NCC &8OF IL NUOVO CIMENTO Vou. 26 0, N. 2008 Domain of validity of some atmospheric mesoscale models M. A. Nufez(*) Deportamento de Fisica, Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana Irtopalapa Apartado Postal 55-534, C.P. 09840 México, Distrito Federal, México (ricevuto il 15 Febbraio 2002; revisionato il 15 Settembre 2008; approvato il 19 Novembre 2003) Summary. — The usual coordinate system in the mesoscale literature is a Carte- sian system zy= with its origin at a point on a spherical earth model with the =axis| normal and exterior to the earth. The main form of the momentum equation for theoretical analysis has been dv/dt = —p"!Vp + g—20 x v-+f, where g is ap- proximated by —g2. Several computational models use a version of this equation where = is replaced by a a-type coordinate, and applications of such models have used a horizontal domain D(L) = 2 x 2L with L 2 650 km but the results of this paper suggest that the equation is valid with L = 100 lam. However, the neces- sity of including the effects of synoptic disturbances and reducing the errors from lateral boundaries impose the use of a large D(L). This conflict is solved with the use of the correct gravitational acceleration g = —ga’Rr~* which provides a mo- mentum equation valid on any domain D(L). This is confirmed with an example which shows that the resulting momentum equation ean yield the correct pressure field on the whole earth surface, Practical problems limit the use of the coordi nate system zyz to L < 500 km. In this ease, it is shown that the approximation g~ —g(2% + y$ + a2)/a can be applied. Some mesoscale models incorporate map projections into model equations to consider the earth curvature. ‘This has mo- tivated the use of such models on a domain with L ~ 882, 1665 km, Formally, the governing equations from map projections are written in'terms of a curvilinear coordinate system 2pypzp but it is shown that if 2», yp,» are taken as 2,y,z the resulting momentum equation is valid on a region with LS 100 km. PACS 92.60.We ~ Weather analysis and prediction. PACS 92.60.82 ~ Air quality and air pollution, (*) E-mail: manp@xanum.uam.mx © Societa tatiana di Fisica 12 M. A. NUNEZ: 1. ~ Introduction ‘The fundamental momentum vector equation for an air parcel in any coordinate system fixed to the earth is ave 1 . (14) Gen AVP He RAK a, where V, p, P are the velocity vector, density and pressure, respectively, © is the earth's angular velocity, f is a frictional force and terms with 9 are neglected. If we consider a uniform-mass spherical earth, the gravitational acceleration is given by (a2) with ¢ = GMa-?, R being the vector from the earth’s center to the parcel, r = |[R||, M and a are the mass and radius of the earth and G is the gravitational constant [1]. As a result of relatively small horizontal scales of mesoprocesses, mesometeorological problems do not as a rule involve the use of a spherical coordinate system or, in general, any system ‘which account for the earth's curvature [2]. The usual coordinate system in the standard mesoscale literature is a Cartesian system zy2 with its origin at a point P. in latitude $, on the terrestrial sphere, the (,y)-plane is normal to g at P. and the z-axis is outside of the earth [2-11]. It is generally acknowledged that when the horizontal scale of the motion ((2| |y| < L) is of order 10° km or smaller, the gravitational acceleration g ‘can be taken as a constant and normal to the (2,y)-plane (7). ‘Thus, the most. common form of the momentum equation used in the mesoscale literature [2-11] is, Tia a (13) Gem pNP ge Pw eh, where @, £9 are the unit vectors of the xyz system. This is a simple equation to perform theoretical analyses with the effects of rotation included, which has been used by numerical mesoscale models to treat problems with complex topography. In this latter case the 2-coordinate is replaced by either a o.