Articles | Volume 11, issue 2
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-575-2018
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-575-2018
Development and technical paper
 | 
08 Feb 2018
Development and technical paper |  | 08 Feb 2018

Trajectory errors of different numerical integration schemes diagnosed with the MPTRAC advection module driven by ECMWF operational analyses

Thomas Rößler, Olaf Stein, Yi Heng, Paul Baumeister, and Lars Hoffmann

Related authors

Intercomparison of meteorological analyses and trajectories in the Antarctic lower stratosphere with Concordiasi superpressure balloon observations
Lars Hoffmann, Albert Hertzog, Thomas Rößler, Olaf Stein, and Xue Wu
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 8045–8061, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-8045-2017,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-8045-2017, 2017
Short summary

Related subject area

Numerical methods
Advances in land surface forecasting: a comparison of LSTM, gradient boosting, and feed-forward neural networks as prognostic state emulators in a case study with ecLand
Marieke Wesselkamp, Matthew Chantry, Ewan Pinnington, Margarita Choulga, Souhail Boussetta, Maria Kalweit, Joschka Bödecker, Carsten F. Dormann, Florian Pappenberger, and Gianpaolo Balsamo
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 921–937, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-921-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-921-2025, 2025
Short summary
Subgrid corrections for the linear inertial equations of a compound flood model – a case study using SFINCS 2.1.1 Dollerup release
Maarten van Ormondt, Tim Leijnse, Roel de Goede, Kees Nederhoff, and Ap van Dongeren
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 843–861, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-843-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-843-2025, 2025
Short summary
Introducing Iterative Model Calibration (IMC) v1.0: a generalizable framework for numerical model calibration with a CAESAR-Lisflood case study
Chayan Banerjee, Kien Nguyen, Clinton Fookes, Gregory Hancock, and Thomas Coulthard
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 803–818, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-803-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-803-2025, 2025
Short summary
Development of a high-order global dynamical core using the discontinuous Galerkin method for an atmospheric large-eddy simulation (LES) and proposal of test cases: SCALE-DG v0.8.0
Yuta Kawai and Hirofumi Tomita
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 725–762, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-725-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-725-2025, 2025
Short summary
A joint reconstruction and model selection approach for large-scale linear inverse modeling (msHyBR v2)
Malena Sabaté Landman, Julianne Chung, Jiahua Jiang, Scot M. Miller, and Arvind K. Saibaba
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8853–8872, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8853-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8853-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Bowman, K. P., Lin, J. C., Stohl, A., Draxler, R., Konopka, P., Andrews, A., and Brunner, D.: Input Data Requirements for Lagrangian Trajectory Models, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 94, 1051–1058, 2013.
Brioude, J., Angevine, W. M., McKeen, S. A., and Hsie, E.-Y.: Numerical uncertainty at mesoscale in a Lagrangian model in complex terrain, Geosci. Model Dev., 5, 1127–1136, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-1127-2012, 2012.
Buizza, R., Houtekamer, P. L., Toth, Z., Pellerin, G., Wei, M., and Zhu, Y.: A comparison of the ECMWF, MSC, and NCEP Global ensemble prediction systems, Mon. Weather Rev., 133, 1076–1097, 2005.
Butcher, J. C.: Numerical methods for ordinary differential equations, John Wiley & Sons, 2008.
CDO: Climate Data Operators, available at: http://www.mpimet.mpg.de/cdo (last access: 3 May 2017), 2015.
Download
Short summary
In this study, we performed an assessment of truncation errors and computational efficiency of trajectory calculations using six popular numerical integration schemes of the Runge–Kutta family. More than 5000 transport simulations for different seasons and regions of the free troposphere and stratosphere were conducted, driven by the latest version of ECMWF operational analyses and forecasts. The study provides guidelines to achieve the most accurate and efficient trajectory calculations.
Share