Some aspects of the circulation of Mars
Martian atmospheric circulation - vertical temperature distribution, diurnal heating and tides, and differential heating and general circulation at solstices
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.
Martian atmospheric circulation - vertical temperature distribution, diurnal heating and tides, and differential heating and general circulation at solstices
A modified version of the two-level atmospheric general circulation model has been developed and employed in the simulation of January and July global climates. The overall physical and numerical formation of the Oregon State University model is the same as that described by Gates and Schlesinger (1977), but in the new version water vapor at the upper level has been made a prognostic variable, the parameterizations of cumulus convection, large-scale condensation and evaporation, clouds, and radiative transfer have been changed, the surface snow mass and ground temperature have been made prognostic variables, and the treatment of the surface boundary layer has been revised. It is found that the model simulates most features of the large-scale distributions of observed January and July climate more accurately than before.
The algorithm chosen to represent the advection in atmospheric models is often used as the primary attribute to classify the model. Meteorological models are generally classified as spectral or grid point, with the term grid point implying discretization using finite differences. These traditional approaches have a number of shortcomings that render them non-physical. That is, they provide approximate solutions to the conservation equations that do not obey the fundamental laws of physics. The most commonly discussed shortcomings are overshoots and undershoots which manifest themselves most overtly in the constituent continuity equation. For this reason many climate models have special algorithms to model water vapor advection. This talk focuses on the development of an atmospheric general circulation model which uses a consistent physically-based advection algorithm in all aspects of the model formulation. The shallow-water model is generalized to three dimensions and combined with the physics parameterizations of NCAR's Community Climate Model. The scientific motivation for the development is to increase the integrity of the underlying fluid dynamics so that the physics terms can be more effectively isolated, examined, and improved. The expected benefits of the new model are discussed and results from the initial integrations will be presented.
The algorithm chosen to represent the advection in atmospheric models is often used as the primary attribute to classify the model. Meteorological models are generally classified as spectral or grid point, with the term grid point implying discretization using finite differences. These traditional approaches have a number of shortcomings that render them non-physical. That is, they provide approximate solutions to the conservation equations that do not obey the fundamental laws of physics. The most commonly discussed shortcomings are overshoots and undershoots which manifest themselves most overtly in the constituent continuity equation. For this reason many climate models have special algorithms to model water vapor advection. This talk focuses on the development of an atmospheric general circulation model which uses a consistent physically-based advection algorithm in all aspects of the model formulation. The shallow-water model of Lin and Rood (QJRMS, 1997) is generalized to three dimensions and combined with the physics parameterizations of NCAR's Community Climate Model. The scientific motivation for the development is to increase the integrity of the underlying fluid dynamics so that the physics terms can be more effectively isolated, examined, and improved. The expected benefits of the new model are discussed and results from the initial integrations will be presented.
Mars atmospheric circulation, diurnal heating, thermal tides and effects on Earth atmosphere
A new version of the Goddard Laboratory for Atmospheres GCM is utilized to simulate the influence of an observed sea surface temperature anomaly on rainfall and atmospheric circulation. The model can reproduce many essential features of the observed tropical rainfall and circulation anomalies during January-February 1983. Particularly, the model simulates realistic patterns of tropical anomalies of sea level pressure, 200 mb geopotential heights, and horizontal winds at the 200 and 850 mb levels. The model-simulated tropical precipitation anomaly patterns appear realistic, although the precipitation is rather excessive and the atmosphere is too energetic.
Surface heterogeneity in the marginal ice zone (MIZ) causes multiscale secondary atmospheric circulations that are challenging to model or observe. The absence or inadequate representation of these circulations in ocean‐atmosphere exchange schemes in climate models is partially responsible for the underestimation of Arctic sea ice loss. Observationally, such circulations obfuscate the interpretation of polar atmospheric chemistry measurements, among others. To address this open challenge, large‐eddy simulations are conducted over real‐world satellite‐sensed sea ice maps with an ice‐sea temperature contrast, as well as over idealizations of these maps that alter the ice pattern but conserve its fraction, showing that the ice fraction of a surface is not sufficient to predict the surface heat flux. In a second suite of simulations, three other heterogeneity metrics (representing the surface fragmentation, patch edge tortuosity, and patch size variability) are introduced to complement the ice fraction in describing the surface. Simulations varying these parameters suggest that they also significantly impact surface‐air interactions. A roughness contrast is then added to the surface temperature contrast, indicating that the contribution of roughness changes to the resulting atmospheric circulations is less pronounced than that of thermal heterogeneity. Based on these results, we illustrate, using a multi‐linear regression on these map features, that MIZ surface parameterizations in Earth Systems Models can be improved if they account for these various characteristics of the sea‐ice patterns.
