The planetary boundary layer turbulence and moist convection parameterizations have been modified recently in the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies （GISS） Model E2 atmospheric general circulation model （GCM;...The planetary boundary layer turbulence and moist convection parameterizations have been modified recently in the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies （GISS） Model E2 atmospheric general circulation model （GCM; post-CMIP5, hereafter P5）. In this study, single column model （SCM_P5） simulated cloud fractions （CFs）, cloud liquid water paths （LWPs） and precipitation were compared with Atmospheric Radiation Measurement （ARM） Southern Great Plains （SGP） groundbased observations made during the period 2002-08. CMIP5 SCM simulations and GCM outputs over the ARM SGP region were also used in the comparison to identify whether the causes of cloud and precipitation biases resulted from either the physical parameterization or the dynamic scheme. The comparison showed that the CMIP5 SCM has difficulties in simulating the vertical structure and seasonal variation of low-level clouds. The new scheme implemented in the turbulence parameterization led to significantly improved cloud simulations in P5. It was found that the SCM is sensitive to the relaxation time scale. When the relaxation time increased from 3 to 24 h, SCM_P5-simulated CFs and LWPs showed a moderate increase （10%-20%） but precipitation increased significantly （56%）, which agreed better with observations despite the less accurate atmospheric state. Annual averages among the GCM and SCM simulations were almost the same, but their respective seasonal variations were out of phase. This suggests that the same physical cloud parameterization can generate similar statistical results over a long time period, but different dynamics drive the differences in seasonal variations. This study can potentially provide guidance for the further development of the GISS model.展开更多
A single column model (SCM) is constructed by extracting the physical subroutines from the NCAR Community Climate Model version 1 (CCM1).Simulated data are generated by CCM1 and used to validate the SCM and to study t...A single column model (SCM) is constructed by extracting the physical subroutines from the NCAR Community Climate Model version 1 (CCM1).Simulated data are generated by CCM1 and used to validate the SCM and to study the sensitivity of the SCM to errors in its input data.It is found that the SCM temperature predictions are moderately sensitive to errors in the input horizontal temperature flux convergence and moisture flux convergence.Two types of error are concerned in this study,random errors due to insufficient data resolution,and errors due to insufficient data area coverage.While the first type of error can be reduced by filtering and/or increasing the data resolution,it is shown that the second type of error can be reduced by enlarging the data area coverage and using a suitable method to compute the input flux convergence terms.展开更多
