4.6 Article

COSMO-CLM (CCLM) climate simulations over CORDEX-Africa domain: analysis of the ERA-Interim driven simulations at 0.44A° and 0.22A° resolution

期刊

CLIMATE DYNAMICS
卷 42, 期 11-12, 页码 3015-3038

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00382-013-1834-5

关键词

COSMO-CLM Regional Climate Model; CORDEX-Africa; High resolution simulation; ERA-Interim driven evaluation run

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present the results of the application of the COSMO-CLM Regional Climate Model (CCLM) over the CORDEX-Africa domain. Two simulations were performed driven by the ERA-Interim reanalysis (1989-2008): the first one with the standard CORDEX spatial resolution (0.44A degrees), and the second one with an unprecedented high resolution (0.22A degrees). Low-level circulation and its vertical structure, the geographical and temporal evolution of temperature and precipitation are critically evaluated, together with the radiation budget and surface energy fluxes. CCLM is generally able to reproduce the overall features of the African climate, although some deficiencies are evident. Flow circulation is generally well simulated, but an excessive pressure gradient is present between the Gulf of Guinea and the Sahara, related to a marked warm bias over the Sahara and a cold bias over southern Sahel. CCLM underestimates the rainfall peak in the regions affected by the passage of the monsoon. This dry bias may be a consequence of two factors, the misplacement of the monsoon centre and the underestimation of its intensity. The former is related to the northern shift of the West African Heat Low. On the other hand, the underestimation of precipitation intensity may be related to the underestimation of the surface short-wave radiation and latent heat flux. The increase of the model resolution does not bring evident improvements to the results for monthly means statistics. As a result, it appears that 0.44A degrees is a suitable compromise between model performances and computational constrains.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据