Earth system models are essential tools for climate projections, but coarse resolutions limit regional accuracy, especially in the Arctic. Regionally refined meshes (RRMs) enhance resolution in key areas while maintaining computational efficiency. This paper provides an overview of the United States (U.S.) Department of Energy's (DOE's) Energy Exascale Earth System Model version 2.1 with an Arctic RRM, hereafter referred to as E3SMv2.1-Arctic, for the atmosphere (25 km), land (25 km), and ocean/ice (10 km) components. We evaluate the atmospheric component and its interactions with land, ocean, and cryosphere by comparing the RRM (E3SM2.1-Arctic) historical simulations (1950–2014) with the uniform low-resolution (LR) counterpart, reanalysis products, and observational data sets. The RRM generally reduces biases in the LR model, improving simulations of Arctic large-scale mean fields, such as precipitation, atmospheric circulation, clouds, atmospheric river frequency, and sea ice thickness. However, it introduces a seasonally dependent surface air temperature bias, reducing the LR cold bias in summer but enhancing the LR warm bias in winter, which contributes to the underestimated winter sea ice area and volume. Radiative feedback analysis shows similar climate feedback strengths in both model configurations, with the RRM exhibiting a more positive surface albedo feedback and contributing to a stronger surface warming than LR. These findings underscore the importance of high-resolution modeling for advancing our understanding of Arctic climate changes and their broader global impacts, although some persistent biases appear to be independent of model resolution at 10–100 km scales.
In order to determine features of rotating fluid flow that are dependent on the geometry, rotating annulus-type experiments are carried out with a numerical model in spherical coordinates. Rather than constructing and testing a model expressly for this purpose, it is found expedient to modify an existing general circulation model of the atmosphere by removing the model physics and replacing the lower boundary with a uniform surface. A regime diagram derived from these model experiments is presented; its major features are interpreted and contrasted with the major features of rotating annulus regime diagrams. Within the wave regime, a narrow region is found where one or two zonal wave numbers are dominant. The results reveal no upper symmetric regime; wave activity at low rotation rates is thought to be maintained by barotropic rather than baroclinic processes.
Venus Express Mission is the first ESA mission to Venus that will be launched in November 2005. In April 2006 after ~150 days of cruise the spacecraft will be inserted into highly elliptical polar orbit around Venus. The observational phase will begin after about one month of commissioning phase. The nominal mission orbital life-time is two Venus sidereal days (~486 Earth days). The scientific goals of Venus Express are related to the global atmospheric circulation and atmosphere chemical composition, the surfaceatmosphere physical and chemical interactions, the physics and chemistry of the cloud layer, the thermal balance and role of trace gases in the greenhouse effect, and the plasma environment and its interaction with the solar wind.
A benchmark calculation is proposed for evaluating the dynamical cores of atmospheric general circulation models (GCMs) independently of the physical parameterizations. The test focuses on the long-term statistical properties of a fully developed general circulation; thus, it is particularly appropriate for intercomparing the dynamics used in climate models. To illustrate the use of this benchmark, two very different atmospheric dynamical cores--one spectral, one finite difference--are compared. It is found that the long-term statistics produced by the two models are very similar. Selected results from these calculations are presented to initiate the intercomparison.
The present investigation is concerned with an analysis of the atmospheric angular momentum balance, based on the simulation data of the Oregon State University two-level atmospheric general circulation model (AGCM). An attempt is also made to gain an understanding of the involved processes. Preliminary results on the angular momentum and mass balance in the AGCM are shown. The basic equations are examined, and questions of turbulent momentum transfer are investigated. The methods of analysis are discussed, taking into account time-averaged balance equations, time and longitude-averaged balance equations, mean meridional circulation, the mean meridional balance of relative angular momentum, and standing and transient components of motion.