A Single Column Model(SCM) for Global and Regional Atmospheric Prediction Enhanced System (GRAPES) is constructed for the purpose of evaluating physical process parameterizations.Two observational datasets including W...A Single Column Model(SCM) for Global and Regional Atmospheric Prediction Enhanced System (GRAPES) is constructed for the purpose of evaluating physical process parameterizations.Two observational datasets including Wangara and the third Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment Atmospheric Boundary Layer Study(GABLS-3) SCM field observations have been applied to evaluate this SCM.By these two numerical experiments,the GRAPESSCM is verified to be correctly constructed.Furthermore, the interaction between the land surface process and atmospheric boundary layer(ABL) is discussed through the second experiment.It is found that CASE3(CoLM land surface scheme coupled with ABL scheme) simulates less sensible heat fluxes and smaller surface temperature which corresponds with its lower potential temperature at the bottom of the ABL.Moreover,CASE3 simulates turbulence that is weaker during the daytime and stronger during nighttime,corresponding with its wind speed at 200 m which is bigger during daytime and smaller during nighttime.However,they are generally opposite in CASE2(SLAB coupled with ABL).The initial profile of the water vapor mixing ratio is artificially increased by the experiment setup which results in the simulated water vapor mixing becoming wetter than actually observed.CASE1 (observed surface temperature taken as lower thermal forcing) and CASE2 have no soil moisture prediction and simulate a similar water vapor mixing ratio,while CASE3 has a soil moisture prediction and simulates wetter.It is also shown that the time step may affect the stabilization of the ABL when the vertical levels of the SCM are fixed.展开更多
In this paper,an axial dispersion mathematical model is developed to simulate a three-phase slurry bubble column reactor for direct synthesis of dimethyl ether（DME） from syngas.This large-scale reactor is modeled us...In this paper,an axial dispersion mathematical model is developed to simulate a three-phase slurry bubble column reactor for direct synthesis of dimethyl ether（DME） from syngas.This large-scale reactor is modeled using mass and energy balances,catalyst sedimentation andsingle-bubble as well as two-bubbles class flow hydrodynamics.A comparison between the two hydrodynamic models through pilot plantexperimental data from the literature shows that heterogeneous two-bubbles flow model is in better agreement with the experimental data thanhomogeneous single-bubble gas flow model.Also,by investigating the heterogeneous gas flow and axial dispersion model for small bubblesas well as the large bubbles and slurry（i.e.including paraffins and the catalyst） phase,the temperature profile along the reactor is obtained.Acomparison between isothermal and non-isothermal reactors reveals no obvious performance difference between them.The optimum values ofreactor diameter and height were obtained at 7 m and 50 m,respectively.The effects of operating variables on the axial catalyst distribution,DME productivity and CO conversion are also investigated in this research.展开更多
利用耦合Milbrandt 2-mon(MY)和Morrison 2-mon(MOR)两种双参数微物理方案的WRF中的单柱模式,对TWP-ICE(Tropical Warm Pool International Cloud Experiment)试验期间的个例进行数值模拟。通过与观测资料和云分辨率模式的模拟结果进行...利用耦合Milbrandt 2-mon(MY)和Morrison 2-mon(MOR)两种双参数微物理方案的WRF中的单柱模式,对TWP-ICE(Tropical Warm Pool International Cloud Experiment)试验期间的个例进行数值模拟。通过与观测资料和云分辨率模式的模拟结果进行对比发现:两种双参数微物理方案能较好地模拟出TWP-ICE期间热带云系的宏观和微观的特征。模拟的降水率、地表向下长波辐射和大气顶向外长波辐射的量级、时间演变趋势与观测相一致;总的液相和冰相水凝物的垂直分布以及随时间的演变特征总体与观测以及云分辨率模式的结果也较接近。在整个时期,两种方案水云中的雨滴宏观和微观特征差异较小,而云滴混合比在两种方案之间的差别显著;冰晶对冰云的贡献在MY方案中占据主导地位,而MOR方案中雪在冰云中扮演的角色相比于在MY方案中更为重要。微观上与MY方案相比,MOR方案中的云滴是由数量更大的小云滴构成,但冰晶却是由数量较少的大冰晶粒子构成。微物理过程转换率的区别是造成两种方案冰云宏观分布特征差异的主要原因。与冰晶和雪有关的微物理过程转换分析表明:活跃期两种方案中与冰晶有关的主要微物理转换项有冰晶的凝华增长、冰晶向雪的自动转化、冰晶被雪碰并以及冰晶的沉降过程。而雪主要的转换项包含沉降和凝华过程等,其中MY方案中雪的主要转换项更为丰富。该时期两种方案冰晶和雪的主要微物理转换项的垂直分布以及量级特征的差异同冰云的宏观分布相一致。季风抑制期,两种方案中冰晶主要的源汇项包括凝华增长和沉降过程。MY方案中凝华凝冻核化也是主要的源汇项之一。抑制期MOR方案中高空的雪发展较强,参与的微物理过程较MY方案更为丰富,主要转换项比MY方案高出约一个量级。展开更多
