals. The results of the moist simulation exhibit many of the properties found in its dry counterpart. Given the similar results, and acceptably small total mass and total energy errors, it is argued that this new moist simulation design can be used as a benchmark to evaluate moist numerical model formulations. The utility of the benchmark simulation is highlighted by running the case with approximate forms of the governing equations found in the literature. Results of these tests have implications for the formulation of numerical models. For example, it is shown that an equation set that conserves both mass and energy is crucial for obtaining the benchmark solution. Results also suggest that the extra effort required to conserve mass in a numerical model may not lead to significant improvements in results unless energy is also conserved.

Generalization and application of the flux-conservative thermodynamic equations in the AROME model of the ALADIN system

“…The conclusions from this case study are in line with the results from Bryan and Fritsch (2002), where neglecting a supposedly small term in the energy budget unexpectedly leads to the worst results.…”

“…The thermodynamic aspects of the physics-dynamics coupling is another topic that deserves some attention. Although some attempts have been made to rigorously formulate the equations for a multicomponent atmosphere (Ooyama, 2001;Bannon, 2002), it remains a fact that many operational models make several adhoc approximations (Bryan and Fritsch, 2002). Catry et al (2007), hereafter CGTBT07, presented a set of equations that expresses the effects of physics parameterizations in a fluxconservative formulation.…”

A Simple Method for Simulating Wind Profiles in the Boundary Layer of Tropical Cyclones

“…This study utilizes "Cloud Model version 1" (CM1) (e.g., Bryan and Fritsch 2002;Bryan and Rotunno 2009), which uses a three-step Runge-Kutta method for the time integration scheme, and a fifth-order scheme for advection terms, following Wicker and Skamarock (2002). CM1 integrates a variety of equation sets including compressible, anelastic, or incompressible equations.…”

General overview: European Integrated project on Aerosol Cloud Climate and Air Quality interactions (EUCAARI) – integrating aerosol research from nano to global scales

“…With that it is possible to study the effects of different CCN concentrations on cloud structures. The model was evaluated using simple test cases (Bryan and Fritsch, 2002) but also some more complex GCSS test cases (BOMEX, DYCOMS). It is capable of producing three-dimensional cloud fields even with features like open and closed cell structures, at computation times of several hours using one GPU.…”