Articles | Volume 12, issue 3
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-879-2019
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-879-2019
Methods for assessment of models
 | 
05 Mar 2019
Methods for assessment of models |  | 05 Mar 2019

DCMIP2016: the splitting supercell test case

Colin M. Zarzycki, Christiane Jablonowski, James Kent, Peter H. Lauritzen, Ramachandran Nair, Kevin A. Reed, Paul A. Ullrich, David M. Hall, Mark A. Taylor, Don Dazlich, Ross Heikes, Celal Konor, David Randall, Xi Chen, Lucas Harris, Marco Giorgetta, Daniel Reinert, Christian Kühnlein, Robert Walko, Vivian Lee, Abdessamad Qaddouri, Monique Tanguay, Hiroaki Miura, Tomoki Ohno, Ryuji Yoshida, Sang-Hun Park, Joseph B. Klemp, and William C. Skamarock

Related authors

DCMIP2016: the tropical cyclone test case
Justin L. Willson, Kevin A. Reed, Christiane Jablonowski, James Kent, Peter H. Lauritzen, Ramachandran Nair, Mark A. Taylor, Paul A. Ullrich, Colin M. Zarzycki, David M. Hall, Don Dazlich, Ross Heikes, Celal Konor, David Randall, Thomas Dubos, Yann Meurdesoif, Xi Chen, Lucas Harris, Christian Kühnlein, Vivian Lee, Abdessamad Qaddouri, Claude Girard, Marco Giorgetta, Daniel Reinert, Hiroaki Miura, Tomoki Ohno, and Ryuji Yoshida
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2493–2507, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2493-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2493-2024, 2024
Short summary
Algorithmically Detected Rain-on-Snow Flood Events in Different Climate Datasets: A Case Study of the Susquehanna River Basin
Colin M. Zarzycki, Benjamin D. Ascher, Alan M. Rhoades, and Rachel R. McCrary
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-3094,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-3094, 2024
Short summary
Using EUREC4A/ATOMIC field campaign data to improve trade wind regimes in the Community Atmosphere Model
Skyler Graap and Colin M. Zarzycki
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1627–1650, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1627-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1627-2024, 2024
Short summary
Technical descriptions of the experimental dynamical downscaling simulations over North America by the CAM–MPAS variable-resolution model
Koichi Sakaguchi, L. Ruby Leung, Colin M. Zarzycki, Jihyeon Jang, Seth McGinnis, Bryce E. Harrop, William C. Skamarock, Andrew Gettelman, Chun Zhao, William J. Gutowski, Stephen Leak, and Linda Mearns
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 3029–3081, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3029-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3029-2023, 2023
Short summary
TempestExtremes v2.1: a community framework for feature detection, tracking, and analysis in large datasets
Paul A. Ullrich, Colin M. Zarzycki, Elizabeth E. McClenny, Marielle C. Pinheiro, Alyssa M. Stansfield, and Kevin A. Reed
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 5023–5048, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5023-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-5023-2021, 2021
Short summary

Related subject area

Numerical methods
ParticleDA.jl v.1.0: a distributed particle-filtering data assimilation package
Daniel Giles, Matthew M. Graham, Mosè Giordano, Tuomas Koskela, Alexandros Beskos, and Serge Guillas
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2427–2445, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2427-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2427-2024, 2024
Short summary
HETerogeneous vectorized or Parallel (HETPv1.0): an updated inorganic heterogeneous chemistry solver for the metastable-state NH4+–Na+–Ca2+–K+–Mg2+–SO42−–NO3–Cl–H2O system based on ISORROPIA II
Stefan J. Miller, Paul A. Makar, and Colin J. Lee
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2197–2219, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2197-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2197-2024, 2024
Short summary
Three-dimensional geological modelling of igneous intrusions in LoopStructural v1.5.10
Fernanda Alvarado-Neves, Laurent Ailleres, Lachlan Grose, Alexander R. Cruden, and Robin Armit
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1975–1993, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1975-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1975-2024, 2024
Short summary
Estimating volcanic ash emissions using retrieved satellite ash columns and inverse ash transport modeling using VolcanicAshInversion v1.2.1, within the operational eEMEP (emergency European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme) volcanic plume forecasting system (version rv4_17)
André R. Brodtkorb, Anna Benedictow, Heiko Klein, Arve Kylling, Agnes Nyiri, Alvaro Valdebenito, Espen Sollum, and Nina Kristiansen
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1957–1974, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1957-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1957-2024, 2024
Short summary
Accounting for uncertainties in forecasting tropical-cyclone-induced compound flooding
Kees Nederhoff, Maarten van Ormondt, Jay Veeramony, Ap van Dongeren, José Antonio Álvarez Antolínez, Tim Leijnse, and Dano Roelvink
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1789–1811, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1789-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1789-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Browning, K. A.: Airflow and Precipitation Trajectories Within Severe Local Storms Which Travel to the Right of the Winds, J. Atmos. Sci., 21, 634–639, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1964)021<0634:AAPTWS>2.0.CO;2, 1964. a
Doswell, C. A. and Burgess, D. W.: Tornadoes and toraadic storms: A review of conceptual models, The Tornado: Its Structure, Dynamics, Prediction, and Hazards, Geophysical Monograph Series, American Geophysical Union, 161–172, 1993. a
Gallus, W. A. and Bresch, J. F.: Comparison of Impacts of WRF Dynamic Core, Physics Package, and Initial Conditions on Warm Season Rainfall Forecasts, Mon. Weather Rev., 134, 2632–2641, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR3198.1, 2006. a, b
Gross, M., Wan, H., Rasch, P. J., Caldwell, P. M., Williamson, D. L., Klocke, D., Jablonowski, C., Thatcher, D. R., Wood, N., Cullen, M., Beare, B., Willett, M., Lemarié, F., Blayo, E., Malardel, S., Termonia, P., Gassmann, A., Lauritzen, P. H., Johansen, H., Zarzycki, C. M., Sakaguchi, K., and Leung, R.: Physics–Dynamics Coupling in Weather, Climate, and Earth System Models: Challenges and Recent Progress, Mon. Weather Rev., 146, 3505–3544, https://doi.org/10.1175/mwr-d-17-0345.1, 2018. a
Guimond, S. R., Reisner, J. M., Marras, S., and Giraldo, F. X.: The Impacts of Dry Dynamic Cores on Asymmetric Hurricane Intensification, J. Atmos. Sci., 73, 4661–4684, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-16-0055.1, 2016. a, b
Short summary
We summarize the results of the Dynamical Core Model Intercomparison Project's idealized supercell test case. Supercells are storm-scale weather phenomena that are a key target for next-generation, non-hydrostatic weather prediction models. We show that the dynamical cores of most global numerical models converge between approximately 1 and 0.5 km grid spacing for this test, although differences in final solution exist, particularly due to differing grid discretizations and numerical diffusion.