- or oy-coordinate to simplify the treatment of lower boundary conditions [5, 6,10, 13]. Following this scheme, several ‘mesoscale computational systems that solve (1.3) in coordinates ry. or yoy have been developed [13-15]. Although some authors have pointed out that the range of validity of eq, (1.3) may be very small [16,1], some applications of these computational systems to air pollution studies [17] have considered a horizontal domain D(L) = 2L x 2L with L 2 650 km but the results of this paper suggest that eq. (1.3) is valid on a region D(2qx) With L2yo¢ S100 ken ‘Two problems motivate the use of a large horizontal domain D(L). The first is the necessity of including the influence of propagating synoptic disturbances on the regional weather; for instance, Pielke suggests a domain of at least 5000 km on a side to reasonably resolve some disturbances in winter [13, p. 445]. The second is that the boundary errors induced by artificial boundaries (which are unavoidable in limited-area numerical models) do not contaminate the results with a large D(L). ‘The solution of these problems is incompatible with the small domain of validity D(L2,,,) of the numerical models that solve (1.3) in zxya-coordinates [13-15]. ‘The answer to this conflict is the use of theDOMAIN OF VALIDITY OF SOME ATMOSPHERIC MESOSCALE MODELS 8 of terms in the u-equation for flows with horizontal scale L. (m), ‘TapLp I~ Magnitudes in ms 2Msing, $ = 45°, g = 10 ms? [9], and z = L/2, y 10 me! du/at iB tf fw Bk +2Kn L WL AP/pL SU. fHUJL KU/H® KU/L? 10° aoe 10-3 10-° ele a 10° 10° ce 10-3 10" aoe ae pier to 107" 10% 10-* plies ae eee: exact gravity acceleration (1.2). If a parcel is at the point (x,y, =) at time ¢ we have R= 2k -+y¥ +(2+a)z and the correct momentum equation is aw 2 5 (a) Gea pNP 9s +19 + (e+ aa—28 xv +E, ‘whose numerical implementation requires a small modification of the numerical mesoscale software developed to the date. Some authors consider that the coordinate system zy2 is not well suited for practical applications to large-scale problems, in part, because the latitudinal variation of the Coriolis force has to be included and a large-scale flow will fall below the tangent plane and acquire a z-component in the 2yz system (16, 1,7]. However, the vector equation (1.1) is valid for any coordinate system rotating with the earth [1] and this includes the xyz system. ‘Thus, in strict mathematical terms, eq. (1.4) together with the conservation equations of mass, energy, moisture and the equation of state, provides the correct meteorological fields when the correct initial and boundary conditions are used, independently of the magnitude of the domain D(L). This is illustrated in subsect. 3'1, where a simple problem shows that eq. (1.4) can yield the correct pressure field on the whole earth, Map projections have been used in atmospheric modeling with the purpose of includ- ing the earth sphericity into model equations [6,18, 19]. Accordingly, some mesoscale computational systems that use coordinates xya, [20] or yap [21] include metric factors in the horizontal derivatives of model equations to consider map projections. This has motivated the use of such computational systems on horizontal domains D(L) with L as large as 885 km [22] or 1665 km 23]. In principle, the use of map projections generates orthogonal coordinate systems pz» which are legitime