• Bonan, G., 1998: The land surface climatology of the NCAR Land Surface Model (LSM 1.0) coupled to the NCAR Community Climate Model (CCM3). J. Climate,11, 1307–1326.

  • Boville, B. A., and P. R. Gent, 1998: The NCAR Climate System Model, version one. J. Climate,11, 1115–1130.

  • ——, and J. W. Hurrell, 1998: A comparison of the atmospheric circulations by the CCM3 and CSM1. J. Climate,11, 1327–1341.

  • Briegleb, B., and D. H. Bromwich, 1998: Polar climate simulation of the NCAR CCM3. J. Climate,11, 1270–1286.

  • Bryan, F. O., B. G. Kauffman, W. G. Large, and P. R. Gent, 1996:The NCAR CSM Flux Coupler. National Center for Atmospheric Research NCAR/TN-424+STR, 46 pp.

  • Gates, W. L., 1992: AMIP: The Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,72, 1962–1970.

  • Gent, P. R., J. Willebrand, T. J. McDougall, and J. C. McWilliams, 1995: Parameterizing eddy-induced tracer transports in ocean circulation models. J. Phys. Oceanogr.,25, 463–474.

  • ——, F. O. Bryan, G. Danabasoglu, S. C. Doney, W. R. Holland, W. G. Large, and J. C. McWilliams, 1998: The NCAR Climate System Model global ocean component. J. Climate. 11, 1287–1306.

  • Hurrell, J. W., 1995: Comparison of the NCAR Community Climate Model (CCM) climates. Climate Dyn.,11, 25–50.

  • ——, H. van Loon, and D. J. Shea, 1998: The mean state of the troposphere. Meteorology of the Southern Hemisphere, D. Karoly and D. Vincent, Eds., Amer. Meteor. Soc., in press.

  • Kiehl, J. T., J. J. Hack, G. Bonan, B. A. Boville, D. Williamson, and P. Rasch, 1998: The National Center for Atmospheric Research Community Climate Model: CCM3. J. Climate,11, 1131–1149.

  • Large, W. G., J. C. McWilliams, and S. C. Doney, 1994: Oceanic vertical mixing: A review and a model with a nonlocal boundary layer parameterization. Rev. Geophys.,32, 363–403.

  • Mitchell, J. F. B., and T. S. Hills, 1986: Sea-ice and the antarctic winter circulation, a numerical experiment. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,112, 953–969.

  • ——, and C. A. Senior, 1989: The antarctic winter; simulations with climatological and reduced sea-ice extents. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,115, 225–246.

  • Quintanar, A. I., and C. R. Mechoso, 1995a: Quasi-stationary waves in the Southern Hemisphere. Part II: Generation Mechanisms. J. Climate,8, 2673–2690.

  • ——, and ——, 1995b: Quasi-stationary waves in the Southern Hemisphere. Part I: Observational data. J. Climate,8, 2659–2672.

  • Schoeberl, M. R., and M. A. Geller, 1976: The structure of stationary planetary waves in winter in relation to the polar night jet intensity. Geophys. Res. Lett.,3, 177–180.

  • Simmonds, I., 1981: The effect of sea-ice on a general circulation model of the Southern Hemisphere. Sea Level, Ice and Climatic Change, I. Allison, Ed., IAHS, 253 pp.

  • ——, and Y. Lin, 1983: Topographical and thermal forcing in a circulation model of the Southern Hemisphere. Publication No. 24, University of Melbourne, Meteorology Department, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, 78 pp.

  • Trenberth, K. E., 1979: Interannual variability of the 500 mbar zonal mean flow in the Southern Hemisphere. Mon. Wea. Rev.,107, 1515–1524.

  • ——, 1980: Planetary waves at 500 mb in the Southern Hemisphere. Mon. Wea. Rev.,108, 1378–1389.

  • van Loon, H. V., and R. Jenne, 1972: The zonal harmonic standing waves in the Southern Hemisphere. J. Geophys. Res.,77, 992–1003.

  • ——, ——, and K. Labitzke, 1973: Zonal harmonic standing waves. J. Geophys. Res.,78, 4463–4471.

  • ——, J. W. Kidson, and A. B. Mullen, 1993: Decadal variation of the annual cycle in the Australian dataset. J. Climate,6, 1227–1231.

  • Watterson, I. G., and I. N. James, 1992: Baroclinic waves propagating from a high latitude source. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,118, 23–50.

  • Weatherly, J., B. Briegleb, W. G. Large, and T. Bettge, 1998: Sea ice and polar climate in the NCAR CSM. J. Climate,11, 1472–1486.

  • Xu, J.-S., H. von Storch, and H. van Loon, 1990: The performance of four spectral GCMs in the Southern Hemisphere: The January and July climatology and the semi-annual wave. J. Climate,3, 53–70.

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 138 138 3
PDF Downloads 47 47 2

Quasi-Stationary Waves in the Southern Hemisphere: An Examination of Their Simulation by the NCAR Climate System Model, with and without an Interactive Ocean

View More View Less
  • 1 Department of Geography, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
© Get Permissions Rent on DeepDyve
Restricted access

Abstract

The three primary quasi-stationary waves in the geopotential height field of the Southern Hemisphere, as simulated by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) Climate System Model (CSM1) and the Community Climate Model, version 3 (CCM3), are examined and compared with the NCAR–National Centers for Environmental Prediction reanalyses. Fourier analysis is used to decompose the geopotential heights into its zonal harmonic components. Both models are able to simulate the mean and zonal asymmetry of the geopotential heights; however, the CSM1 simulates the interannual variability considerably better than the CCM3. The amplitude and phase of wave 1 are well simulated by the models, particularly in the subantarctic region. The models are also able to reproduce the interannual variation in phase and amplitude of wave 1. The success of the simulation is attributed to the models’ ability to simulate well the important features of the geopotential height and temperature distributions. The models vary in their ability to simulate waves 2 and 3. Reasons for these variations are discussed.

Corresponding author address: Dr. Marilyn Raphael, Department of Geography, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1524.

Email: raphael@geog.ucla.edu

Abstract

The three primary quasi-stationary waves in the geopotential height field of the Southern Hemisphere, as simulated by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) Climate System Model (CSM1) and the Community Climate Model, version 3 (CCM3), are examined and compared with the NCAR–National Centers for Environmental Prediction reanalyses. Fourier analysis is used to decompose the geopotential heights into its zonal harmonic components. Both models are able to simulate the mean and zonal asymmetry of the geopotential heights; however, the CSM1 simulates the interannual variability considerably better than the CCM3. The amplitude and phase of wave 1 are well simulated by the models, particularly in the subantarctic region. The models are also able to reproduce the interannual variation in phase and amplitude of wave 1. The success of the simulation is attributed to the models’ ability to simulate well the important features of the geopotential height and temperature distributions. The models vary in their ability to simulate waves 2 and 3. Reasons for these variations are discussed.

Corresponding author address: Dr. Marilyn Raphael, Department of Geography, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1524.

Email: raphael@geog.ucla.edu

Save