2019
DOI: 10.1175/mwr-d-18-0392.1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessing Adaptive Mesh Refinement (AMR) in a Forced Shallow-Water Model with Moisture

Abstract: Two forced shallow-water flow scenarios are explored in a 2D fourth-order finite-volume dynamical core with adaptive mesh refinement (AMR) to investigate AMR’s ability to track and resolve complex evolving features. Traditional shallow-water test cases are mainly characterized by large-scale smooth flows that do not effectively test the multiscale abilities of variable-resolution and AMR models to resolve sharp gradients and small-scale flow filaments. Therefore, adding forcing mechanisms to the shallow-water … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The second test case is similar to the barotropic unstable jet test case (Galewsky et al, 2004). This test case was analyzed in Ferguson et al (2019), however, in their work, the rain formed is considered as precipitated and is removed from the model. In our analysis, we consider the rain to be advected as a tracer following Zerroukat and Allen (2015).…”
Section: Moist Shallow-water Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The second test case is similar to the barotropic unstable jet test case (Galewsky et al, 2004). This test case was analyzed in Ferguson et al (2019), however, in their work, the rain formed is considered as precipitated and is removed from the model. In our analysis, we consider the rain to be advected as a tracer following Zerroukat and Allen (2015).…”
Section: Moist Shallow-water Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The second test case is similar to the barotropic unstable jet test case (Galewsky et al, 2004). This test case was analyzed in Ferguson et al (2019); however, in their work, the rain formed is considered precipitated and is removed from the model. In our analysis, we consider the rain to be advected as a tracer following Zerroukat and Allen (2015).…”
Section: Moist Shallow-water Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Participants included developers for the MOM6 (Adcroft et al., 2019), CROCO (Hilt et al., 2020) and NEMO (Madec et al., 2019) ocean models, the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM, Neale et al., 2010) which is part of the Community Earth System Model (CESM, Danabasoglu et al., 2020) from the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) (Golaz et al., 2019), the DYNAMICO (Dynamical Core on Icosahedral Grid, Dubos et al., 2015), the Unified Model (Walters et al., 2017), LFRic (S. Adams et al., 2019; Melvin et al., 2019) and ICON‐IAP (Icosahedral Nonhydrostatic model at the Institute for Atmospheric Physics, Gassmann, 2013) atmosphere models, and the CLUBB (Cloud Layers Unified By Binormals) parameterization of turbulence and clouds in the atmosphere (Larson, 2017). Participants also included developers of Adaptive Mesh Refinement (AMR) methods for geophysical flows via the CHOMBO library (M. Adams et al., 2019; Ferguson et al., 2016, 2019) as well as WAVETRISK (Dubos & Kevlahan, 2013; Kevlahan & Dubos, 2019). Since the group was deliberately heterogeneous, the workshop began with a series of overview talks on each component (atmosphere, ocean, physics, couplers).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%