to solve model equations. How- ever, in sect. 4 itis shown that if 2», yp, zp are taken as correct approximations of x, y, 2, respectively, the horizontal momentumn equations omit the gravitational acceleration and, therefore, their reliability region is similar to D(L®,q,)- Following Atkinson (9), table I yields the magnitude of the terms in the u-equation, where the term ga?xr~* was added, for a flow with horizontal length scale L (m), U=10 ms-*, H=10 m, g=10 ms“?, a = 6378 km, @ = 45° and « = L/2, y =z =0. For flows with L from 10° to 10° m the term ga®zr? is dominant while the dissipative terms are very small, so that the latter will be ignored in the next sections.4 M.A. NUSEZ Fig. 1, ~ Reference systems XYZ, ry2, spherical coordinates Agrand position vectors R, r of a parcel. Governing equations for dry and inviscid air Consider a spherical earth with uniform mass. The primary Cartesian coordinate system XYZ is defined with its origin at the earth's center, is fixed to the earth and the Z-axis coincides with the earth’s rotation axis, as shown in fig. 1. If X, ¥,2 are unitary vectors on the positive X,Y, Z axes and R=XX +Y¥ + 22 is the position vector of an air parcel with mass m, the gravitational force on m is =oM 92a -cum® 7 ey fe where r is the magnitude of R, M and a are the mass and radius of the earth and @ is the gravitational constant. Let V =dR/d¢ and consider that the flow is inviscid, then the momentum equation of parcel in the XYZ system is SF 4 atx v4 Ax(@ xR) =—LyP—9 SR, where p and P are the density and pressure and & = 9% is the earth angular velocity [1]. If we set V=UX+VY+W2 and neglect the term (Gx R) the governing equations are au (22a) qv av qt aw #DOMAIN OF VALIDITY OF SOME ATMOSPHERIC MESOSCALE MODELS. 5 and P=RTp, dloge , aU, OV, OW ar _aP a” Ox oeae a ate (2.28) ov} oz where Tis the temperature, R is the gas constant and d/dt = a/at + U(2/aX) + V(a/aY) + W(a/2zZ). ‘To define the system zy on a plane tangent to the earth, we consider that the location of a point on the terrestrial sphere is given by the latitude and longitude A, as fig. 1 shows, where ¢ is positive on the north hemisphere, the reference meridian is on the (@,2)-plane and ) is positive eastward. The coordinate system zy has its origin at a point (Ac,dc), the « (y) axis is tangent to the parallel circle (meridian) at (Ae,z); is positive eastward (northward), and the z-axis is taken out of the earth. If &,,2 are the unit vectors on the positive 10? kam The error of f° and f! can be shown with the graph of their height with respect to the terrestrial sphere. According to fig. 4 the height of a point (€, f°(€)) on the isobar £° passing through (€ = 0, 0 = 0) is (3.10) ne) = (3.11) WO) = a+ JF +lat FOP. Figure 5 shows the graphs of € vs. h®, h!, We observe that if the pressure on the earth surface is pp = 1013 mb, the zeroth-order equations yield the same pressure value at the point (€ = 940, f9(€)) whose height on the earth surface is h(é) ~ 600 km, a wrong result and worse results are obtained as & tends to Emax = 2355 km. ‘The functions A, hé defined by the isobars with py = 1013 mb can be used to estimate upper bounds L2q, and 14,q, for the validity domains of the approximate momentum equations. For instance, if we consider that fina is the maximum height at which theDOMAIN OF VALIDITY OF SOME ATMOSPHERIC MESOSCALE MODELS a we 7 h (km) of (ken) 5.