The Ground Hydrologic Model (GHM) developed for use in an atmospheric general circulation model (GCM) has been refined. A series of sensitivity studies of the new version of the GHM were conducted for the purpose of understanding the role played by various physical parameters in the GHM. The following refinements have been made: (1) the GHM is coupled directly with the planetary boundary layer (PBL); (2) a bulk vegetation layer is added with a more realistic large-scale parameterization; and (3) the infiltration rate is modified. This version GHM has been tested using input data derived from a GCM simulation run for eight North America regions for 45 days. The results are compared with those of the resident GHM in the GCM. The daily average of grid surface temperatures from both models agree reasonably well in phase and magnitude. However, large difference exists in one or two regions on some days. The daily average evapotranspiration is in general 10 to 30% less than the corresponding value given by the resident GHM.
Responses of the surface energy budgets and hydrologic cycles of 19 atmospheric general circulation models to an imposed, globally uniform sea surface temperature perturbation of 4 K were analyzed. The responses of the simulated surface energy budgets are extremely diverse and are closely linked to the responses of the simulated hydrologic cycles. The response of the net surface energy flux is not controlled by cloud effects; instead, it is determined primarily by the response of the latent heat flux. The prescribed warming of the oceans leads to major increases in the atmospheric water vapor content and the rates of evaporation and precipitation. The increased water vapor amount drastically increases the downwelling IR radiation at the earth's surface, but the amount of the change varies dramatically from one model to another.
Six years ago, we compared the climate sensitivity of 19 atmospheric general circulation models and found a roughly threefold variation among the models; most of this variation was attributed to differences in the models' depictions of cloud feedback. In an update of this comparison, current models showed considerably smaller differences in net cloud feedback, with most producing modest values. There are, however, substantial differences in the feedback components, indicating that the models still have physical disagreements.
The present study provides an intercomparison and interpretation of climate feedback processes in 19 atmospheric general circulation models. This intercomparison uses sea surface temperature change as a surrogate for climate change. The interpretation of cloud-climate interactions is given special attention. A roughly threefold variation in one measure of global climate sensitivity is found among the 19 models. The important conclusion is that most of this variation is attributable to differences in the models' depiction of cloud feedback, a result that emphasizes the need for improvements in the treatment of clouds in these models if they are ultimately to be used as reliable climate predictors. It is further emphazied that cloud feedback is the consequence of all interacting physical and dynamical processes in a general circulation model. The result of these processes is to produce changes in temperature, moisture distribution, and clouds which are integrated into the radiative response termed cloud feedback.
Parameterizations are developed for the representation of subgrid hydrologic processes in atmospheric general circulation models. Reasonable a priori probability density functions of the spatial variability of soil moisture and of precipitation are introduced. These are used in conjunction with the deterministic equations describing basic soil moisture physics to derive expressions for the hydrologic processes that include subgrid scale variation in parameters. The major model sensitivities to soil type and to climatic forcing are explored.
This paper focuses on the comparison of cloud amounts derived from an atmospheric general circulation model (AGCM), Satellite-observed clouds, and Ground-based cloud observations. Unlike Earth Radiation Budget Experiment (ERBE)-type comparisons it does not mix potential errors in the cloud amount with those in the radiation code embedded in the model. Long term cloud climatologies were used to compare global cloud amounts and regional seasonal cycles. The AGCM successfully reproduced the signatures of the warm pool and North Pacific seasonal cycle cloudiness but failed in the low stratus region off the coast of South America, a known problem for AGCMs. The data sets also reproduced the anomaly signature associated with El Nino in the warm pool region, but the model amounts were lower. Global results had a similar success rate, with the model generally producing lower total cloud compared to the satellite and in situ measurements. To compare cloud vertical distributions the cloud height may need to be validated using the corresponding radiation fields. Unfortunately there were also some large discrepancies between the two observed cloud data sets. While tremendously improved over the last decade the character of the observed cloud data sets, must be substantially enhanced before they will be useful in validating AGCMs by any but the crudest levels of comparison.