SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
A new radiative transfer model combining the efforts of three groups of researchers is discussed. The model accurately computes radiative transfer in a inhomogeneous absorbing, scattering and emitting atmospheres. As an illustration of the model, results are shown for the effects of dust on the thermal radiation.
A new radiative transfer model combining the efforts of three groups of researchers is discussed. The model accurately computes radiative transfer in a inhomogeneous absorbing, scattering and emitting atmospheres. As an illustration of the model, results are shown for the effects of dust on the thermal radiation.
A new radiative transfer model combining the efforts of three groups of researchers is discussed. The model accurately computes radiative transfer in a inhomogeneous absorbing, scattering and emitting atmospheres. As an illustration of the model, results are shown for the effects of dust on the thermal radiation.
No abstract available
The methods to quantify equilibrium climate sensitivity are still debated. We collect millennial length simulations of coupled climate models and show that the global mean equilibrium warming is higher than those obtained using extrapolation methods from shorter simulations. Specifically, 27 simulations with 15 climate models forced with a range of CO2 concentrations show a median 17% larger equilibrium warming than estimated from the first 150 years of the simulations. The spatial patterns of radiative feedbacks change continuously, in most regions reducing their tendency to stabilizing the climate. In the equatorial Pacific, however, feedbacks become more stabilizing with time. The global feedback evolution is initially dominated by the tropics, with eventual substantial contributions from the midlatitudes. Time dependent feedbacks underscore the need of a measure of climate sensitivity that accounts for the degree of equilibration, so that models, observations, and paleo proxies can be adequately compared and aggregated to estimate future warming.
A seasonal climate model was developed to test the climate sensitivity and, in particular, the Milankovitch (1941) theory. Four climate model versions were implemented to investigate the range of uncertainty in the parameterizations of three basic feedback mechanisms: the ice albedo-temperature, the outgoing long-wave radiation-temperature, and the eddy transport-meridional temperature gradient. It was found that the differences between the simulation of the present climate by the four versions were generally small, especially for annually averaged results. The climate model was also used to study the effect of growing/shrinking of a continental ice sheet, bedrock sinking/uplifting, and sea level changes on the climate system, taking also into account the feedback effects on the climate of the building of the ice caps.
For the first time, a formal comparison is made between gravity wave momentum fluxes in models and those derived from observations. Although gravity waves occur over a wide range of spatial and temporal scales, the focus of this paper is on scales that are being parameterized in present climate models, sub-1000-km scales. Only observational methods that permit derivation of gravity wave momentum fluxes over large geographical areas are discussed, and these are from satellite temperature measurements, constant-density long-duration balloons, and high-vertical-resolution radiosonde data. The models discussed include two high-resolution models in which gravity waves are explicitly modeled, Kanto and the Community Atmosphere Model, version 5 (CAM5), and three climate models containing gravity wave parameterizations,MAECHAM5, Hadley Centre Global Environmental Model 3 (HadGEM3), and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) model. Measurements generally show similar flux magnitudes as in models, except that the fluxes derived from satellite measurements fall off more rapidly with height. This is likely due to limitations on the observable range of wavelengths, although other factors may contribute. When one accounts for this more rapid fall off, the geographical distribution of the fluxes from observations and models compare reasonably well, except for certain features that depend on the specification of the nonorographic gravity wave source functions in the climate models. For instance, both the observed fluxes and those in the high-resolution models are very small at summer high latitudes, but this is not the case for some of the climate models. This comparison between gravity wave fluxes from climate models, high-resolution models, and fluxes derived from observations indicates that such efforts offer a promising path toward improving specifications of gravity wave sources in climate models.
1D climate models are less sophisticated than 3D global circulation models (GCMs), however their computational time is much less expensive, allowing a large number of runs in a short period of time to explore a wide parameter space. Exploring parameter space is particularly important for predicting the observable properties of exoplanets, for which few parameters are known with certainty. Therefore, 1D climate models are still very useful tools for planetary studies. In most of these 1D models, clouds are not physically represented in the atmosphere, despite having a well-known, significant impact on a planetary radiative budget. This impact is simulated by artificially raising surface albedo, in order to reproduce the observed-averaged surface temperature (i.e. 288 K for modern Earth) and a radiative balance at the top of the atmosphere. This non-physical representation of clouds, causes atmospheric long wave and shortwaves fluxes to not match observational data. Additionally, this technique represents a parameter that is highly-tuned to modern Earth’s climate, and may not be appropriate for planets that deviate from modern Earth’s climate conditions. In this paper, we present an update to the climate model within the Atmos 1D atmospheric modeling package with a physical representation of clouds. We show that this physical representation of clouds in the atmosphere allows both long wave and shortwave fluxes to match observational data. This improvement will allow us to study the energy fluxes for a variety of cloudy rocky planets, and increase our confidence in future simulations of temperature profile and net energy balance.
