Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Impact of consistent boundary layer mixing approaches between NAM and CMAQ

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Environmental Fluid Mechanics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Discrepancies in grid structure, dynamics and physics packages in the offline coupled NWS/NCEP NAM meteorological model with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model can give rise to inconsistencies. This study investigates the use of three vertical mixing schemes to drive chemistry tracers in the National Air Quality Forecast Capability (NAQFC). The three schemes evaluated in this study represent various degrees of coupling to improve the commonality in turbulence parameterization between the meteorological and chemistry models. The methods tested include: (1) using NAM predicted TKE-based planetary boundary height, h, as the prime parameter to derive CMAQ vertical diffusivity; (2) using the NAM mixed layer depth to determine h and then proceeding as in (1); and (3) using NAM predicted vertical diffusivity directly to parameterize turbulence mixing within CMAQ. A two week period with elevated surface O3 concentrations during the summer 2006 has been selected to test these schemes in a sensitivity study. The study results are verified and evaluated using the EPA AIRNow monitoring network and other ozonesonde data. The third method is preferred a priori as it represents the tightest coupling option studied in this work for turbulent mixing processes between the meteorological and air quality models. It was found to accurately reproduce the upper bounds of turbulent mixing and provide the best agreement between predicted h and ozonesonde observed relative humidity profile inferred h for sites investigated in this study. However, this did not translate into the best agreement in surface O3 concentrations. Overall verification results during the test period of two weeks in August 2006, did not show superiority of this method over the other 2 methods in all regions of the continental U.S. Further efforts in model improvement for the parameterizations of turbulent mixing and other surface O3 forecast related processes are warranted.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Byun DW (1999a) Dynamically consistent formulations in meteorological and air quality models for multi-scale atmospheric studies. Part I: Governing equations in a generalized coordinate system. J Atmos Sci 56:3789–3807. doi:10.1175/1520-0469(1999)056<3789:DCFIMA>2.0.CO;2

    Google Scholar 

  2. Byun DW (1999b) Dynamically consistent formulations in meteorological and air quality models for multi-scale atmospheric studies. Part II: Mass conservation issues. J Atmos Sci 56:3808–3820. doi:10.1175/1520-0469(1999)056<3808:DCFIMA>2.0.CO;2

    Google Scholar 

  3. Byun DW, Dennis RL (1995) Design artifacts in Eulerian air quality models: evaluation of the effects of layer thickness and vertical profile correction on surface ozone concentrations. Atmos Environ 29: 105–126. doi:10.1016/1352-2310(94)00225-A

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Byun DW, Schere KL (2007) Review of the governing equations, computational algorithms, and other components of the Models-3 Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system overview. Appl Mech Rev 59: 51–77. doi:10.1115/1.2128636

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Davidson PM, Seaman N, Schere K, Wayland RA, Hayes JL, Carey KF (2004) National Air Quality Forecasting Capability: first steps toward implementation. Preprints, 6th conference on atmospheric chemistry: air quality in megacities. American Meteorological Society, Seattle, WA, 11–15 January 2004. J2.10

  6. EPA, cited (2006) 2006 Summer ozone season—archive. Available online at http://www.airnow.gov

  7. Hanna S, Hendrick E, Santos L, Reen B, Stauffer D, Deng AJ, McQueen J, Tsidulko M, Janjic Z, Sykes I (2008) Comparison of observed, MM5 and WRF-NMM model-simulated and HPAC-assumed boundary layer meteorological variables for three days during the IHOP experiment. Preprints, 15th conference on applications of air pollution meteorology. American Meteorological Society, New Orleans, LA, 20–24 January 2008. J1.2

  8. Holtslag AAM, Boville BA (1993) Local versus nonlocal boundary layer diffusion in a global climate model. J Clim 6:1825–1842. doi:10.1175/1520-0442(1993)006<1825:LVNBLD>2.0.CO;2

    Google Scholar 

  9. Janjic ZI (1996) The Mellor–Yamada level 2.5 scheme in the NCEP Eta model. Preprints, 11th conference on numerical weather prediction. Norfolk, VA, American Meteorological Society, pp 333–334

  10. Janjic ZI (2001) Nonsingular implementation of the Mellor–Yamada level 2.5 scheme in the NCEP meso-model, NCEP Office Note 437. Available at http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/officenotes/FullTOC.html

  11. Janjic ZI (2003) A nonhydrostatic model based on a new approach. Meteorol Atmos Phys 82: 271–285. doi:10.1007/s00703-001-0587-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lawrence MG, von Kuhlmann R, Salzmann M, Rasch PJ (2003) The balance of effects of deep convective mixing on troposheric ozone. Geophys Res Lett 30: 1940. doi:10.1029/2003GL017644

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Lee SM, Yoon S-C, Byun DW (2004) The effect of mass inconsistency of meteorological field generated by a meteorological model on air quality modeling. Atmos Environ 38: 2917–2926. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2004.02.008

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Lin HM, Mathur R, Otte TL, Lee P, Pleim JE (2006) On the development of a vertical direct linkage between the WRF-NMM and CMAQ models. Preprint, 9th conference on atmospheric chemistry. American Meteorological Society, San Antonio, 13–18 January, J3.4

