Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for :

  • Model performance/evaluation x
  • Impacts of Land Use and Land Cover Change on the Atmosphere x
  • All content x
Clear All
K. W. Oleson, G. B. Bonan, J. Feddema, M. Vertenstein, and C. S. B. Grimmond

sunlit and shaded walls are hydrologically inactive. 3. Evaluation MG02 evaluated the TEB model for two urban sites (Mexico City and Vancouver), as did Best et al. (2006) for the Met Office Surface Exchange Scheme (MOSES). Here, we closely follow the evaluation methods of the Masson study and evaluate the model’s performance with observed data, contrasting it with TEB’s performance where appropriate. The model is run uncoupled from the atmospheric model and is forced by observations of atmospheric

Full access
Vinodkumar, A. Chandrasekar, K. Alapaty, and Dev Niyogi

the ABL were nudged. This case study occurred during a special intensive field campaign as part of BOBMEX ( Sikka and Sanjeeva Rao 2000 ). The BOBMEX program sought to address the role of the Bay of Bengal in monsoon variability. Research ships, buoys, INSAT, coastal radar, and other conventional observation systems monitored air temperature, wind speed, wind direction, and relative humidity. These data together with radiosonde observations are used in this study to evaluate model performance

Full access
K. W. Oleson, G. B. Bonan, J. Feddema, and M. Vertenstein

conditions. The urban model is integrated with the Community Land Model, version 3 (CLM3; Oleson et al. 2004 ; Dickinson et al. 2006 ). Our model has been evaluated for two urban sites described in Part I , but further evaluation is needed before the model can be used to investigate global urban climate questions. Thus, the purpose of this paper is twofold. First, the robustness of the model is examined through sensitivity studies: the sensitivity of the model fluxes to morphological, radiative, and

Full access