We give an overview of the practice of developing and using complex climate models, as seen from experiences in a major climate modelling center and through participation in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP).We discuss the construction and calibration of models; their evaluation, especially through use of out-of-sample tests; and their exploitation in multi-model ensembles to identify biases and make predictions. We stress that adequacy or utility of climate models is best assessed via their skill against more naive predictions. The framework we use for making inferences about reality using simulations is naturally Bayesian (in an informal sense), and has many points of contact with more familiar examples of scientific epistemology. While the use of complex simulations in science is a development that changes much in how science is done in practice, we argue that the concepts being applied fit very much into traditional practices of the scientific method, albeit those more often associated with laboratory work.
A seasonal global climatic model developed by Sellers is studied. Several changes are made to correct errors in the original model and to allow its use in a time dependent simulation mode. The major changes are in the infrared radiation formulation and in the size of the time steps. The seasonal cycles of surface temperature, wind, ice, snow, albedo, horizontal heat transport, and vertical flux of solar and infrared radiation are compared to recent observations. The seasonal cycle of temperature is fairly well reproduced, but has too small an amplitude in the Northern Hemisphere high latitudes. An overestimate of albedo at the poles is found, which is related to errors in some of the other variables. The sensitivity of the model to CO2 and solar constant (O) changes is summarized. Doubling the CO2 amount causes a 2.45 K increase in global average surface temperature (T). Increasing Q by 1% increases T by 3.14K. Decreasing 0 by 1% decreases T by 4.65K. An annual average version of the model is more sensitive to changes in Q than the model with the seasonal cycle.
If you want to know whether you will need sunscreen or an umbrella for tomorrow's picnic, you can simply read the local weather report. However, if you are calculating the impact of gas combustion on global temperatures, or anticipating next year's rainfall levels to set water conservation policy, you must conduct a more comprehensive investigation. Such complex matters require long-range modeling techniques that predict broad trends in climate development rather than day-to-day details. Climate models are built from equations that calculate the progression of weather-related conditions over time. Based on the laws of physics, climate model equations have been developed to predict a number of environmental factors, for example: 1. Amount of solar radiation that hits the Earth. 2. Varying proportions of gases that make up the air. 3. Temperature at the Earth's surface. 4. Circulation of ocean and wind currents. 5. Development of cloud cover. Numerical modeling of the climate can improve our understanding of both the past and, the future. A model can confirm the accuracy of environmental measurements taken. in, the past and can even fill in gaps in those records. In addition, by quantifying the relationship between different aspects of climate, scientists can estimate how a future change in one aspect may alter the rest of the world. For example, could an increase in the temperature of the Pacific Ocean somehow set off a drought on the other side of the world? A computer simulation could lead to an answer for this and other questions. Quantifying the chaotic, nonlinear activities that shape our climate is no easy matter. You cannot run these simulations on your desktop computer and expect results by the time you have finished checking your morning e-mail. Efficient and accurate climate modeling requires powerful computers that can process billions of mathematical calculations in a single second. The NCCS exists to provide this degree of vast computing capability.
The physics of the upper troposphere is dominated by the different phases of water, while the lower stratosphere is governed by the presence of ozone. The tropopause may be regarded as the layer which separates the regions where stratospheric and tropospheric processes dominate the physics, but it is clearly not a smooth transition level. Modelling this region in comprehensive climate models is complicated, partly because of the constraints inherent in numerical methods (such as the finite resolution used in models) and partly because of our incomplete knowledge of the physical and chemical interactions which occur (such as the phase transitions of water and the composition of aerosols). However, studies of stratospheric impacts on climate change clearly require the tropopause region to be modelled with a high degree of accuracy. This paper will examine how well we can currently model the structure and dynamics of the tropopause region; this includes some comparisons of the simulated atmospheric composition with observational estimates of these species, some studies of discrepancies between forecasts and observations in the Data Assimilation System of the Data Assimilation office, and inferences for sparsely observed quantities. The analysis will focus on meteorological quantities, physical forcing mechanisms, and the transport and interactions of trace species.
A coupled high and low latitude radiative-dynamical model of the annual mean northern hemisphere has been constructed in order to study the interactions of the vertical and meridional heat fluxes and their feedback effect on model climate sensitivity. The model's climate sensitivity to solar constant changes and CO2 increases is investigated, and the effect of feedback in the dynamical fluxes on model climate sensitivity is examined. Nonlinear interactions between heat fluxes and other feedbacks such as radiation-temperature, ice albedo, and humidity are also discussed.