  15. Mahrt L (1981) Modelling the depth of stable boundary layer. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 21: 3–19. doi:10.1007/BF00119363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. McQueen J, Lee P, Tsidulko M, Tang Y, Huang H, Lu S, Mathur R, Kang D, Lin H, Yu S, DiMego G, Davidson P (2007) An overview of the NAM-WRF CMAQ Air Quality Forecasting System run operationally during the Summer 2007. Preprint, 6th annual CMAS conference, US EPA, Chapel Hill, NC, 1–3 October, pp 6.2. Available online at http://www.cmascenter.org/conference/2007/abstracts/

  17. Mellor GL, Yamada T (1982) Development of a turbulence closure model for geophysical fluid problems. Rev Geophys Space Phys 20: 851–871. doi:10.1029/RG020i004p00851

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. National Research Council (1991) Rethinking the ozone problem in urban and regional air pollution. National Academy Press, Washington, DC

  19. NCEP, National Centers for Environmental Prediction (2006) Near-surface forecast verification statistics for operational NCEP models: statistics by region and Quantitative Precipitation Forecast scores: Available at http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/research/nearsfc/ and http://wwwt.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/ylin/pcpverif/scores/2006/200608/

  20. Otte TL, Pouliot G, Pleim JE, Young JO, Schere KL, Wong DC, Lee PC, Tsidulko M, McQueen JT, Davidson P, Mathur R, Chuang HY, DiMego G, Seaman N (2005) Linking the Eta Model with the Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system to build a national air quality forecasting system. Weather Forecast 20: 367–384. doi:10.1175/WAF855.1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Pleim JE (2007) A combined local and non-local closure model for the atmospheric boundary layer. PBL model for meteorological and air quality modeling. Part 1: Model description and testing. J Appl Meteorol Climatol 46: 1383–1395. doi:10.1175/JAM2539.1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Pleim JE, Chang J (1992) A non-local closure model for vertical mixing in the convective boundary layer. Atmos Environ 26A: 965–981

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Ryan WF, Piety CA, Luebehusen ED (2000) Air quality forecasts in the Mid-Atlantic region: current practice and benchmark skill. Weather Forecast 15:46–60. doi:10.1175/1520-0434(2000)015<0046:AQFITM>2.0.CO;2

    Google Scholar 

  24. Thompson A, Witte J (2006) INTEX ozonesonde network study August/September 2006. Available online at http://croc.gsfc.nasa.gov/intexb/SONDES/ions06_augsept.html

  25. Thompson AM, Yorks JE, Miller SK, Witte JC, Dougherty KM, Morris GA, Baumgardner D, Ladino L, Rappenglueck B (2008) Tropospheric ozone sources and wave activity over Mexico City and Houston during MILAGRO/Intercontinental Transport Experiment (INTEX-B) Ozonesonde Network Study, 2006 (IONS-06). Atmos Chem Phys Discuss 8: 5979–6007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Timin B, Wesson K, Dolwick P, Possiel N, Phillips S (2007) An exploration of model concentration differences between CMAQ and CAMx. Preprints, 6th annual CMAS conference, US EPA, Chapel Hill, NC, 1–3 October 2007, pp 8.9. Available online at http://www.cmascenter.org/conference/2007/agenda.cfm

  27. Tost H, Jöckel P, Kerkweg A, Sander R, Lelieveld J (2006) Technical note: a new comprehensive SCAVenging submodel for global atmospheric chemistry modeling. Atmos Chem Phys 6: 565–574

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Vogelelezang DHP, Holtslag AAM (1996) Evaluation and model impacts of alternative boundary-layer height formulations. Boundary-Layer Meteorol 81: 245–269. doi:10.1007/BF02430331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Wyngaard JC (1973) On surface layer turbulence. Workshop on micrometeorology. Haugen DA (ed) American Meteorological Society, pp 101–149

  30. Yamartino RJ, Scire JS, Carmichael GR, Chang YS (1992) The CALGRID mesoscale photochemical grid model. Part I: Model formulation. Atmos Environ 26A: 1493–1512

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Yuan H, Anderson C, Schultz P, Jankov I, McGinley J (2007) Precipitation forecasts using the WRF-ARW and WRF-NMM models during the HMT-west 2006 and 2007 winter experiments. Preprint, 4th annual WRF user workshop, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, June 2007. Available online at http://www.mmm.ucar.edu/wrf/users/worshops/WS2007/abstracts

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Science Applications International Corporation, Beltsville, MD, USA

    Pius Lee, Youhua Tang, Marina Tsidulko, Ho-Chun Huang, Sarah Lu & Mary Hart

  2. Science and Technology Corporation, Hampton, VA, USA

    Daiwen Kang, Hsin-Mu Lin & Shaocai Yu

  3. National Centers for Environmental Prediction, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Camp Springs, MD, USA

    Jeff McQueen & Geoff DiMego

  4. Noblis, Inc., Falls Church, VA, USA

    Ivanka Stajner

  5. Office of Science and Technology, National Weather Service, Silver Spring, MD, USA

    Paula Davidson

  6. NCEP/EMC, W/NP22 Room 207, 5200 Auth Road, Camp Springs, MD, 20746-4304, USA

    Pius Lee

Authors
  1. Pius Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Youhua Tang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daiwen Kang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jeff McQueen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Marina Tsidulko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ho-Chun Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Sarah Lu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Mary Hart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Hsin-Mu Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Shaocai Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Geoff DiMego
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Ivanka Stajner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Paula Davidson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pius Lee.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lee, P., Tang, Y., Kang, D. et al. Impact of consistent boundary layer mixing approaches between NAM and CMAQ. Environ Fluid Mech 9, 23–42 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10652-008-9089-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10652-008-9089-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation