Laserfiche WebLink
<br />....... <br /> <br />;. <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />.a:..,.o <br /> <br />COMPARISONS OF CLOUD MODEL PREDICTIONS: <br />A CASE STUDY ANALYSIS OF ONE- AND TWO-DIMENSIONAL MODELS <br /> <br />By <br /> <br />r <br /> <br />B. A. Silverman, D. A. Matthews, L. D. Nelson <br />Bureau of Reclamation <br />Division of Atmospheric Water Resources Management <br />Denver, Colorado <br /> <br />And <br /> <br />H. D. Orville, F. J. Kopp, R. D. Farley <br />South Dakota School of Mines and Technology <br />Rapid City, South Dakota <br /> <br />1. <br /> <br />INTRODUCTION <br /> <br />One measure of our understanding of <br />cloud and precipitation processes is our ability <br />to simulate the essential features of their <br />behavior through numerical cloud models. Nodel <br />development will progress most rapidly when <br />modelers and observationalists interact iteratively <br />with feedback from one to the other in a mutually <br />supportive fashion. Unfortunately, this approach <br />has been only seldom followed. <br /> <br />, A convective cloud modeling workshop <br />was convened by the Bureau of Reclamation's <br />Division of Atmospheric Water Resources ~~nagement <br />in Denver, Colorado, on June 11-13, 1975. The <br />main objective of this workshop was to design a <br />specific and continuing effort to close the gap <br />between models and observations and thereby <br />maximize the utility of models to contribute to <br />our understanding of natural and artificially <br />modified convective clouds. The workshop focused <br />its discussions on (1) model initialization data <br />requirements; (2) model verification data require- <br />ments, including the method or methods by which <br />model predictions can be bime-synchronized with <br />observations of cloud development; and (3) objec- <br />tive model verification criteria. <br /> <br />To lay the foundation for these <br />discussions, each participating modeler presented <br />the results of his model for two standard input <br />data sets, which were sent to him beforehand. The <br />models were compared first to each other and then <br />against such verification data as were available, <br />which were first presented to the modelers at the <br />workshop. <br /> <br />Twenty-two scientists representing <br />several universities, Government agencies, and <br />industrial groups participated in the workshop. <br />Results from three one-dimensional, steady-state <br />models (lD, SS), five one-dimensional, time- <br />dependent models (lD, TD), four two-dimensional, <br />time-dependent, axi-symmetric models (2D, TD, <br />Axi), and two two-dimensional, time-dependent, <br />slab-symmetric models (2D, TD, SLAB) were <br />presented. <br /> <br />The purpose of this paper is to <br />summarize the results of this workshop and indicate <br />what follow-on work is planned or in progress. <br /> <br />---- <br /> <br />--::~__L _~_L <br /> <br />2. <br /> <br />MODEL PREDICTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS <br /> <br />Data used in the workshop were <br />collected on August 10 and 17, 1973, in the <br />vicinity of St. Louis as part of Project Metromex. <br />They were graciously provided by Dr. Bernice <br />Ackerman of the Illinois State Water Survey, who <br />also participated in the workshop. Input rawin- <br />sonde soundings and supporting data that were used <br />to initialize the models are shown in figures 1 <br />and 2 and table 1, respectively. <br /> <br />It can be seen from figures 1 and 2 <br />that the sounding for August 10 was quite unstable <br />while that for August 17 was not so unstable. <br />This resulted, as we shall see later, in the <br />development of clouds with different growth and <br />precipitation characteristics, which is the reason <br />,why these 2 days were selected for the workshop cases. <br />Since the input and verification data sets were <br />limited, we were anxious to see if the model <br />predictions could at least distinguish the nature <br />of the convective activity on these 2 days. <br /> <br />/ <br /> <br />,o~. ,'Of::.' ,tb~' ,,,ft;)' }b~' /,f::!>' ,oJf:" <br />100, ' <br />~ .J.Jo "s. ".s ~/'-t~ -t~ ~' s.<,: ~,... ~ s..t, ~.s.! <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />:~f:::I' <br /> <br /> <br />,,' <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />, '. / ". /:... . X. .< j..../, '. ,/ ,'. / ". <br /> <br />;,i~?$?~~~~~~~~0 ,. <br /> <br /> <br />1000. <br /> <br />STLSt 0 <br />INrTlAL SOUNDING AT 13 HR 0 HIN <br /> <br />Figur>e Z. Skew-T, Log-P thermodynamic d-iagram <br />showing initial sounding temperature and dewpoint <br />profiles for st. Louis, Mo., on August ZO, 1973, <br />at l300 L.S.T. <br /> <br />"T!' <br />