Energy considerations in the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM)
Abstract
An error in the energy formulation in the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM) is identified and corrected. Ten year AMIP simulations are compared using the correct and incorrect energy formulations. Statistics of selected primary variables all indicate physically insignificant differences between the simulations, comparable to differences with simulations initialized with rounding sized perturbations. The two simulations are so similar mainly because of an inconsistency in the application of the incorrect energy formulation in the original CAM. CAM used the erroneous energy form to determine the states passed between the parameterizations, but used a form related to the correct formulation for the state passed from the parameterizations to the dynamical core. If the incorrect form is also used to determine the state passed to the dynamical core the simulations are significantly different. In addition, CAM uses the incorrect form for the global energy fixer, but that seems to be less important. The difference of the magnitude of the fixers using the correct and incorrect energy definitions is very small.
- Authors:
-
- National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO (United States)
- Uni Research and Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research, Bergen (Norway)
- National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO (United States); Univ. of Colorado, Boulder, CO (United States)
- Sandia National Lab. (SNL-NM), Albuquerque, NM (United States)
- Publication Date:
- Research Org.:
- Sandia National Lab. (SNL-NM), Albuquerque, NM (United States)
- Sponsoring Org.:
- USDOE Office of Science (SC), Biological and Environmental Research (BER)
- OSTI Identifier:
- 1214705
- Grant/Contract Number:
- AC04-94AL85000
- Resource Type:
- Accepted Manuscript
- Journal Name:
- Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems
- Additional Journal Information:
- Journal Name: Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems; Journal ID: ISSN 1942-2466
- Publisher:
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
- Subject:
- 54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Citation Formats
Williamson, David L., Olson, Jerry G., Hannay, Cécile, Toniazzo, Thomas, Yudin, Valery, and Taylor, Mark. Energy considerations in the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM). United States: N. p., 2015.
Web. doi:10.1002/2015MS000448.
Williamson, David L., Olson, Jerry G., Hannay, Cécile, Toniazzo, Thomas, Yudin, Valery, & Taylor, Mark. Energy considerations in the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM). United States. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015MS000448
Williamson, David L., Olson, Jerry G., Hannay, Cécile, Toniazzo, Thomas, Yudin, Valery, and Taylor, Mark. Tue .
"Energy considerations in the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM)". United States. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015MS000448. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1214705.
@article{osti_1214705,
title = {Energy considerations in the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM)},
author = {Williamson, David L. and Olson, Jerry G. and Hannay, Cécile and Toniazzo, Thomas and Yudin, Valery and Taylor, Mark},
abstractNote = {An error in the energy formulation in the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM) is identified and corrected. Ten year AMIP simulations are compared using the correct and incorrect energy formulations. Statistics of selected primary variables all indicate physically insignificant differences between the simulations, comparable to differences with simulations initialized with rounding sized perturbations. The two simulations are so similar mainly because of an inconsistency in the application of the incorrect energy formulation in the original CAM. CAM used the erroneous energy form to determine the states passed between the parameterizations, but used a form related to the correct formulation for the state passed from the parameterizations to the dynamical core. If the incorrect form is also used to determine the state passed to the dynamical core the simulations are significantly different. In addition, CAM uses the incorrect form for the global energy fixer, but that seems to be less important. The difference of the magnitude of the fixers using the correct and incorrect energy definitions is very small.},
doi = {10.1002/2015MS000448},
journal = {Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {Tue Jun 30 00:00:00 EDT 2015},
month = {Tue Jun 30 00:00:00 EDT 2015}
}
Free Publicly Available Full Text
Publisher's Version of Record
Other availability
Search WorldCat to find libraries that may hold this journal
Cited by: 17 works
Citation information provided by
Web of Science
Web of Science
Save to My Library
You must Sign In or Create an Account in order to save documents to your library.
Works referenced in this record:
Toward a Complete Model of the Climate System
book, January 2000
- Boville, B. A.
- Numerical Modeling of the Global Atmosphere in the Climate System
Heating and Kinetic Energy Dissipation in the NCAR Community Atmosphere Model
journal, December 2003
- Boville, Byron A.; Bretherton, Christopher S.
- Journal of Climate, Vol. 16, Issue 23
Various Vertical Coordinate Systems Used for Numerical Weather Prediction
journal, July 1974
- Kasahara, Akira
- Monthly Weather Review, Vol. 102, Issue 7
A Spectral General Circulation Model Using a Piecewise-Constant Finite-Element Representation on a Hybrid Vertical Coordinate System
journal, January 1990
- Laprise, René; Girard, Claude
- Journal of Climate, Vol. 3, Issue 1
Conservation of Mass and Energy for the Moist Atmospheric Primitive Equations on Unstructured Grids
book, January 2011
- Taylor, Mark A.
- Numerical Techniques for Global Atmospheric Models
Time-Split versus Process-Split Coupling of Parameterizations and Dynamical Core
journal, August 2002
- Williamson, David L.
- Monthly Weather Review, Vol. 130, Issue 8
Two Dynamical Core Formulation Flaws Exposed by a Baroclinic Instability Test Case
journal, February 2009
- Williamson, David L.; Olson, Jerry G.; Jablonowski, Christiane
- Monthly Weather Review, Vol. 137, Issue 2
Works referencing / citing this record:
A Methodology for Anomaly Coupling in Climate Simulation
journal, August 2018
- Toniazzo, Thomas; Koseki, Shunya
- Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, Vol. 10, Issue 8
Description and evaluation of NorESM1-F: a fast version of the Norwegian Earth System Model (NorESM)
journal, January 2019
- Guo, Chuncheng; Bentsen, Mats; Bethke, Ingo
- Geoscientific Model Development, Vol. 12, Issue 1
The path to CAM6: coupled simulations with CAM5.4 and CAM5.5
journal, January 2018
- Bogenschutz, Peter A.; Gettelman, Andrew; Hannay, Cecile
- Geoscientific Model Development, Vol. 11, Issue 1
The tropical rain belts with an annual cycle and a continent model intercomparison project: TRACMIP
text, January 2016
- Voigt, A.; Biasutti, M.; Scheff, J.
- Karlsruhe
Description and evaluation of NorESM1-F: A fast version of the Norwegian Earth System Model (NorESM)
posted_content, September 2018
- Guo, Chuncheng; Bentsen, Mats; Bethke, Ingo
- Geoscientific Model Development Discussions
The tropical rain belts with an annual cycle and a continent model intercomparison project: TRACMIP
text, January 2016
- Voigt, Aiko; Biasutti, Michela; Scheff, Jacob S.
- Columbia University