180 likes | 201 Vues
Explore the transition processes in the atmospheric boundary layer during evening hours, comparing data from two experimental sites in Spain and France. Utilizing methodology, experimental data, WRF model simulations, and results analysis to understand differences in boundary layer behavior.
E N D
12th EMS Annual Meeting & 9th European Conference on Applied Climatology (ECAC) EUROPEAN METEOROLOGICAL SOCIETY Atmospheric Boundary Layer evening transitions: a comparison between two experimental sites (CIBA-Spain and BLLAST-France) M. Sastre (1), C. Yagüe (1), C. Román-Cascón (1), G. Maqueda (2). (1) Dept. Geofísica y Meteorología. University Complutense of Madrid, Spain. (msastrem@fis.ucm.es) (2) Dept. Astrofísica y Ciencias de la Atmósfera. University Complutense of Madrid, Spain. 11th September 2012
Contents 1.- Introduction 2.- Methodology 3.- Experimental data 4.- WRF model 5.- Results 6.- Summary and conclusions
1.- Introduction • Evening transition processes in the ABL: from convection to stability • Comparison at two experimental sites • Simulations: differences between sites?
x x 2.- Methodology • Data from two experimental sites: CIBA site (Spain) and the BLLAST campaign site (France).
2.- Methodology BLLAST campaign site: land-use crops Forest deciduous meadow 1 P town village Forest pines industrial moor meadow corn
x x 2.- Methodology • Data from two experimental sites: CIBA site (Spain) and the BLLAST campaign site (France). • Days studied from two summer periods: 2009 (CIBA) and 2011 (BLLAST). • Times related to sunset for every site and day (t=0 => tsunset). • Simulations using WRF model. • MRFD technique employed.
3.- Experimental data • Sonic anemometer (CIBA and BLLAST) • BLLAST 60m-tower instruments (2, 15, 30, 45, 60 m) • CIBA 10m-mast instruments (1.5, 3, 5, 7.5, 10 m) Focus on: • Wind speed and direction • Temperature • Turbulent parameters Friction velocity:
4.- WRF model • Weather Research and Forecast (WRF) mesoscale model. • Test three PBL parameterizations: MYJ, MYNN, QNSE. • More about model configuration: • Initial and boundary conditions from NCEP-NCAR (1º resolution; data every 6 hours). • 4 nested domains whose grids are: 27, 9, 3 and 1km. • Time step: 81 seconds. • 50 eta vertical levels. • Spin up: 12 h. • SW radiation: Dudhia (1998). • LW radiation RRTM. • Microphysics package: WSM3.
5.- Results • Days selected: 28-29-30 August 2009 (CIBA) and 24-25-26 June 2011 (BLLAST). • Similar synoptic situations: stability and weak pressure gradient. 30/August/2009 – 00:00 UTC Geopotential at 500 hPa (gpdm) and surface pressure reduced to sea level (reanalysis taken from: www.wetterzentrale.de)
5.- Results Comparison of MRFD Friction velocity (U*) 29 Aug 2009 (CIBA) 24 Jun 2011 (BLLAST) m s-1 t=0 => tsunset
5.- Results Comparison of MRFD Friction velocity (U*) 29 Aug 2009 (CIBA) 24 Jun 2011 (BLLAST) m s-1 t=0 => tsunset
5.- Results Comparison of temperature and friction velocity U* T CIBA BLLAST
wind speed wind direction 5.- Results Katabatic event - CIBA
24 Jun 2011 5.- Results WRF simulations Friction velocity (U*) 28 Aug 2009 CIBA BLLAST 30 Aug 2009 26 Jun 2011
5.- Results WRF simulations Temperature 30 Aug 2009 (CIBA) 25 Jun 2011 (BLLAST)
5.- Results WRF simulations Wind speed 28 Aug 2009 (CIBA) 26 Jun 2011 (BLLAST)
6.- Summary and conclusions • Evening transition processes have been evaluated at two different experimental sites. • MRFD timescales: similar evolution, but with some differences. • Radiative cooling: seems to be influenced by soil moisture. • Simulations: tend to overestimate the turbulence after sunset at one of the sites (the less dried).
THANK YOUFOR YOUR ATTENTION Acknowledgements: • Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation projects CGL2006-12474-C03-03, CGL2009-12797-C03-03 and CGL2011-13477-E . • UCM fellowship (reference BE45/10). • BLLAST project, especially M. Lothon and F. Saïd for the 60m-tower data. • EMS Young Scientist Travel Award (YSTA).