Editorial Type:
Article
Article Type:
Research Article

An Evaluation of the Large-Eddy Simulation Option of the Regional Atmospheric Modeling System in Simulating a Convective Boundary Layer: A FIFE Case Study

Roni Avissar Department of Environmental Sciences, Cook College, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey

Search for other papers by Roni Avissar in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Edwin W. Eloranta Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, University of Wisconsin—Madison, Madison, Wisconsin

Search for other papers by Edwin W. Eloranta in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Kemal Gürer Department of Environmental Sciences, Cook College, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey

Search for other papers by Kemal Gürer in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
, and
Gregory J. Tripoli Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, University of Wisconsin—Madison, Madison, Wisconsin

Search for other papers by Gregory J. Tripoli in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
Print Publication:
01 Apr 1998
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1998)055<1109:AEOTLE>2.0.CO;2
Page(s):
1109–1130
Restricted access

Abstract

A large-eddy simulation (LES) model was used to simulate the convective boundary layer (CBL) that developed on 1 July 1987, over the domain of the First International Satellite Land Surface Climatology Project Field Experiment (FIFE). Three simulations were produced using different boundary conditions at the ground surface, namely, (i) spatial distribution of topography and spatial distribution of surface heat fluxes; (ii) spatial distribution of topography but mean surface heat fluxes; and (iii) no topography and mean surface heat fluxes. The diurnal variation of mean surface fluxes and their spatial distribution were derived from the FIFE network of observations. In all cases, the model was initialized with the atmospheric sounding observed in this domain at 0700, and run until 1500 local time. The resulting mean profiles of temperature and specific humidity were compared to those observed with atmospheric soundings at 0900, 1030, and 1230 local time. The simulated structure of turbulence was qualitatively compared with that obtained from a volume-imaging lidar (VIL) scanning the CBL over the simulated domain during that day. Power spectra and autocorrelations of mixing ratio were calculated from the model outputs and were compared to those obtained from the VIL.

Overall, the model performed quite well. Observed atmospheric soundings were within 1 K and 1 g kg−1 of the simulated mean profiles of temperature and specific humidity, respectively, and indicated that the model correctly predicts the CBL height. Similarities in the structure of the eddies obtained from the model and the VIL were clearly identified. Spectral analysis indicated that resolved eddies (i.e., eddies larger than 200 m) are relatively well simulated with the model, but that the energy cascade is not well represented by the Deardorff 1.5-order-of-closure subgrid-scale parameterization. Autocorrelation analysis indicated that the model correctly simulates the characteristic size of the eddies, but that their mean lifetime is longer than that observed with the VIL, indicating a too weak dissipation of the eddies by the subgrid-scale scheme. Thus, this study emphasized the need to develop better subgrid-scale parameterizations for LES models. The different simulations also indicated that topographical features of the order of 100 m and microβ-scale heterogeneity of surface heat fluxes had only a minor to modest impact on the CBL developing over a relatively humid surface.

Corresponding author address: Prof. Roni Avissar, Department of Environmental Sciences, Cook College, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08903.

Abstract

A large-eddy simulation (LES) model was used to simulate the convective boundary layer (CBL) that developed on 1 July 1987, over the domain of the First International Satellite Land Surface Climatology Project Field Experiment (FIFE). Three simulations were produced using different boundary conditions at the ground surface, namely, (i) spatial distribution of topography and spatial distribution of surface heat fluxes; (ii) spatial distribution of topography but mean surface heat fluxes; and (iii) no topography and mean surface heat fluxes. The diurnal variation of mean surface fluxes and their spatial distribution were derived from the FIFE network of observations. In all cases, the model was initialized with the atmospheric sounding observed in this domain at 0700, and run until 1500 local time. The resulting mean profiles of temperature and specific humidity were compared to those observed with atmospheric soundings at 0900, 1030, and 1230 local time. The simulated structure of turbulence was qualitatively compared with that obtained from a volume-imaging lidar (VIL) scanning the CBL over the simulated domain during that day. Power spectra and autocorrelations of mixing ratio were calculated from the model outputs and were compared to those obtained from the VIL.

