All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 83 21 7
PDF Downloads 42 14 1

One-Way Nested Grid Models: The Interface Conditions and the Numerical Accuracy

View More View Less
  • 1 Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory/NOAA, Princeton University, Princeton, N.J. 08540
Full access

Abstract

Tests of several interface conditions in a one-way nested grid model were undertaken, where the ratio of grid size for the coarse mesh in the large domain and the fine mesh in the small domain was 4:1. The interface values for all parameters are specified by the solutions of the larger domain model, although they are modified in some cases. Scheme A includes a “boundary adjustment” and the consideration of mountain effect for the surface pressure along the interface. Scheme B uses, in addition to Scheme A, a “radiation condition” at the outward propagation boundaries. Scheme C uses viscous damping along five rows adjacent to the border lines in addition to Scheme A. The solutions for the fine-mesh models obtained by these schemes are compared quantitatively with the solution of a control model. The results show how quickly the effect at the interface propagates into the interior. The proper treatment of the mountain effect on the surface pressure along the interface, and the boundary adjustment are important for obtaining reasonable solutions. Schemes A, B and C are all acceptable, though not entirely satisfactory. Scheme B was useful in reducing the false reflection at the interface. Scheme C gave smooth fields of predicted variables, but false reflection sometimes occurred. A combination of these conditions optimally chosen was applied to a 34 km mesh model for a domain covering the whole mainland of the United States. The resulting maps of the time integration show the formation of a front and the detailed structure of intense rainbands associated with the front.

Abstract

Tests of several interface conditions in a one-way nested grid model were undertaken, where the ratio of grid size for the coarse mesh in the large domain and the fine mesh in the small domain was 4:1. The interface values for all parameters are specified by the solutions of the larger domain model, although they are modified in some cases. Scheme A includes a “boundary adjustment” and the consideration of mountain effect for the surface pressure along the interface. Scheme B uses, in addition to Scheme A, a “radiation condition” at the outward propagation boundaries. Scheme C uses viscous damping along five rows adjacent to the border lines in addition to Scheme A. The solutions for the fine-mesh models obtained by these schemes are compared quantitatively with the solution of a control model. The results show how quickly the effect at the interface propagates into the interior. The proper treatment of the mountain effect on the surface pressure along the interface, and the boundary adjustment are important for obtaining reasonable solutions. Schemes A, B and C are all acceptable, though not entirely satisfactory. Scheme B was useful in reducing the false reflection at the interface. Scheme C gave smooth fields of predicted variables, but false reflection sometimes occurred. A combination of these conditions optimally chosen was applied to a 34 km mesh model for a domain covering the whole mainland of the United States. The resulting maps of the time integration show the formation of a front and the detailed structure of intense rainbands associated with the front.

Save