~Graph of & ws. the height A, h of the isobars f°, /? of fig. 3 pressure p°(,2 = f°(é)) is 1013 mb, then eq. (3.10) yields the corresponding Ea. coordinate, Vmax + a? = 0, (3.12a) Snax which provides the bound (3.12) Linax = Snax! V2 for the reliability domain D(L®,,,,) of the zeroth-order equations. It is clear that for any point (é,29) with € < aq the error of numerical results from zeroth-order equations is lower than the error at (Eqq, %a)- Let us consider Fagan ~ 2 Ke, then aq ~ 160 kn and Ia, ~ 113 km, a result consistent with the small separation between f and f° in fig. 3 for € € [0, 100 kin] This yields the domain D(113 km) which is small with respect to the domain D,(665 km) used in [17] where momentum equations of zero-order type in coordinates rye, were employed [15,17] Let us consider the reliability domain for first-order equations. Instead of computing Ehqx from eq. (3.11), it ean be estimated from fig. 5 for a given Fax: If Pingx ~ 2 km12 1M. A. NUNEZ 0 oe ra (km) Fig. 6. ~ Graph of € vs. the relative error Ap°, Ap* (3.16) of the pressure fields p° and p on ‘the terrestrial sphere (zo = 0) and the sphere with radius r = 10 kim ta, a = 6378 kam, wwe have Gy, ~ 1000 km and Dhan ~ 700 km. This result is consistent with the small separation between f and f" in fig. 5 for € € [0,1000 km]. The domain D(700) is similar to that D, used in [17] and may be large enough for some applications of computational mesoscale models. This suggests the use of first-order momentum equations, which require a minimum modification of the zeroth-order equations used by some mesoscale models [14,15]. ‘The above results are independent of the explicit, expression of p®, p!, p in terms of z,y,2 but if such expressions are known, we ean compute the relative error of p?, pl to estimate the reliability domain of the approximate momentum equations. Consider an isothermic and hydrostatic atmosphere with temperature Tp and pressure pp on the terrestrial sphere. To compute p and 9, it is easier to solve the equations in spherical coordinates (2.6), namely, Op./r = —p,ga?/r? and p, = RTops with p,(r = a) = po. ‘The solution Pelt) = poet), where r= [2? + y? + (2+ 4)?J/? and b = g/RTo, yields y(t, 1,2) solution of the exact momentum equations with the boundary condition p terrestrial sphere. In fact, the solution of eqs. (2.4a), (2.4b), or, equivalently, 1(r) which is the con the —ba®yr8, 8, np = —ba*(z +a)r-8,DOMAIN OF VALIDITY OF SOME ATMOSPHERIC MESOSCALE MODELS 13 is inp = ba?/r-+eand using p = mo we get p = pye™§0~2/") which is the pressure field on the whole terrestrial sphere. This confirms that the governing equations (24a), (2b) in the xyz system are equivalent, to the equations in spherical coordinates (2.6) and, therefore, are valid on any domain D(L) indeed. Hence we get the pressure value on the isobar f that passes through the 2-axis point (€ = 0,2 = =p), namely, (3.13) P(z = y = 0,20) = po exp[—bz0/(1 + z0/a)]. The solution of zeroth-order equations (3.1) with p®(r 0) =mis (3.14) P=) = Poe and for the first-order equations we have 1 Vin (8.5) HG2)=men[-2 (Je -2*+02)| Consider the relative error of p®, p* on a sphere with radius r = zo +a and center at the origin of the XYZ system, that is (316) Ap'() = (P'/p-1)100— with z= at Varn —F and p is given by (3.13). The values Ty = 300K, R= 287 J/kgK, po = 1013 mb, 9 =9.8 ms® and a = 6378 km yield 6 = 0.11382 km~!. Figure 6 shows the graphs of € vs. Ap®, Ap! on the earth surface (29 = 0) and the sphere with radius r = 2 +a and = 10 km. We observe that Ap? is less than 20% for € < {ay ~ 160 km and increases rapidly from 20 to 300% as € goes from £2... to 400 km. In contrast, the error ‘Ap? is smaller than 20% for € < Ea, ~ 1000 km. ‘This confirms that £2. ~ 160 km, Ehae ~ 1000 km provide upper bounds 2, ~ 113 km, Li... ~ 700 km for the reliability domains D(L2,..) ; P(Dhax) of the approximate equations (3.1) and (3.2) 3°2. Bidimensional steady motion. ~ Consider the flow on Ps obtained from the flow around a circular cylinder, VG) =U GDEHWE with (3.7) U=Wo(1+R-2R"), w= -208(1+2)FR Using @ = ¥? + 9? and & = cosd& + sin OF we get the velocity field v = ut + vf + wf, (3:18) u=U(G2)cs8 v=U(Gz)sin0 w=WE, Which satisfies the continuity equation V - v = 0 and the correct boundary condition Von |:an,(2,)= 0 where m is normal to the terrestrial sphere which has the equation (ty) = -a t+ Vo? =4 M.A. NUREZ. By replacing (3.18) in eqs. (3.4) and (3.6) we get the isobar equations (15) af (Q) ____ a MIT + 20 cose cos 8 + S/ RE dé ~~ a MW —20U cost cos. +9 (+2) | RS’ af2(@) ___a™MU + 20W cos. cosé de ‘a IMW — 2NU cos0cosd. +9" af) ____ a“! MU + 20 cos 0088 + &; de ~~ aM — 200 cosBeos de + 9 (1-23) where M = U;-+W@, and whose solution with the boundary condition (8.5) yields the isobars that pass through (€ = 0, 0). The graph of & vs. f°, f, f for € € (0, 1000 km] and Up = 10 ms~ has no appreciable difference with fig. 3. Thus, if we use the isobar heights A? and h to estimate the validity region of the approximate momentum equations, such regions are equal to those estimated for the hydrostatic case. In particular, if max ~ 2km is the largest height of the isobars f°, f* corresponding to the earth surface pressure po, then D(L2,.,) $200 x 200 km? and D(D4,,,) $ 1400 x 1400 km?, The similarity between the isobars f, {®, f¥ from eqs. (3.19) and those for the hydro- static case is expected because the factors a~* and € reduce significantly the contribution ‘of the velocity components with respect to g. This argument can be extrapolated to any large-scale velocity field v with u, v ~ 10 ms“ and w~ 10~? m s~?, so that in general wwe can expect that the differences between f, f°, f1 will be similar to those observed in fig. 3 and, therefore, D(L2,,,) and D(Eka,) Will be as above. 4, — Equations from map projections ‘To analyze the role of map projections we begin with a formal definition of tpl which will be called projection coordinates. Let py» be a Cartesian coordinate system on 1 projection plane P which is normal to the H,-axis. ‘The projection of a point (A, @) on the terrestrial sphere is the point (rp,¥p) given by a pair of projections equations (41a) (0.8), Up = Ups). Usually, the center (Ae,¢2) of the horizontal domain D on the tangent plane ry is pro- jected on the origin of the pup system, (4:1) Ep(Aes Ge) = voles be) = Op and the eastward parallel circle and the northward meridian on (Az, .) ate projected on the positive 2, and yp axes, respectively. If a point in physical space has spherical coordinates (2, ,7), its coordinates zp, yp are given by (dla) and H is defined by (4:1e) H, ‘Thus we have four equivalent sets of coordinates to define the position of a parcel, namely, (2,u,2), (X,¥,Z) and (A,,r) which have a simple geometrical interpretation in physi- cal space while (2p, yp, Hl,) are coordinates in an abstract space. If we assume that theDOMAIN OF VALIDITY OF SOME ATMOSPHERIC MESOSCALE MODELS 15 projection is conformal, tplZ, are orthogonal curvilinear coordinates and the govern- ing equations in such coordinates are obtained from the equations in spherical coordi- nates (18). Ifp,Pp, Tp are the density, pressure and temperature in projection coordinates ‘and upvptv, are the corresponding velocity components, the governing equations are (42) $(%)+ (r ‘uptand+ 1) ( Wee we (We) + 40 [i tup (OT*) +54» (087)] ( o ) + Ww, cos \ _ _ a (Hz! DegDy aay )= —at (ae ). tp B48 senses py, 1 at * hh, and py = RT ppp, where f =200sind, the matrix T and the metric factors, hy depend on the projection