Editorial Type:
Article
Article Type:
Research Article

High-Resolution Simulation of Surface and Turbulent Fluxes during HAPEX-MOBILHY

Stéphane Bélair Centre National de Recherches Météorologiques, Météo-France, Toulouse, France

Search for other papers by Stéphane Bélair in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Pierre Lacarrère Centre National de Recherches Météorologiques, Météo-France, Toulouse, France

Search for other papers by Pierre Lacarrère in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Joël Noilhan Centre National de Recherches Météorologiques, Météo-France, Toulouse, France

Search for other papers by Joël Noilhan in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Valéry Masson Centre National de Recherches Météorologiques, Météo-France, Toulouse, France

Search for other papers by Valéry Masson in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
, and
Joël Stein Centre National de Recherches Météorologiques, Météo-France, Toulouse, France

Search for other papers by Joël Stein in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
Print Publication:
01 Aug 1998
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1998)126<2234:HRSOSA>2.0.CO;2
Page(s):
2234–2253
Restricted access

Abstract

The newly developed nonhydrostatic model MESO-NH, in which the surface scheme Interactions Soil–Biosphere–Atmosphere has been incorporated, is used in this study to assess the impact of increasing the horizontal resolution from 10 km to 1 km on the simulation of surface and turbulent fluxes for the 16 June 1986 case of HAPEX-MOBILHY, a field experiment that took place in southwestern France.

Except for a slight deterioration over the cultivated areas surrounding the Landes forest (caused by an inconsistency between the soil texture fields at 10 and 1 km), the simulation of the surface fluxes of sensible and latent heat is generally improved by the increase of horizontal resolution. The contrast of the sensible heat fluxes between the Landes forest and the surrounding cultures is well captured in both 10-km and 1-km runs, but the spatial variability of these fluxes is better represented in the high-resolution results. An oasis-type effect over the larger clearings of the Landes forest is even produced by the model, as was observed.

For the 1-km simulation, the comparison of the turbulent fluxes against observations has to include both the grid-scale fluxes resulting from resolved larger eddies within the well-mixed layer, as well as subgrid-scale (i.e., parameterized) fluxes. (At 10-km resolution, all turbulent fluxes are parameterized.) The greater contributions of the grid-scale component are found over the forest, where the larger eddies are more vigorous due to stronger sensible heat fluxes at the surface. For sensible and latent heat fluxes, the grid-scale component is particularly important in the middle of the mixed layer, whereas for turbulent kinetic energy this component is greater near the bottom and top of the mixed layer. In general, the increase of horizontal resolution does not improve significantly the simulation of the turbulent fluxes. Thus, the use of such an intermediate horizontal resolution (i.e., 1 km), lying between that typically used in large-eddy simulation models (<200 m) and that of mesoscale models (>few kilometers), is questionable, even though this resolution is probably optimal for simulating surface fluxes, since it is roughly the same as the resolution of the soil and vegetation databases.

* Current affiliation: Recherche en Prévision Numérique, Atmospheric Environment Service, Dorval, Quebec, Canada.

Corresponding author address: Dr. Stéphane Bélair, Recherche en Prévision Numérique, Environment Canada, 2121 Trans-Canada North, 500, Dorval, PQ H9P 1J3, Canada.

Email: stephane.belair@ec.gc.ca

Abstract

The newly developed nonhydrostatic model MESO-NH, in which the surface scheme Interactions Soil–Biosphere–Atmosphere has been incorporated, is used in this study to assess the impact of increasing the horizontal resolution from 10 km to 1 km on the simulation of surface and turbulent fluxes for the 16 June 1986 case of HAPEX-MOBILHY, a field experiment that took place in southwestern France.

Except for a slight deterioration over the cultivated areas surrounding the Landes forest (caused by an inconsistency between the soil texture fields at 10 and 1 km), the simulation of the surface fluxes of sensible and latent heat is generally improved by the increase of horizontal resolution. The contrast of the sensible heat fluxes between the Landes forest and the surrounding cultures is well captured in both 10-km and 1-km runs, but the spatial variability of these fluxes is better represented in the high-resolution results. An oasis-type effect over the larger clearings of the Landes forest is even produced by the model, as was observed.

For the 1-km simulation, the comparison of the turbulent fluxes against observations has to include both the grid-scale fluxes resulting from resolved larger eddies within the well-mixed layer, as well as subgrid-scale (i.e., parameterized) fluxes. (At 10-km resolution, all turbulent fluxes are parameterized.) The greater contributions of the grid-scale component are found over the forest, where the larger eddies are more vigorous due to stronger sensible heat fluxes at the surface. For sensible and latent heat fluxes, the grid-scale component is particularly important in the middle of the mixed layer, whereas for turbulent kinetic energy this component is greater near the bottom and top of the mixed layer. In general, the increase of horizontal resolution does not improve significantly the simulation of the turbulent fluxes. Thus, the use of such an intermediate horizontal resolution (i.e., 1 km), lying between that typically used in large-eddy simulation models (<200 m) and that of mesoscale models (>few kilometers), is questionable, even though this resolution is probably optimal for simulating surface fluxes, since it is roughly the same as the resolution of the soil and vegetation databases.