Overall, the model performed quite well. Observed atmospheric soundings were within 1 K and 1 g kg−1 of the simulated mean profiles of temperature and specific humidity, respectively, and indicated that the model correctly predicts the CBL height. Similarities in the structure of the eddies obtained from the model and the VIL were clearly identified. Spectral analysis indicated that resolved eddies (i.e., eddies larger than 200 m) are relatively well simulated with the model, but that the energy cascade is not well represented by the Deardorff 1.5-order-of-closure subgrid-scale parameterization. Autocorrelation analysis indicated that the model correctly simulates the characteristic size of the eddies, but that their mean lifetime is longer than that observed with the VIL, indicating a too weak dissipation of the eddies by the subgrid-scale scheme. Thus, this study emphasized the need to develop better subgrid-scale parameterizations for LES models. The different simulations also indicated that topographical features of the order of 100 m and microβ-scale heterogeneity of surface heat fluxes had only a minor to modest impact on the CBL developing over a relatively humid surface.

Corresponding author address: Prof. Roni Avissar, Department of Environmental Sciences, Cook College, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08903.

Save
Cover Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences
Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences

  • André, J.-C., G. de Moor, P. Lacarrère, G. Therry, and R. du Vachat, 1978: Modeling the 24-hour evolution of the mean turbulent structures of the planetary boundary layer. J. Atmos. Sci.,35, 1861–1883.

  • Avissar, R., and R. A. Pielke, 1989: A parameterization of heterogeneous land surface for atmospheric numerical models and its impact on regional meteorology. Mon. Wea. Rev.,117, 2113–2136.

  • Briggs, G. A., 1988: Surface inhomogeneity effects on convective diffusion. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,45, 117–135.

  • Chen, D., and W. Brutsaert, 1995: Diagnostics of land surface spatial variability and water vapor flux. J. Geophys. Res.,100, 25595–25606.

  • Chen, F., K. Mitchell, J. Schaake, Y. Xue, H.-L. Pan, V. Koren, Q.-Y. Duan, M. Ek, and A. Betts, 1996: Modeling of land–surface evaporation by four schemes and comparison with FIFE observation. J. Geophys. Res.,101, 7251–7268.

  • Clark, T. L., 1977: A small scale dynamic model using a terrain following coordinate transformation. J. Comput. Phys.,24, 329–350.

  • Collins, D. C., and R. Avissar, 1994: An evaluation with the Fourier Amplitude Sensitivity Test (FAST) of which land–surface parameters are of greatest importance in atmospheric modeling. J. Climate,7, 681–703.

  • Crosson, W. L., and E. A. Smith, 1992: Estimation of surface heat and moisture fluxes over a prairie grassland. Part 2: Two-dimensional time filtering and site variability. J. Geophys. Res.,97, 18583–18598.

  • Deardorff, J. W., 1972: Numerical investigation of neutral and unstable planetary boundary layers. J. Atmos. Sci.,29, 91–115.

  • ——, 1974: Three-dimensional numerical study of turbulence in an entraining mixing layer. Bound.-Layer. Meteor.,7, 199–226.

  • ——, 1980: Stratocumulus capped mixed layers derived from a three-dimensional model. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,18, 495–527.

  • Desjardins, R. L., P. H. Schuepp, J. I. MacPherson, and D. J. Buckley, 1992: Spatial and temporal variations of the fluxes of carbon dioxide and sensible heat flux. J. Geophys. Res.,97, 18467–18476.

  • Druilhet, A., J. Noilhan, B. Benech, G. Dubosclard, D. Guedalia, and J. Frangi, 1983: Etude experimentale de la couche limite au-dessus d’un relief modéré proche d’une chaine de montagne. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,25, 3–16.

  • Eloranta, E. W., and D. K. Forrest, 1992: Volume imaging lidar observations of the convective structure surrounding the flight path of a flux-measuring aircraft. J. Geophys. Res.,97, 18383–18393.

  • Friedl, M. A., 1995: Modeling land surface fluxes using a sparse canopy model and radiometric surface temperature measurements. J. Geophys. Res.,100, 25435–25446.

  • Gal-Chen, T., and R. C. J. Somerville, 1975: On the use of coordinate transformation for the solution of the Navier–Stokes equations. J. Comput. Phys.,17, 209–228.