in question (see appendix) and [ee Gam + hand + 3 (rata CE ea Ce dt Ot hz On, hy Oyy |? OHy ‘The solution of these equations with the pertinent boundary and initial conditions gen- ‘erates the meteorological fields in the x»ypHp space but in order to analyze such fields in physical space we have to apply the following coordinate transformations to obtain the fields in Cartesian 2, y,z or spherical A,,r coordinates. {From (4.1a)-(4.1e) we get Asdur in terms Of ap, Ups Hs (4.3) A=NACpidp) 9 = Op. Yp) r=Hy+a. {From (2.3) and (2.5) we obtain zy, in terms of A, 4,7 and combining this result with (4.3) the relation betwoen 2,y,2 and 2», yp, Hy follows z (Hp + a) 608 (2p, Yp) 608 A(xp,¥p) (44) y = Be (Hp +a)cosd(zp,yp)sin A(xp, 4p) } - (Hp + a) sin d(x», yp) This shows that xyz and zpypHp are different coordinate systems. However, the refer- ‘ences [6,18-21] that solve map-projection equations like (4.2) do not report or suggest the use of the coordinate transformations (4.3) or (4.4) to recover the meteorological fields from (4.2) in ayz or Mgr coordinates. Instead, the approximation (43) pre upny Hyws16 M.A. NUNEZ, : P= (5h 47h) 1P=(xy2)=(A$ rohgta) Fig. 7. ~ Sketch of a point P on the geoid and their coordinates 2yz, \,d\r = hy +a, and pr tps Hy is used to work on the Cartesian coordinate system cy with the expectation that: the map projection considers the spherical shape of the earth [6]. In fact, the usual horizon- tal coordinate system in mesoscale modeling is a Cartesian system xy [2-13] but. some models attempt to consider the earth sphericity using map projections to define the to- ography [14,15] and other models define both topography and governing equations like (4.2) with map projections [18-21]. Let us see more carefully this approach. Although the standard terrain elevation data are referred to an ellipsoid we can con- sider that the data are known with respect to a spherical earth model defined prop- erly from the ellipsoidal model [24]. Let he(A,@) denote the terrain elevation on the point (A, ) of the terrestrial sphere, then the set of points with spherical coordinates (dsr = hg +a) define the true earth surface (which is called geoid) as fig. 7 shows. In practice the geoid is known only on a discrete set of points (Ax, Gx.rk = Max +), bea. It is a common practice in mesoscale modeling, to define the topography from a data set {Ay, de, Ase}, Computing a point (1px, Ypx) with a map projection (4.1a) and consider ‘that the terrain elevation on (¢yi,Ypa) iS hy(\s,x) since “map projections generate a minimum distortion of the earth surface”. Of course, (pt, pe) is on the projection plane P in an abstract space and 7; are the covariant, vectors from the #'s. Hence, the contravariant form of the ‘momentum equation (1.4) is au! oF ‘where frictional forces are neglected, instead of the contravariant form the zeroth-order equation (1.3), (6) 19h gE tna COT +o Fag 7 2st, aig Om. _ O38 ai 6% ro 5 O05 Bes (56) = 9 ~ 224105 (6, p. 110]. The practical limitations discussed above impose the use of a domain D(L) with L < 500 km which is smaller than the bound L},,. < 700 km of the reliability domain of the first-order equations (3.2). Thus, we can use the linear approximation 67) gir -gea, > -au/a 9° g(t ~2¢/a)20 M.A. NUNEZ. in eq. (6.5). If L = 500 kan we have |2|max = 39.3 kin and hence [2z/a| < 0.01 so that the term 22/a can be neglected. It has been pointed out that the variations of g due to height. above the ground of location on the earth surface should be considered (see, ¢.9. [5, p.16], [1, p. 225]). The reliability of the first-order equations (3.2) shows that the horizontal