* Current affiliation: Recherche en Prévision Numérique, Atmospheric Environment Service, Dorval, Quebec, Canada.

Corresponding author address: Dr. Stéphane Bélair, Recherche en Prévision Numérique, Environment Canada, 2121 Trans-Canada North, 500, Dorval, PQ H9P 1J3, Canada.

Email: stephane.belair@ec.gc.ca

Save
Cover Monthly Weather Review
Monthly Weather Review

  • Alapaty, K., J. E. Pleim, S. Raman, D. S. Niyogi, and D. W. Byun, 1997: Simulation of atmospheric boundary layer processes using local- and nonlocal-closure schemes. J. Appl. Meteor.,36, 214–233.

  • André, J.-C., J.-P. Goutorbe, and A. Perrier, 1986: HAPEX-MOBILHY: A hydrological atmospheric experiment for the study of water budget and evaporation flux at the climatic scale. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,67, 138–144.

  • ——, Ph. Bougeault, and J.-P. Goutorbe, 1990: Regional estimates of heat and evaporation fluxes over non-homogeneous terrain. Examples from the HAPEX-MOBILHY programme. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,50, 77–108.

  • Avissar, R., 1991: A statistical–dynamical approach to parameterize subgrid-scale land-surface heterogeneity in climate models. Land Surface–Atmosphere Interactions for Climate Models: Observations, Models, and Analyses, E. F. Wood, Ed., Kluwer, 155–178.

  • ——, 1992: Conceptual aspects of a statistical–dynamical approach to represent landscape subgrid-scale heterogeneities in atmospheric models. J. Geophys. Res.,97, 2729–2742.

  • ——, 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.

  • Beljaars, A. C. M., and A. A. M. Holtslag, 1991: Flux parameterization over land surfaces for atmospheric models. J. Appl. Meteor.,30, 327–341.

  • Bhumralkar, C. M., 1975: Numerical experiment on the computation of ground surface temperature in an atmospheric general circulation model. J. Appl. Meteor.,14, 1246–1258.

  • Blackadar, A. K., 1976: Modeling the nocturnal boundary layer. Proc. Third Symp. on Atmospheric Turbulence, Diffusion and Air Quality, Boston, MA, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 46–49.

  • Bosilovitch, M. G., and W.-Y. Sun, 1995: Formulation and verification of a land surface parameterization for atmospheric models. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,73, 321–341.

  • Bougeault, P., and J.-C. André, 1986: On the stability of the third-order turbulence closure for the modeling of the stratocumulus-topped boundary layer. J. Atmos. Sci.,43, 1574–1581.

  • ——, and P. Lacarrère, 1989: Parameterization of orography-induced turbulence in a meso-beta-scale model. Mon. Wea. Rev.,117, 1872–1890.

  • ——, J. Noilhan, P. Lacarrère, and P. Mascart, 1991a: An experiment with an advanced surface parameterization in a mesobeta-scale model. Part I: Implementation. Mon. Wea. Rev.,119, 2358–2373.

  • ——, P. Bret, P. Lacarrère, and J. Noilhan, 1991b: An experiment with an advanced surface parameterization in a mesobeta-scale model. Part II: The 16 June 1986 simulation. Mon. Wea. Rev.,119, 2374–2392.

  • Chen, T. H., and Coauthors, 1997: Cabauw experimental results from the Project for Intercomparison of Land-Surface Parameterization Schemes. J. Climate,10, 1194–1215.

  • Clapp, R. B., and G. M. Hornberger, 1978: Empirical equations for some soil hydraulic properties. Water Resour. Res.,14, 601–604.

  • Clark, C. A., and R. W. Arritt, 1995: Numerical simulations of the effect of soil moisture and vegetation cover on the development of deep convection. J. Appl. Meteor.,34, 2029–2045.

  • Cuxart, J., P. Bougeault, P. Lacarrère, J. Noilhan, and M. R. Soler, 1994: A comparison between transilient turbulence theory and the exchange coefficient model approaches. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,67, 251–276.

  • Davies, H. C., 1976: A lateral boundary formulation for multi-level prediction models. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,102, 405–418.

  • Deardorff, J. W., 1977: A parameterization of ground surface moisture content for use in atmospheric prediction models. J. Appl. Meteor.,16, 1182–1185.

  • Douville, H., J.-F. Royer, and J.-F. Mahfouf, 1995: A new snow parameterization for the French community climate model. Climate Dyn.,12, 21–52.

  • Ducoudré, N. I., K. Laval, and A. Perrier, 1993: SECHIBA, a new set of parameterizations of the hydrologic exchanges within the LMD atmospheric general circulation model. J. Climate,6, 248–273.

  • Ek, M., and R. H. Cuenca, 1994: Variation in soil parameters: Implications for modeling surface fluxes and atmospheric boundary-layer development. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,70, 369–383.

  • Entekhabi, D., and P. S. Eagleson, 1989: Land-surface hydrology parameterization for atmospheric general circulation models including subgrid-scale spatial variability. J. Climate,2, 816–831.

  • Famiglietti, J. S., and E. F. Wood, 1991: Evapotranspiration and runoff from large land areas: Land surface hydrology for atmospheric general circulation models. Land Surface–Atmosphere Interactions for Climate Models: Observations, Models, and Analyses, E. F. Wood, Ed., Kluwer, 179–204.

  • Fritsch, J. M., and C. F. Chappell, 1980: Numerical prediction of convectively driven mesoscale pressure systems. Part I: Convective parameterization. J. Atmos. Sci.,37, 1722–1733.

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

  • Gash, J. H. C., W. J. Shuttleworth, C. R. Loyd, J. C. André, J. P. Goutorbe, and J. Gelpe, 1989: Micrometeorological measurements in Les Landes forest during HAPEX-MOBILHY. Agric. For. Meteor.,46, 131–147.

  • Goutorbe, J. P., J. Noilhan, C. Valancogne, and R. H. Cuenca, 1989:Soil moisture variations during HAPEX-MOBILHY. Ann. Geophys.,7, 415–426.

  • Henderson-Sellers, A., Z.-L. Yang, and R. E. Dickinson, 1993: The Project for Intercomparison of Land-Surface Parameterization Schemes. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,74, 1335–1349.

  • Hildebrand, P., 1988: Flux and sounding data from the NCAR King Air aircraft during HAPEX. NCAR Tech. Rep. 319, 35 pp. [Available from National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO 80307.].

  • Holtslag, A. A. M., and M. Ek, 1996: Simulation of surface fluxes and boundary layer development over the pine forest in HAPEX-MOBILHY. J. Appl. Meteor.,35, 202–213.

  • Jacquemin, B., and J. Noilhan, 1990: Validation of a land surface parameterization using the HAPEX-MOBILHY data set. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,52, 93–134.

  • Kain, J. S., and J. M. Fritsch, 1990: A one-dimensional entraining/detraining plume model and its application in convective parameterization. J. Atmos. Sci.,47, 2784–2802.

  • Kessler, E., 1969: On the Distribution and Continuity of Water Substance in Atmospheric Circulations. Meteor. Monogr., No. 32, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 84 pp.

  • Klemp, J. B., and D. K. Lilly, 1978: Numerical simulations of hydrostatic mountain waves. J. Atmos. Sci.,35, 78–107.

  • Koster, R. D., and M. Suarez, 1992: Modeling the land surface boundary in climate models as a composite of independent vegetation stands. J. Geophys. Res.,97, 2697–2715.

  • Lafore, J. P., and Coauthors, 1998: The Meso-Nh atmospheric simulation system. Part I: Adiabatic formulation and control simulation Ann. Geophys.,16, 90–109.

  • Lenschow, D. H., and B. B. Stankov, 1986: Length scales in the convective boundary layer. J. Atmos. Sci.,43, 1198–1209.

  • Li, B., and R. Avissar, 1994: The impact of spatial variability of land-surface characteristics on land-surface heat fluxes. J. Climate,7, 527–537.

  • Liang, X., D. P. Lettenmaier, E. F. Wood, and S. J. Burges, 1994: A simple hydrologically based model of land surface water and energy fluxes for general circulation models. J. Geophys. Res.,99, 14 415–14 428.

  • Lipps, F. B., and R. S. Hemler, 1982: A scale analysis of deep moist convection and some related numerical calculations. J. Atmos. Sci.,39, 2192–2210.

  • Mahfouf, J.-F., and B. Jacquemin, 1989: A study of rainfall interception using a land surface parameterization for mesoscale meteorological models. J. Appl. Meteor.,28, 1282–1302.

  • ——, and J. Noilhan, 1991: Comparative study of various formulations of evaporation from bare soil using in situ data. J. Appl. Meteor.,30, 1354–1365.

  • Mahrt, L., 1987: Grid-averaged surface fluxes. Mon. Wea. Rev.,115, 1550–1560.

  • ——, and J. Sun, 1995: The subgrid velocity scale in the bulk aerodynamic relationship for spatially averaged scalar fluxes. Mon. Wea. Rev.,123, 3032–3041.

  • Manabe, S., 1969: Climate and the ocean circulation: The atmospheric circulation and the hydrology of the earth’s surface. Mon. Wea. Rev.,97, 739–805.