  • Gürer, K., 1995: 3-D comparisons of simulated large eddy structures with the lidar observations. Ph.D. thesis, University of Wisconsin—Madison, 159 pp.

  • Hadfield, M. G., 1989: The response of the atmospheric convectiveboundary layer to surface inhomogeneities. Ph.D. thesis, Colorado State University, 401 pp.

  • ——, W. R. Cotton, and R. A. Pielke, 1991a: Large-eddy simulations of thermally forced circulations in the convective boundary layer. Part I: Small scale circulation with zero wind. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,57, 79–114.

  • ——, ——, and ——, 1991b: Large-eddy simulations of thermally forced circulations in the convective boundary layer. Part II: The effect of changes in wavelength and wind speed. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,58, 307–327.

  • Hall, F. G., and P. J. Sellers, 1995: First International Satellite Land Surface Climatology Project (ISLSCP) Field Experiment (FIFE) in 1995. J. Geophys. Res.,100, 25383–25395.

  • Hechtel, L. M., C.-H. Moeng, and R. B. Stull, 1990: The effects of nonhomogeneous surface fluxes on the convective boundary layer: A case study using large eddy simulation. J. Atmos. Sci.,47, 1721–1741.

  • Holwill, C. J., and J. B. Stewart, 1992: Spatial variability of evaporation derived from aircraft and ground based data. J. Geophys. Res.,97, 18673–18680.

  • Huynh, B. P., C. E. Coulman, and T. R. Turner, 1990: Some turbulence characteristics of convectively mixed layers over rugged and homogeneous terrain. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,51, 229–254.

  • Jedlovec, G. J., and R. J. Atkinson, 1992: Variability of geopysical parameters from aircraft radiance measurements for FIFE. J. Geophys. Res.,97, 18913–18924.

  • Kaimal, J. C., 1978: Horizontal velocity spectra in an unstable surface layer. J. Atmos. Sci.,35, 18–24.

  • Kanemasu, E. T., S. B. Verma, E. A. Smith, L. J. Fritschen, M. Wesely, R. T. Field, W. P. Kustas, H. Weaver, J. B. Stewart, R. Gurney, G. Panin, and J. B. Moncrieff, 1992: Surface flux measurements in FIFE: An overview. J. Geophys. Res.,97, 18547–18555.

  • Klemp, J. B., and D. K. Lilly, 1978: Numerical simulation of hydrostatic mountain waves. J. Atmos. Sci.,35, 78–106.

  • Krettenauer, K., and U. Schumann, 1989: Direct numerical simulation of thermal convection over a wavy surface. Meteor. Atmos. Phys.,41, 165–179.

  • Kunkel, K. E., E. W. Eloranta, and J. A. Weinman, 1980: Remote determination of winds, turbulence spectra, and energy dissipation rates in the boundary layer from lidar measurements. J. Atmos. Sci.,37, 978–985.

  • Lee, T. J., R. A. Pielke Sr., and P. W. Mielke Jr., 1995: Modeling the clear sky surface energy budget during FIFE 1987. J. Geophys. Res.,100, 25585–25593.

  • Li, B., and R. Avissar, 1994: The impact of spatial variability of land–surface characteristics on land–surface heat fluxes. J. Climate,7, 528–537.

  • Mahrer, Y., and R. A. Pielke, 1977: The numerical simulation of the airflow over Barbados. Beitr. Phys. Atmos.,50, 98–113.

  • Mason, P. J., 1988: Large-eddy simulations of the convective atmospheric boundary layer. J. Atmos. Sci.,45, 1492–1516.

  • ——, 1994: Large-eddy simulation: A critical review of the technique. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,120, 1–26.

  • Moeng, C.-H., 1984: A large-eddy simulation model for the study of planetary boundary-layer turbulence. J. Atmos. Sci.,41, 2052–2062.

  • ——, and J. C. Wyngaard, 1984: Statistics of conservative scalars in the convective boundary layer. J. Atmos. Sci.,41, 2052–2062.

  • ——, and ——, 1988: Spectral analysis of large-eddy simulations of the convective boundary layer. J. Atmos. Sci.,45, 3573–3587.

