YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • AMS
    • Monthly Weather Review
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • AMS
    • Monthly Weather Review
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Evaluation of the Soil Model of the Hydro–Thermodynamic Soil–Vegetation Scheme by Observations and a Theoretically Advanced Numerical Scheme

    Source: Monthly Weather Review:;2006:;volume( 134 ):;issue: 010::page 2927
    Author:
    Narapusetty, Balachandrudu
    ,
    Mölders, Nicole
    DOI: 10.1175/MWR3219.1
    Publisher: American Meteorological Society
    Abstract: The soil module of the Hydro?Thermodynamic Soil?Vegetation Scheme is evaluated by soil temperature observations and independent theoretical numerical results. To gain the latter, a Galerkin weak finite-element (GWFE) scheme is implemented for solving the heat and water balance equations that are originally solved by a Crank?Nicholson finite-difference (CNFD) scheme. The GWFE scheme captures discontinuities well and has a high phase fidelity. When/where frozen ground thaws and under moderate advection-dominated regimes, peak temperatures simulated with the CNFD scheme are up to seven days off compared with observations and the results of the GWFE scheme. If freeze?thaw cycles repeat for more than a month, CNFD predictions will oscillate ±1 K around the observations but will converge to the observations and results of the GWFE scheme afterward. Under diffusion-dominated regimes, CNFD runs perform well with similar quality to the GWFE predictions. Comparisons of the results of both numerical schemes substantiate that the long spinup time of CNFD simulations results from the numerical scheme and not from the initialization procedure and that the diffusive nature of the CNFD scheme and not parameterized physical processes causes phase shifts. GWFE requires 1.6?2.8 more CPU time than CNFD in this study. Unless CPU time is an issue, the GWFE scheme is recommended because of its high phase fidelity and short spinup.
    • Download: (1.545Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Evaluation of the Soil Model of the Hydro–Thermodynamic Soil–Vegetation Scheme by Observations and a Theoretically Advanced Numerical Scheme

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4229249
    Collections
    • Monthly Weather Review

    Show full item record

    contributor authorNarapusetty, Balachandrudu
    contributor authorMölders, Nicole
    date accessioned2017-06-09T17:27:59Z
    date available2017-06-09T17:27:59Z
    date copyright2006/10/01
    date issued2006
    identifier issn0027-0644
    identifier otherams-85766.pdf
    identifier urihttp://onlinelibrary.yabesh.ir/handle/yetl/4229249
    description abstractThe soil module of the Hydro?Thermodynamic Soil?Vegetation Scheme is evaluated by soil temperature observations and independent theoretical numerical results. To gain the latter, a Galerkin weak finite-element (GWFE) scheme is implemented for solving the heat and water balance equations that are originally solved by a Crank?Nicholson finite-difference (CNFD) scheme. The GWFE scheme captures discontinuities well and has a high phase fidelity. When/where frozen ground thaws and under moderate advection-dominated regimes, peak temperatures simulated with the CNFD scheme are up to seven days off compared with observations and the results of the GWFE scheme. If freeze?thaw cycles repeat for more than a month, CNFD predictions will oscillate ±1 K around the observations but will converge to the observations and results of the GWFE scheme afterward. Under diffusion-dominated regimes, CNFD runs perform well with similar quality to the GWFE predictions. Comparisons of the results of both numerical schemes substantiate that the long spinup time of CNFD simulations results from the numerical scheme and not from the initialization procedure and that the diffusive nature of the CNFD scheme and not parameterized physical processes causes phase shifts. GWFE requires 1.6?2.8 more CPU time than CNFD in this study. Unless CPU time is an issue, the GWFE scheme is recommended because of its high phase fidelity and short spinup.
    publisherAmerican Meteorological Society
    titleEvaluation of the Soil Model of the Hydro–Thermodynamic Soil–Vegetation Scheme by Observations and a Theoretically Advanced Numerical Scheme
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume134
    journal issue10
    journal titleMonthly Weather Review
    identifier doi10.1175/MWR3219.1
    journal fristpage2927
    journal lastpage2942
    treeMonthly Weather Review:;2006:;volume( 134 ):;issue: 010
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian