1995
DOI: 10.1175/1520-0493(1995)123<0059:roptsl>2.0.co;2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

“Horizontal” Reduction of Pressure to Sea Level: Comparison against the NMC's Shuell Method

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

1997
1997
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Differences in the pressure reduction method can introduce errors during interpolation of pressures from coarser to finer grids during model initialization over complex terrain. Brewer et al [14] report that the Shuell pressure reduction [31,32] used in the NARR often results in a closed low pressure over eastern Washington and pressure ridging over higher terrain during summer months, while the Mesinger pressure reduction [33] (e.g., used in the Eta Model) does not produce either of these features. The Mesigner method was developed to mitigate "unnatural-looking" small-scale terrain-following features in the pressure field [34].…”
Section: Gap Winds and Operational Modelingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Differences in the pressure reduction method can introduce errors during interpolation of pressures from coarser to finer grids during model initialization over complex terrain. Brewer et al [14] report that the Shuell pressure reduction [31,32] used in the NARR often results in a closed low pressure over eastern Washington and pressure ridging over higher terrain during summer months, while the Mesinger pressure reduction [33] (e.g., used in the Eta Model) does not produce either of these features. The Mesigner method was developed to mitigate "unnatural-looking" small-scale terrain-following features in the pressure field [34].…”
Section: Gap Winds and Operational Modelingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While most existing extrapolation schemes aim to estimate as accurately as possible the sea level pressure field, the goals of this study are best served by ensuring that the data are extrapolated so as to minimize the flow attributable to the artificial subterranean PV. In this study and the subsequent papers (Part II, Part III, and Part IV), the reanalysis data are first extrapolated using the so-called Shuell procedure (Mesinger and Treadon 1995) and then postprocessed using a scheme designed to impose balance between the subterranean mass and momentum fields (Gold 2004). The postprocessing replaces static stability profiles in and near elevated orography with the neighboring atmospheric static stability and imposes geostrophic balance on the wind field in this layer.…”
Section: Data Pv Inversion and Pv Modification A Datasetmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Any objective evaluation of the gradient would conclude that there is a permanent front located there. Mesinger & Treadon (1995) show that horizontally interpolating the temperatures whenever the pressure level is below ground is the most appropriate method for computing heights below ground. Since air temperatures are known where the isobaric surface cuts the high terrain, temperatures inside the region can be interpolated so that the analysis below ground is smooth with the edges.…”
Section: Fronts Over Higher Terrainmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, she also points out that because the process of estimating pressure level heights below ground is fraught with assumptions, it is difficult to assess the errors. Note also that the AWC's method is not as rigorous as the Mesinger & Treadon (1995) method, which solves a partial differential equation by iteration, Drawing fronts objectively but it is computationally far simpler. This is important when having to recompute heights on global data sets.…”
Section: Fronts Over Higher Terrainmentioning
confidence: 99%