1997
DOI: 10.1175/1520-0477(1997)078<2599:atolbc>2.0.co;2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Tutorial on Lateral Boundary Conditions as a Basic and Potentially Serious Limitation to Regional Numerical Weather Prediction

Abstract: Limited-area models (LAMs) are presently used for a wide variety of research and operational forecasting applications, and such use will likely expand greatly as the rapid increase in the performance/price ratio of computers and workstations makes LAMs more accessible to novice users. The robustness of these well-tested and documented models will make it tempting for many to consider them as turn-key systems that can be used without any experience or formal training in numerical weather prediction. This paper … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

12
270
0
5

Year Published

2003
2003
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 401 publications
(290 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
(29 reference statements)
12
270
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…One shortcoming of this approach is the transmission of GCM biases through the RCM lateral and lower boundaries, which may have a severe impact on the interior climate (e.g. Warner et al 1997;Done et al 2013).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One shortcoming of this approach is the transmission of GCM biases through the RCM lateral and lower boundaries, which may have a severe impact on the interior climate (e.g. Warner et al 1997;Done et al 2013).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The use of nested LAMs or RCMs as a climate downscaling technique, indeed, involves a number of issues, one of which is related to the lateral boundary conditions (LBCs) (Giorgi and Mearns 1999;Denis et al 2002). This drawback of RCMs is related to the fact that one is obliged to impose imperfect LBCs, inducing various errors at the boundaries (e.g., Warner et al 1997;Termonia et al 2009). Despite this, past and current applications with RCMs have shown that the one-way nesting strategy is a workable solution (Giorgi and Mearns 1999).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are many studies evaluating the value added by dynamical downscaling with the perfect boundary experiment (e.g., Castro et al 2005;Fu et al 2005;Xue et al 2007;Gao et al 2011). In addition to errors due to the quality of lateral boundary condition data (e.g., Gong and Wang 2000;Xue et al 2012), known sources of uncertainty generated through RCM experiments are horizontal resolution (e.g., Christensen et al 1998;Mo et al 2000;Wang et al 2003;Zhang et al 2003;Castro et al 2005;Xue et al 2007;Sato et al 2008), domain size and location (e.g., Treadon and Petersen 1993;Xue et al 2007;Gao et al 2011), lateral boundary settings (Denis et al 2003;Giorgi and Mearns 1999;Warner et al 1997), and physics schemes Liang et al 2004;Wang et al 2004). Meanwhile, the nudging setup (including nudging method and coefficient for time scale) has been introduced to overcome the problems caused by the above mentioned factors (e.g., Marbaix et al 2003;Gong and Wang 2000;Xu and Yang 2012).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%