  • Mascart, P., J. Gelpe, and J. P. Pinty, 1988: Study of the soil characteristics in the HAPEX-MOBILHY 86 area (in French). Tech. Rep. GDTA, 36 pp. [Available from CNRM, 31057 Toulouse, France.].

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

  • Mesinger, F., and A. Arakawa, 1976: Numerical methods used in atmospheric models. GARP Publication Series No. 14, WMO/ICSU Joint Organizing Committee, 64 pp.

  • Mihailovic, D. T., H. A. R. de Bruin, M. Jeftic, and A. van Dijken, 1992: A study of the sensitivity of land surface parameterizations to the inclusion of different fractional covers and soil textures. J. Appl. Meteor.,31, 1477–1487.

  • Morcrette, J., 1989: Description of the radiation scheme in the ECMWF model. ECMWF Tech. Memo. 165, 26 pp. [Available from European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, Shinfield Park, Reading, Berkshire R6A 9AX, United Kingdom.].

  • Noilhan, J., and S. Planton, 1989: A simple parameterization of land surface processes for meteorological models. Mon. Wea. Rev.,117, 536–549.

  • ——, and P. Lacarrère, 1995: GCM grid-scale evaporation from mesoscale modeling. J. Climate,8, 206–223.

  • ——, ——, and P. Bougeault, 1991: An experiment with an advanced surface parameterization in a mesobeta-scale model. Part III: Comparison with the HAPEX-MOBILHY dataset. Mon. Wea. Rev.,119, 2393–2413.

  • Orlanski, I., 1975: A rational subdivision of scales for atmospheric processes. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,56, 527–530.

  • Pan, H.-L., 1990: A simple parameterization scheme of evapotranspiration over land for the NMC Medium-Range Forecast model. Mon. Wea. Rev.,118, 2500–2512.

  • Phulpin, T., and J. Noilhan, 1989: Use of AVHRR and Meteosat data for the determination of land surface parameters. Adv. Space Res.,9, 269–274.

  • Pielke, R. A., G. A. Dalu, J. S. Snook, T. J. Lee, and T. G. F. Kittel, 1991: Nonlinear influence of mesoscale land use on weather and climate. J. Climate,4, 1053–1069.

  • Pitman, A. J., A. Henderson-Sellers, and Z.-L. Yang, 1990: Sensitivity of regional climates to localized precipitation in global models. Nature,346, 734–737.

  • ——, Z.-L. Yang, and A. Henderson-Sellers, 1993: Sub-grid scale precipitation in AGCMS: Re-assessing the land surface sensitivity using a single column model. Climate Dyn.,9, 33–41.

  • Pleim, J. E., and A. Xiu, 1995: Development and testing of a surface flux and planetary boundary layer model for application in mesoscale models. J. Appl. Meteor.,34, 16–32.

  • Redelsperger, J.-L., and G. Sommeria, 1981: Méthode de représentation de la turbulence d’échelle inférieur à la maille pour un modéle tri-dimensionel de convection nuageuse. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,21, 509–530.

  • Sellers, P. J., Y. Mintz, Y. C. Sud, and A. Dalcher, 1986: A simple biosphere model (SiB) for use within general circulation models. J. Atmos. Sci.,43, 505–531.

  • ——, and Coauthors, 1996: A revised land surface parameterization (SiB2) for atmospheric GCMs. Part I: Model formulation. J. Climate,9, 676–705.

  • Smagorinsky, J., 1963: General circulation experiments with the primitive equations. Part 1: The basic experiment. Mon. Wea. Rev.,91, 99–164.

  • Sommeria, G., and J. W. Deardorff, 1977: Subgrid-scale condensation in models of nonprecipitating clouds. J. Atmos. Sci.,34, 344–355.

  • Sun, W.-Y., and M. G. Bosilovich, 1996: Planetary boundary layer and surface layer sensitivity to land surface parameters. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,77, 353–378.

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

  • Verseghy, D., 1991: CLASS—A Canadian land surface scheme for GCMs. Part I: Soil model. Int. J. Climatol.,11, 111–113.

  • ——, 1993: CLASS—A Canadian land surface scheme for GCMs. Part II: Vegetation model and coupled runs. Int. J. Climatol.,13, 343–370.

  • Wilson, M. F., A. Henderson-Sellers, R. E. Dickinson, and P. J. Kennedy, 1987: Sensitivity of the Biosphere–Atmosphere Transfer Scheme (BATS) to the inclusion of variable soil characteristics. J. Appl. Meteor.,26, 341–362.

  • Yang, Z.-L., and R. E. Dickinson, 1996: Description of the biosphere–atmosphere transfer scheme (BATS) for the soil moisture workshop and evaluation of its performance. Global Planet. Change,13, 117–134.

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 149 48 8
PDF Downloads 57 28 2