利用高分辨率WRF单气柱模式,选取了两种边界层参数化方案(YSU,MYJ),对TWP-ICE(Tropical Warm Pool International Cloud Experiment)试验期间的个例进行数值模拟,比较了两种方案对边界层结构、云和降水模拟的影响。结果表明:季风活跃期,...利用高分辨率WRF单气柱模式,选取了两种边界层参数化方案(YSU,MYJ),对TWP-ICE(Tropical Warm Pool International Cloud Experiment)试验期间的个例进行数值模拟,比较了两种方案对边界层结构、云和降水模拟的影响。结果表明:季风活跃期,YSU方案模拟的湍流交换系数较小,湍流混合偏弱,边界层内热通量偏小,使地表热量和水汽不易向上输送,水汽含量在近地表明显偏多,而在边界层及其以上大气层具有显著的干偏差,因此该方案模拟的云中液态水和固态水含量偏低,云量偏少,降水率偏小;MYJ方案对于季风活跃期的边界层结构具有较好的模拟能力,其模拟的云和降水更为准确。季风抑制期,MYJ方案模拟的夜间边界层结构存在较大误差,这是因为该方案模拟的夜间湍流交换系数较大,湍流混合偏强,边界层内热通量偏大,模拟的位温和水汽混合比在边界层内随高度变化较小,而观测廓线在边界层内存在较大梯度。季风抑制期两种方案模拟的云和降水均比观测值偏多,方案之间的差异较小。展开更多
根据GCSS WG4(Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment Cloud System Study Working Group 4)第3次个例模拟的观测数据,为GRAPES(Global and Regional Assimilation and Prediction Enhanced System)设计了一个可用于检验其整套物理...根据GCSS WG4(Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment Cloud System Study Working Group 4)第3次个例模拟的观测数据,为GRAPES(Global and Regional Assimilation and Prediction Enhanced System)设计了一个可用于检验其整套物理参数化过程对夏季中纬度陆地天气过程模拟的单柱模式试验,并利用该试验考察了不同复杂度的两种陆面过程(CoLM和SLAB)对温、湿度和降水模拟的影响。整个观测时段的模拟表明,模拟的降水与观测的量级一致,位温和水汽混合比没有明显偏离观测,这说明本试验的构造是合理的。考虑到模式系统误差对长期积分结果的影响,随后选取了4个降水子时段分别进行积分。结果表明,使用CoLM方案模拟得到的累积降水量均大于使用SLAB方案的,但使用CoLM方案时出现虚假降水的概率较大。由于区域平均的初始热动力廓线比实际降水发生地区偏干,使用两个方案的模拟均对子时段3的第1个降水事件延迟24h左右,这对其在子时段3的相关系数都很小有贡献。时间平均的位温和水汽混合比误差分析表明,使用CoLM模拟的子时段1和2的对流层低层偏冷、偏湿,而其他情况下为偏暖、偏干。对流层低层位温的误差与地表气温的误差一致。此外,还发现使用CoLM模拟得到的感热通量偏小,潜热通量偏大,而使用SLAB模拟得到感热通量偏大,潜热通量偏小。对流层中高层,子时段1和4为偏冷、偏湿,对应降水偏少(使用CoLM的模拟在子时段1的降水偏多归因于虚假降水);子时段2,使用CoLM的模拟为偏暖、偏干,对应降水偏多,使用SLAB的模拟为偏冷、偏干,对应降水偏少;子时段3,使用两个陆面方案的模拟均为偏冷、偏干,对应降水偏多。展开更多
基金supported by the DOE ASR program(Grant No.DESC008468)
文摘The planetary boundary layer turbulence and moist convection parameterizations have been modified recently in the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies （GISS） Model E2 atmospheric general circulation model （GCM; post-CMIP5, hereafter P5）. In this study, single column model （SCM_P5） simulated cloud fractions （CFs）, cloud liquid water paths （LWPs） and precipitation were compared with Atmospheric Radiation Measurement （ARM） Southern Great Plains （SGP） groundbased observations made during the period 2002-08. CMIP5 SCM simulations and GCM outputs over the ARM SGP region were also used in the comparison to identify whether the causes of cloud and precipitation biases resulted from either the physical parameterization or the dynamic scheme. The comparison showed that the CMIP5 SCM has difficulties in simulating the vertical structure and seasonal variation of low-level clouds. The new scheme implemented in the turbulence parameterization led to significantly improved cloud simulations in P5. It was found that the SCM is sensitive to the relaxation time scale. When the relaxation time increased from 3 to 24 h, SCM_P5-simulated CFs and LWPs showed a moderate increase （10%-20%） but precipitation increased significantly （56%）, which agreed better with observations despite the less accurate atmospheric state. Annual averages among the GCM and SCM simulations were almost the same, but their respective seasonal variations were out of phase. This suggests that the same physical cloud parameterization can generate similar statistical results over a long time period, but different dynamics drive the differences in seasonal variations. This study can potentially provide guidance for the further development of the GISS model.
