|
|
| |
Welcome
This is the webpage for the Standard Test Set
for
Nonhydrostatic Dynamical Cores of NWP Models. The preliminary
test
set is listed below along with links to pages describing test
configurations,
results, interpretation of results, discussion of what the tests reveal
about
a model and some discussion of the fine points and limitations of the
tests. This is an early version of the test
set web page. The test results and
discussion
posted here are incomplete - all that is posted presently are the test
results
shown on the 2004 AMS NWP/WAF conference poster (essentially what was
presented at the 2003 SRNWP workshop). We expect to have complete
test results
for a few of the cases posted sometime before the 2005 SRNWP meeting.
In addition to the test cases and documentation,
we
could post test results from other models if desired. Discussion these
test results could also be posted. Finally, in the future, test
cases
for other aspects of NWP models (such as physics) could also be
accomodated
here.
9 January 2004, W. Skamarock
13 October 2005, IG wave test cases added. W. Skamarock
19 October 2005, Linear 2D mountain wave solutions added. J.
Doyle, W. Skamarock
|
|
| |
Background (top)
Objective: Compile a set of test
cases
to verify the correctness and examine the robustness of nonhydrostatic
solvers
(not full NWP models). Publish this test set (journal paper, web page,
etc.)
to facilitate commmunity use.
Philosophy: Our foremost needs
are
for tests encompassing important linear and nonlinear nonhydrostatic
flows
encountered as NWP models increase resolution from hydrostatic regime
(dx ~ 10 km) to nonhydrostatic regime (dx ~ 1 km), e.g. terrain-forced
flows,
gravity waves and convection (strongly nonlinear flows). The primary
purpose
of these tests are for testing coding correctness and the
appropriateness
of approximations, and to test model robustness, accuracy and
efficiency.
Background: At the SRWNP (Short Range
Numerical
Weather Prediction) workshop in Bad Orb, Germany, 27-29 October 2003,
we
(Bill Skamarock (NCAR), Jim Doyle (ONR) , Peter Clark and Nigel Wood
(MetOffice))
presented the following proposed test set. The 80+ participants at the
workshop
strongly endorsed the proposal. Additionally, this proposal
was
presented that the 2004 AMS NWP-WAF conference as
poster P2.17
.
|
|
|
|
Guiding Principles (top)
|
|
Principles
|
Test Documentation
|
|
(1) Tests should be
easy
to configure.
(2) Tests should be easy to evaluate.
(3) Tests should require onlyminimal physics (dissipation, very simple
moist
physics).
(4) Tests should test something in the
solver.
(5) Test set should be a minimal set.
|
Existing test cases are
scattered
in the literature, and tend to be poorly documented, especially for the
uninitiated,
hence we will strive to provide complete documentation of:
(1) setup of tests and interpretation of results.
(2) solution (analytic, numerical converged, subjective).
(3) identification of solver components
tested by test, and interpretation of
results with respect to solver components.
|
|
| |
Test Cases (top)
(1) Inertia
gravity waves in a periodic channel
(2) Density Current
(3) Resting atmosphere
(4) Potential flow over a mountain
(5)
2-D mountain waves (hydrostatic and
nonhydrostatic,
linear and nonlinear)
(6) 3-D mountain waves
(7) Schaer test case
(8) Squall lines and/or supercells?
|
|
| |
Other Tests of Interest
|
| |
| |
|
