1 / 14

Dynamical downscaling of wind fields in stratified flow: a high resolution mesoscale approach

Dynamical downscaling of wind fields in stratified flow: a high resolution mesoscale approach. Pedro Miranda, R Tomé, A Rodrigues, J Palma, F Castro, J Pinto, E Dutra. University of Lisbon, CGUL, IDL, Portugal University of Porto, CEsA, Portugal. Issues.

faxon
Download Presentation

Dynamical downscaling of wind fields in stratified flow: a high resolution mesoscale approach

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Dynamical downscaling of wind fields in stratified flow: a high resolution mesoscale approach Pedro Miranda, R Tomé, A Rodrigues, J Palma, F Castro, J Pinto, E Dutra University of Lisbon, CGUL, IDL, Portugal University of Porto, CEsA, Portugal

  2. Issues Merging meteorology and mechanical engineering approaches to wind simulation What resolution is needed/possible to get the most from mesoscale meteorological models? Is it worth using even higher resolution nested CFD codes? Forecast and mapping: how different are they?

  3. What is in a weather prediction model? • Resolved scales: full dynamic equations (hydrostatic or non-hydrostatic) • Problems • initial state, boundary conditions • interaction with unresolved scales (higher-resolution?) • misrepresentation of non-dynamical processes • Unresolved scales and processes • Orography (small and some mesoscale)> local wind • Clouds • Turbulence • ... ECMWF (T511L60~40km) 3km

  4. Models Meteorological Boundary conditions from ECMWF analysis MM5 (nested, down to 33, 22 or 11 km), full physics, 5 years 54x54km18x18  6x6  (3x3 or 2x2 or 1x1) WRF(nested domains, down to 22 km), full physics, 1 month MesoNH(nested domains, down to 22 km), full physics, 1 month NH3D (single domain, 1.51.5km), simple physics CFD code Boundary Conditions from NH3D VENTOS, dry, unrotating, adiabatic, ~300300 m, 1 week

  5. “Real” 100x100m Model 2x2km

  6. Dec 2002

  7. Linear model OBS Linear NH3D

  8. Resolution 3km 1.5km

  9. u v

  10. December 2002

  11. Nov 2005 Models (MM5, WRF, MesoNH) @2km Best mast (Nov 2005) Resolution (MM5) 2001-2005

  12. Coupling NH3D (1.5km) with VENTOS (300m)

  13. Nov 2005 Mean wind 2x2km

  14. Final thoughts Results are model dependent and resolution dependent (same analysed boundary conditions) “High” mesoscale resolution is needed (e.g. 2km) There may be gains in higher resolution (100m) if the microscale model is good There is a clear need for improvement! Remember: this is a very rough case in terms of topography. Results in mainland Portugal are often better

More Related