Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-mnklg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T07:25:17.248Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Evaluation of a regional atmospheric model for January 1993, using in situ measurements from the Antarctic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Nicole P. M. Van Lipzig
Affiliation:
Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute (KNMI), P.O.Box 201,3730 AE de Bill, The NetherlandsInstitute for Marine and Atmospheric Research Utrecht (IMAU), P.O. Box 80.005, 3508 TA Utrecht, The Netherlands
Johannes Oerlemans
Affiliation:
Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Research Utrecht (IMAU), P.O. Box 80.005, 3508 TA Utrecht, The Netherlands
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The performance of a regional atmospheric climate model (RACMO) with a horizontal resolution of 55 km X 55 km is evaluated using measured temperature and humidity profiles. Parameterisations of the physical processes are taken from the EC-HAM4 general circulation model (GCM). Sea-surface temperatures and sea-ice mask in the model are prescribed from observations. The model is forced by re-analyses of the European Centre for Medium-range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) at the lateral boundaries.

We compared simulations for January 1993 with boundary-layer profiles measured at the Swedish research station Svca (Dronning Maud Land, Antarctica) and with radiosonde measurements made at the Georg von Neumayer (GvN) and South Polar stations for the same period. This comparison was performed in order to study some model characteristics before the model is used for mass-balance calculations. The vertical temperature gradient at Svea during the night is overestimated by RACMO, but corresponds much more closely to the observations than do the ECMWF re-analyses. in the re-analyses a decoupling of the lowest model layer from the higher atmosphere occurs. The differences between the absolute temperatures at the GvN and SP stations and the absolute temperatures at the model gridpoints corresponding most closely to these sites are less than 5°C. The humidity profiles indicate that the model generally underestimates the turbulent transport of moisture from the surface to higher levels.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Glaciological Society 1998
Figure 0

Fig. 1.Map of the location of Georg von Neumayer station (GvN; 70°39' S, 8° 15' W), Amundsen-Scott South Polar station (SP; 90°S)and the Swedish station Svea (74°35' S, 11° 13' W). Data measured at these sites are used to evaluate model output.

Figure 1

Fig. 2.RACMO grid with a horizontal spacing of 55 km. in the relaxation zone (indicated by larger dots), the model prognostic variables are relaxed towards ECMWF re-analyses. The surface geopolential height (km) is indicated by the contour lines, (b) Model orography along the cross-section indicated by the black line in (a). Dots refer to modelgridpoints.

Figure 2

Table 1.Short description of the ECHAM4 parameterisations and the adjustments implemented before the model was appliedfor Antarctica

Figure 3

Fig. 3.Mean potential temperature profiles at Svea averaged over the period 14-19 January 1993 as a function of height above ground level (h.a.g.l). The observed profiles (OBS) are plotted together with the control run, ECMWF re-analyses (a) and the sensitivity run NO-CLD (b). in the NO-CLD simulation, the radiation calculations are performedfor clear sky conditions at all gridpoints for the entire period of simulation. The control run is initialised on 28 December 1992 (tO) and the NO_CLD run is initialised on 6 January 1993.

Figure 4

Fig. 4.Daily cycle of the potential temperature in the boundary layer at Svea averaged over PL

Figure 5

Fig. 5.January mean profiles at SP (a, b) and GvN (c,d) stations. Left panels show the potential temperature profiles in the atmosphere to a height of 5km; right panels show the temperature profile in the atmosphere to a height of 20 km. At GvN, the RACMO output and ECMWF re-analyses of1200 UTC were used to calculate the average profiles, because this time corresponds most closely to the time of the balloon launches.

Figure 6

Fig. 6.Mean profiles over the period 14-19 January 1993 (PI) at Svea (a, b), SP (c, d) and GvN ( ej)fir the sensitivity runs TP5 and TM5. in TP5andTM5the snow temperature of all land points is initialised 5°C higher and 5°C lower, respectively, than in the standard initialisation. The left column displays the simulated and observed mean potential temperature profiles in the atmosphere. When comparing these figures directly to those in figures 3 and 5 it should be borne in mind that a different date of initialisation (10) is chosen, and that the profilesfor GvN and SP in figures 3 and 5 are averaged over January and not over P1. in the right column, the mean temperature profiles over PI in the snow are displayed for the two sensitivity runs. in addition, measurements from the surface to a depth of 80 cm are shown in (b). The simulated cloud cover can be different in the two sensitivity runs; this can have a large impact on the temperature profiles.

Figure 7

Fig. 7.Like the left column of figures 3 and 5, except for specific humidity. Svea (a), SP (I)) and GvN (c).