文摘A single column model (SCM) is constructed by extracting the physical subroutines from the NCAR Community Climate Model version 1 (CCM1).Simulated data are generated by CCM1 and used to validate the SCM and to study the sensitivity of the SCM to errors in its input data.It is found that the SCM temperature predictions are moderately sensitive to errors in the input horizontal temperature flux convergence and moisture flux convergence.Two types of error are concerned in this study,random errors due to insufficient data resolution,and errors due to insufficient data area coverage.While the first type of error can be reduced by filtering and/or increasing the data resolution,it is shown that the second type of error can be reduced by enlarging the data area coverage and using a suitable method to compute the input flux convergence terms.
基金supported by the National Key Technologies Research and Development Program(Grant No.2006BAC02B02)Key International S&T Cooperation Projects(Grant No. 2008DFA22180)European Commission(Call FP7ENV -2007-1 Grant nr.212921) as part of the CEOPAEGIS project(http://www.ceop-aegis.org) coordinated by the University of Strasbourg.
文摘A Single Column Model(SCM) for Global and Regional Atmospheric Prediction Enhanced System (GRAPES) is constructed for the purpose of evaluating physical process parameterizations.Two observational datasets including Wangara and the third Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment Atmospheric Boundary Layer Study(GABLS-3) SCM field observations have been applied to evaluate this SCM.By these two numerical experiments,the GRAPESSCM is verified to be correctly constructed.Furthermore, the interaction between the land surface process and atmospheric boundary layer(ABL) is discussed through the second experiment.It is found that CASE3(CoLM land surface scheme coupled with ABL scheme) simulates less sensible heat fluxes and smaller surface temperature which corresponds with its lower potential temperature at the bottom of the ABL.Moreover,CASE3 simulates turbulence that is weaker during the daytime and stronger during nighttime,corresponding with its wind speed at 200 m which is bigger during daytime and smaller during nighttime.However,they are generally opposite in CASE2(SLAB coupled with ABL).The initial profile of the water vapor mixing ratio is artificially increased by the experiment setup which results in the simulated water vapor mixing becoming wetter than actually observed.CASE1 (observed surface temperature taken as lower thermal forcing) and CASE2 have no soil moisture prediction and simulate a similar water vapor mixing ratio,while CASE3 has a soil moisture prediction and simulates wetter.It is also shown that the time step may affect the stabilization of the ABL when the vertical levels of the SCM are fixed.
文摘In this paper,an axial dispersion mathematical model is developed to simulate a three-phase slurry bubble column reactor for direct synthesis of dimethyl ether（DME） from syngas.This large-scale reactor is modeled using mass and energy balances,catalyst sedimentation andsingle-bubble as well as two-bubbles class flow hydrodynamics.A comparison between the two hydrodynamic models through pilot plantexperimental data from the literature shows that heterogeneous two-bubbles flow model is in better agreement with the experimental data thanhomogeneous single-bubble gas flow model.Also,by investigating the heterogeneous gas flow and axial dispersion model for small bubblesas well as the large bubbles and slurry（i.e.including paraffins and the catalyst） phase,the temperature profile along the reactor is obtained.Acomparison between isothermal and non-isothermal reactors reveals no obvious performance difference between them.The optimum values ofreactor diameter and height were obtained at 7 m and 50 m,respectively.The effects of operating variables on the axial catalyst distribution,DME productivity and CO conversion are also investigated in this research.
文摘利用耦合Milbrandt 2-mon(MY)和Morrison 2-mon(MOR)两种双参数微物理方案的WRF中的单柱模式,对TWP-ICE(Tropical Warm Pool International Cloud Experiment)试验期间的个例进行数值模拟。通过与观测资料和云分辨率模式的模拟结果进行对比发现:两种双参数微物理方案能较好地模拟出TWP-ICE期间热带云系的宏观和微观的特征。模拟的降水率、地表向下长波辐射和大气顶向外长波辐射的量级、时间演变趋势与观测相一致;总的液相和冰相水凝物的垂直分布以及随时间的演变特征总体与观测以及云分辨率模式的结果也较接近。在整个时期,两种方案水云中的雨滴宏观和微观特征差异较小,而云滴混合比在两种方案之间的差别显著;冰晶对冰云的贡献在MY方案中占据主导地位,而MOR方案中雪在冰云中扮演的角色相比于在MY方案中更为重要。微观上与MY方案相比,MOR方案中的云滴是由数量更大的小云滴构成,但冰晶却是由数量较少的大冰晶粒子构成。微物理过程转换率的区别是造成两种方案冰云宏观分布特征差异的主要原因。与冰晶和雪有关的微物理过程转换分析表明:活跃期两种方案中与冰晶有关的主要微物理转换项有冰晶的凝华增长、冰晶向雪的自动转化、冰晶被雪碰并以及冰晶的沉降过程。而雪主要的转换项包含沉降和凝华过程等,其中MY方案中雪的主要转换项更为丰富。该时期两种方案冰晶和雪的主要微物理转换项的垂直分布以及量级特征的差异同冰云的宏观分布相一致。季风抑制期,两种方案中冰晶主要的源汇项包括凝华增长和沉降过程。MY方案中凝华凝冻核化也是主要的源汇项之一。抑制期MOR方案中高空的雪发展较强,参与的微物理过程较MY方案更为丰富,主要转换项比MY方案高出约一个量级。
文摘利用高分辨率WRF单气柱模式,选取了两种边界层参数化方案(YSU,MYJ),对TWP-ICE(Tropical Warm Pool International Cloud Experiment)试验期间的个例进行数值模拟,比较了两种方案对边界层结构、云和降水模拟的影响。结果表明:季风活跃期,YSU方案模拟的湍流交换系数较小,湍流混合偏弱,边界层内热通量偏小,使地表热量和水汽不易向上输送,水汽含量在近地表明显偏多,而在边界层及其以上大气层具有显著的干偏差,因此该方案模拟的云中液态水和固态水含量偏低,云量偏少,降水率偏小;MYJ方案对于季风活跃期的边界层结构具有较好的模拟能力,其模拟的云和降水更为准确。季风抑制期,MYJ方案模拟的夜间边界层结构存在较大误差,这是因为该方案模拟的夜间湍流交换系数较大,湍流混合偏强,边界层内热通量偏大,模拟的位温和水汽混合比在边界层内随高度变化较小,而观测廓线在边界层内存在较大梯度。季风抑制期两种方案模拟的云和降水均比观测值偏多,方案之间的差异较小。
文摘根据GCSS WG4(Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment Cloud System Study Working Group 4)第3次个例模拟的观测数据,为GRAPES(Global and Regional Assimilation and Prediction Enhanced System)设计了一个可用于检验其整套物理参数化过程对夏季中纬度陆地天气过程模拟的单柱模式试验,并利用该试验考察了不同复杂度的两种陆面过程(CoLM和SLAB)对温、湿度和降水模拟的影响。整个观测时段的模拟表明,模拟的降水与观测的量级一致,位温和水汽混合比没有明显偏离观测,这说明本试验的构造是合理的。考虑到模式系统误差对长期积分结果的影响,随后选取了4个降水子时段分别进行积分。结果表明,使用CoLM方案模拟得到的累积降水量均大于使用SLAB方案的,但使用CoLM方案时出现虚假降水的概率较大。由于区域平均的初始热动力廓线比实际降水发生地区偏干,使用两个方案的模拟均对子时段3的第1个降水事件延迟24h左右,这对其在子时段3的相关系数都很小有贡献。时间平均的位温和水汽混合比误差分析表明,使用CoLM模拟的子时段1和2的对流层低层偏冷、偏湿,而其他情况下为偏暖、偏干。对流层低层位温的误差与地表气温的误差一致。此外,还发现使用CoLM模拟得到的感热通量偏小,潜热通量偏大,而使用SLAB模拟得到感热通量偏大,潜热通量偏小。对流层中高层,子时段1和4为偏冷、偏湿,对应降水偏少(使用CoLM的模拟在子时段1的降水偏多归因于虚假降水);子时段2,使用CoLM的模拟为偏暖、偏干,对应降水偏多,使用SLAB的模拟为偏冷、偏干,对应降水偏少;子时段3,使用两个陆面方案的模拟均为偏冷、偏干,对应降水偏多。