It is widely recognized that water ice clouds critically affect the current weather and climate of Mars. Simulating clouds and the water cycle in climate models remains challenging, however, due to the highly sensitive nature of cloud formation to several microphysical parameters that are not well known for Mars and the strong radiative feedbacks that can occur. We have recently ported our cloud microphysics package from the NASA Ames Legacy Mars Global Climate Model (MGCM) to our new MGCM based on the NOAA/GFDL cubed-sphere finite volume (FV3) dynamical core. Here we report on the status of our water cycle simulations and show how our reference simulation compares to observations.
The Community Climate Model (CCM) is a comprehensive three-dimensional global atmospheric model assembled at the National Center for Atmospheric Research. Detailed comparisons are made between the climate simulated by a seasonal version of CCM, namely CCM1, at 12 level, R15 spectral resolution, and that revealed by ECMWF operational analyses over 1980-86 truncated to a similar resolution. A variety of circulation statistics are presented in order to reveal the spatial character and seasonality of CCM1 biases in temperature, winds, and wave flux quantities. The biases revealed for CCM1 are similar in many respects to those found in other climate models run at similar resolution. Results of this study are then presented, discussing temperature biases and thermodynamic balances, wind fields, zonal mean wave diagnostics, stationary waves, and local eddy statistics. The major findings are then summarized.
Over the past 30 years most climate models have grown from relatively simple representations of a few atmospheric processes to a complex multi-disciplinary system. Computer infrastructure over that period has gone from punch card mainframes to modem parallel clusters. Model implementations have become complex, brittle, and increasingly difficult to extend and maintain. Existing verification processes for model implementations rely almost exclusively upon some combination of detailed analysis of output from full climate simulations and system-level regression tests. In additional to being quite costly in terms of developer time and computing resources, these testing methodologies are limited in terms of the types of defects that can be detected, isolated and diagnosed. Mitigating these weaknesses of coarse-grained testing with finer-grained "unit" tests has been perceived as cumbersome and counter-productive. In the commercial software sector, recent advances in tools and methodology have led to a renaissance for systematic fine-grained testing. We discuss the availability of analogous tools for scientific software and examine benefits that similar testing methodologies could bring to climate modeling software. We describe the unique challenges faced when testing complex numerical algorithms and suggest techniques to minimize and/or eliminate the difficulties.
Climate resilience can emerge from a combination of (1) climate projections that enable future-oriented planning and (2) contemporary observations that can be used for adaptation in the face of realized climate. NASA is uniquely positioned to provide global climate projections and satellite-based observations to users who must take a global perspective on climate risk (e.g., supply chain managers). Here, we will share the capabilities and experiences of three NASA projects. The first project, the NASA Earth eXchange (NEX) provides two downscaled climate projections, NEX-GDDP-CMIP6, a global 25 km resolution product, and NEX-DCP30-CMIP6, an 800 m resolution product covering the coterminous U.S. specifically designed for U.S. National Climate Assessment (NCA). NEX also offers land surface products that mirror the twice-daily products provided by the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) but are derived from operational geostationary weather satellite data collected at 5-10 minutes intervals. The second project, the Short-term Prediction Research and Transition Center (SPoRT), was established in 2002 to transition unique NASA satellite products and capabilities to stakeholders to improve decision-making that benefits society. SPoRT provides products and capabilities derived from NASA observations and models to end users in government, academia, and the private sector. SPoRT translates NASA Earth science into actionable solutions reaching over 400 stakeholders across 80 organizations. Finally, the Regional Climate Model Evaluation System (RCMES) is designed to facilitate regional-scale evaluations of climate models by providing standardized access to a vast and comprehensive set of observations, such as satellite, in-situ, and reanalyses, and modeling resources such as CMIP & CORDEX. These three projects form part of the core capabilities at the NASA Centers deliver climate information under the new NASA Earth Science to Action (ES2A) strategy.
Previous versions of GISS climate models have either used formulations of Rayleigh drag to represent unresolved gravity wave interactions with the model-resolved flow or have included a rather complicated treatment of unresolved gravity waves that, while being climate interactive, involved the specification of a relatively large number of parameters that were not well constrained by observations and also was computationally very expensive. Here, the authors introduce a relatively simple and computationally efficient specification of unresolved orographic and nonorographic gravity waves and their interaction with the resolved flow. Comparisons of the GISS model winds and temperatures with no gravity wave parameterization; with only orographic gravity wave parameterization; and with both orographic and nonorographic gravity wave parameterizations are shown to illustrate how the zonal mean winds and temperatures converge toward observations. The authors also show that the specifications of orographic and nonorographic gravity waves must be different in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres. Then results are presented where the nonorographic gravity wave sources are specified to represent sources from convection in the intertropical convergence zone and spontaneous emission from jet imbalances. Finally, a strategy to include these effects in a climate-dependent manner is suggested.