variation of g is more important than the vertical one in @. In fact, if we use g ~—ga*(2-+a)~*2 in ~Vp = pg the pressure field p ~ po exp|~baz /(z +a) p? (8.14) while the approximation g ~—g(z%-+y9+a2) /a yields p ~ poexp|~2(5€2-+a2)] which is basically p* (3.15). ‘The horizontal momentum equations reported in some references (see, ¢.9., [17, eqs. (3,4)), [26)) have terms with g but it does not come from the use of the cor reet gravity acceleration g (1.2). For instance, from the zeroth-order equation (5.6), ‘(=~ 2c)/(s— 2c), the hydrostatic relation and the chain rule Pielke (5, eq. (6-56)] obtains ee os ae tO Ge he he, where the terms with g!, g? or their linear approximation (5.7) are absent. ‘The use of projection coordinates zrpypHf, in numerical modeling is correct when the initial and boundary conditions are obtained from real data in coordinates xry2 or or via the inverse of the transformation equations (4.3), (4.4), but if apypHfp are taken as approximations of zyz, as occurs with the definition of topography [24], the resulting momentum equations are basically zeroth-order momentum equations and hence their range of validity is very small. A similar problem may occur with the use of the curvilinear coordinates (ode, (A= Ac)acos be, Us Let L,D be the horizontal and vertical scales of a flow on the terrestrial sphere. Some references [7,27-29] use the coordinates :rsys%. to rewrite the governing equations in spherical coordinates in the expectation that for small L/a and D/a they will be the Cartesian coordinates of the #-plane approximation [27]. If eyeze are replaced by yz the resulting equations are approximations of the exact ones in zyz-coordinates, as occurs with eqs. (4.8). OF course, the equations in coordinates z.y.2. allow the study of ‘dynamical effects from the latitudinal variation of the Coriolis force, for example, but ‘one should be careful in consider such coordinates as ry2.DOMAIN OF VALIDITY OF SOME ATMOSPHERIC MESOSCALE MODELS a ‘The author wish to thanks to the referee by his comments, R. MARIA VELAsco by the revision of the manuscript and Ma. TRINIDAD N. by her invaluable support. APPENDIX Let R= XX+¥¥+ ZZ be the position vector of an air parcel where X,Y, Z are functions of 2», 4p, Hp. Hence we get the vectors X)=9,R, ¥p=0,,R, Hy =dy,R with magnitudes he = |[xpl|, hy Iyoll, |]Hpl| = 1 and Rp =Xpfhe, — Fp=Vo/hy, By = For R= XX+Y¥ + 22 in spherical coordinates we have A=AR @= OR, r=0,R with hy = [|Al] = + ie = [el] = 1 and £08 4 hg = [6 Mhy b= d/h Considering that the projection (4.1) is conformal and 9 = fly we find the relation (5)-9(8). where 7 ae 1 (gyp)hahzt — — (Oxyp) hohg* rao (3 Baa ( pik: apna) hy = A*/[(@ pup) hal? + [Oattp) hl» fy = AV [(Ogp) bal? + [Orep) hol? and A = A,2p0yp — DayyOyry > 0. Hence the velocity vector dR } av+axr can be written as dR/dt = upp + Upp + wpHy + Or cos d (Trp — Ta¥p) where a = hy te slg) ae dy tebe ae ‘The map-projection equations reported in [18,19] are obtained from eqs. (4.2), the formulas given in this appendix and the approximation r = zp +a~ a,2 M.A. NUSEZ REFERENCES: [1] Durrox J. A., The Geaseless Wind: An Introduction to the Theory of Atmospherie Motion (McGraw-Hill, New York) 1976, p. 176, 225. 2] Gummax L. 'N., Introduction to the Nonlinear Theory of Mesoscale Meteorological Processes (Jerusalem, Israel Program) 1972, p. 3. {3] Yin C-S,, Stratified Plows (Academic Press, New York) 1980, p. 1 [i] ATKINSON B. W., Meso-seale Atmospheric Circulations (Academic, London) 1981, p. 13. [5] Prouxe R. A., Mesoscale Meteorological Modeling (Academic Press, New York) 1984, pp. 17-21; 2nd edition (2002). (6] Pankey D. J., Formulation of Mesoscale Numerical Models, in Mesoscale Meteorology and Forecasting, edited by P. S. Ray (American Meteorological Society, Boston) 1986, pp. 575-579. [f]_ Zevrounian R., Asymptotic Modeling of Atmospheric Flows (Springer, Berlin) 1990, p. 10, gs. (231). [S| Brown R. A., Pluid Mechanics of the Atmosphere (Academic Press, San Diego) 1991, p. 250, 254, eqs. (6.46), (6.57). [9] ATKINSON W. B., Introduction to the fluid mechanics of meso-scale flow fields, in Diffusion ‘and Transport of Pollutants in Atmospheric Mesoscale Flow Fields, edited by A. GR and F.-S. Rvs (Kluwer, Netherlands) 1995, pp. 6,7, eqs. (I.1-2), and fig. 9. [10] Bppex D. P. and Cavtiss U., Boundary conditions and treatment of topography in limited- area models, in Diffusion and Transport of Pollutants in Atmospheric Mesoscale Flow Fields, edited by A. Gyr and F.-8. Rvs (Kluwer, Netherlands) 1995, p. 24, eqs. (21.1). [11] Bawes P. G., Topographic Bffects in Stratified Flows (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge) 1995, p. 3. [12] Durraw D. R., Numerical Methods for Wave Bquations in Geophysical Fluid Dynomice (Springer, New York) 1998, p. 16 [15] Prouke R. A., The status of mesoscale meteorological models, in Planning ond Managing Regional Air Quality, edited by P. A. SoLoMON and TT. A. SitveR (Pacific Gas & Electric Co, and Lewis Publishers, San Ramon, CA) 1994, pp. 485-463 [04] Xue M,, Drozammeer K. K., Woe V., SHarmo A. and Brewster K., Advanced Regional Prediction System (ARPS) Version 4.0 User's Guide (1995), pp. 119120. http:// swweaps.ou.edu/ ARPS/, [15] YaMAba 'T., J. Meteorol. Soe. Jpn., 89 (1981) 108; YAMADA TT. and BuNKER S., J. Appl Meteorol, 27 (1988) 562. [16] MoVirnie G. C., Quat. J. Mech. Appl. Math, 1 (1948) 174; J. Meteorol., 8 (1951) 161, {7} Yamapa T., Kao J. C.-Y. and Bunker S., Atmos. Bnviron., 28 (1980) 539. {18} Hatrwver G. J., Numerical Weather Prediction (Wiley and Sons, New York) 1971, pp. 13- 18. {19] Hautwer G. J. and Wnutiaus R. T., Numerical Weather Prediction and Dynamic ‘Meteorology (Wiley and Sons, New York) 1980, 2nd ed, pp. 6-14 20] Prenxe R.A. et al, Meteorol. Atmos. Phys, 49 (1992) 69 RAMS The Regional Atmospheric Modeling System Technical Description DRAFT, hitp:// ‘www-.atmet.com/html/ does/ rams,techman.pdf, section 2.2. [21] Dupita J., GuLt D., Guo ¥.-R., HANSEN D., MANNING K. and WANG W.. PSU/NCAR Mesoscale ‘Modeling System ‘Tutorial Class Notes and Users’ Guide (MMB Modeling System Version 2 with an introduction to version 3) (1999), chapter 9, eqs. (1-4) and . 9-5. http:// wwwammm.uear.edu/ mam5/ mm5-home. htm. [22] Fast J. D. and ZHONG S., J. Geophys. Res., 108 (1998) 18927. [23] Prondstico Numerico Regional (Modelo MMS), Servicio Meteorolégico Nacional, http:// sman.ena.gob.mx/ productos/mms/ htm/pag7773.htm [24] Nuse2 M. A., Nuovo Cimento C, 28 (2002) 18.DOMAIN OF VALIDITY OF SOME ATMOSPHERIC MESOSCALE MODELS 23. [25] GTOPO3O documentation, section 7, U. S. Geological Survey (1997). http:// vwww.sed.near.edu/ dss/datasests/ds758.0hratl [26] Ssiaxun C., Cumin L. R., Moneis B. R. and Kessuisn ©. R., Conceptual plan for air ‘quality and meteorological modelling sn the San Joaquin Valley, in Planning and Managing Regional Air Quality, edited by P. A. SOLONON and T. A. Sitven (Pacific Gas & Electric Go. and Lewis Publishers, San Ramon, CA) 1994, pp. 46-47 [21] PepLosky J., Geophysical Fluid Dynamics, 2nd ed. (Springer, New York) 1987, p. 340. [28] Houow J. R., An Introduction to Dynomie Meteorology 3rd ed. (Academic Press, San Diego) 1992, pp. 33-38, [20] Cusmuax-Rosne B., Introduction to Geophysical Fluid Dynamics (Prentice Hall, New Jersey) 1994, p. 34