  • Nicholls, M., R. Pielke, and R. Meroney, 1993: Large-eddy simulationof microburst winds flowing around a building. J. Wind Eng. Indus. Aerodyn.,46 and 47, 229–237.

  • Nie, D., E. T. Kanemasu, L. J. Fritschen, H. L. Weaver, E. A. Smith, S. B. Verma, R. T. Field, W. P. Kustas, and J. B. Stewart, 1992:An intercomparison of surface energy flux measurement systems used during FIFE 1987. J. Geophys. Res.,97, 18715–18724.

  • Peck, E. L., and A. S. Hope, 1995: Spatial patterns of soil moisture for the FIFE study area derived from remotely sensed and ground data. J. Geophys. Res.,100, 25463–25468.

  • Pielke, R. A., W. R. Cotton, R. L. Walko, C. J. Tremback, W. A. Lyons, L. D. Grasso, M. E. Nicholls, M. D. Moran, D. A. Wesley, T. J. Lee, and J. H.Copeland 1992: A comprehensive meteorological model system—RAMS. Meteor. Atmos. Phys.,49, 69–91.

  • Schmidt, H., and U. Schumann, 1989: Coherent structure of the convective boundary layer derived from large-eddy simulations. J. Fluid Mech.,200, 511–562.

  • Schols, J. L., and E. W. Eloranta, 1992: Calculation of area averaged profiles of the horizontal wind velocity from volume imaging lidar data. J. Geophys. Res.,97, 18395–18407.

  • Sellers, P. J., F. G. Hall, G. Asrar, D. E. Strebel, and R. E. Murphy, 1992: An overview of the First International Satellite Land Surface Climatology Project (ISLSCP) Field Experiment. J. Geophys. Res.,97, 18345–18371.

  • ——, M. D. Hesier, F. G. Hall, S. J. Goetz, D. E. Strebel, S. B. Verma, R. L. Desjardins, P. M. Schepp, and I. MacPherson, 1995: Effects of spatial variability in topography, vegetation cover and soil moisture on area-averaged surface fluxes: A case study using the FIFE 1989 data. J. Geophys. Res.,100, 25607–25629.

  • Smith, E. A., A. Y. Hsu, W. L. Crosson, R. T. Field, L. J. Fritschen, R. J. Gurney, E. T. Kanemasu, W. P. Kustas, D. Nie, W. J. Shuttleworth, J. B. Stewart, S. B. Verma, H. L. Weaver, and M. L. Wesely, 1992: Area averaged surface fluxes and their time space variability over the FIFE experimental domain. J. Geophys. Res.,97, 18559–18622.

  • Stull, R. B., 1988: An Introduction to Boundary Layer Meteorology. Kluwer Academic, 666 pp.

  • Therry, G., and P. Lacarrère, 1983: Improving the eddy kinetic energy model for planetary boundary layer description. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,25, 63–88.

  • Tripoli, G. J., and W. R. Cotton, 1982: The Colorado State University three-dimensional cloud/mesoscale model—1982. Part I: General theoretical framework and sensitivity experiments, J. Rech. Atmos.,16, 185–220.

  • Tuomi, T. J., 1976: The influence of relative humidity and its stratification on lidar backscattering. Beitr. Phys. Atmos.,49, 98–113.

  • Turner, C. L., T. R. Seastedt, M. I. Dyer, T. G. F. Kittel, and D. S. Schimel, 1992: Effects of management and topography on the radiometric response of a tallgrass prairie. J. Geophys. Res.,97, 18855–18866.

  • Viterbo, P., and A. C. M. Beljaars, 1995: An improved land–surface parameterization scheme in the ECMWF model and its validation. J. Climate,8, 2716–2748.

  • Walko, R. L., W. R. Cotton, and R. A. Pielke, 1992: Large eddy simulations of the effects of hilly terrain on the convective boundary layer. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,58, 133–150.

  • Wilezak, J. M., and J. A. Businger, 1983: Thermally indirect motions in the convective atmospheric surface layer. J. Atmos. Sci.,40, 343–358.

  • Young, G. S., 1988: Turbulence structure of the convective boundary layer. Part II: Phoenix 78 aircraft observations of thermals and their environment. J. Atmos. Sci.,45, 727–735.

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 441 145 55
PDF Downloads 161 82 4