Search NASA⌕ Search

NASA NTRS · 20150022137

Using CYGNSS to Study MJO Convection

Abstract

No abstract available

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Lang, Timothy J., Mecikalski, John, Li, Xuanli, Chronis, Themis, Castillo, Tyler, Hoover, Kacie, Brewer, Alan, Churnside, Jim, McCarty, Brandi. 2015-10-21. Using CYGNSS to Study MJO Convection. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20150022137

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related reports

Evaluation of 10‐m Wind Speed From ISD Meteorological Stations and the MERRA‐2 Reanalysis: Impacts on Dust Emission in the Arabian Peninsula

Mineral dust is one of the most important aerosols when studying the radiative balance and climate of the planet. There are different dust emission schemes utilized by the atmospheric modeling communities, many of which disagree on basic output quantities such as mass of dust emitted and distribution of mass among size bins. In this work, we examined mineral dust emission from a leading model scheme, the Goddard Chemistry Aerosol Radiation and Transport (GOCART), as utilized in the Modern-Era Retrospective analysis for Research and Applications, Version 2 (MERRA-2) Reanalysis and compared it to dust emissions calculated using wind measurements from ground based weather stations located in the Arabian Peninsula that are included in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) integrated surface database (ISD). An intercomparison of 10-m wind speed is shown for the Arabian Peninsula region, differences of the observed and modeled wind field are quantified, and impacts of differences on dust emissions are calculated. This analysis shows 10-m winds in the ISD were generally lower than MERRA-2 winds, which propagated to dust emissions errors. Our estimate of one of the most significant mass impacts in dust emission is 0.178 Tg/year/grid box with a percent change of over 200% to the recalculated dust emissions from MERRA-2. These differences in wind speed propagated to a difference in dust mass emitted by the use of a static source function which aids in scaling the mass emitted by the availability of dust in each grid. Additionally, the magnitude of these differences varies seasonally.

winds↗

Simulations of Dynamics and Transport during the September 2002 Antarctic Major Warming

A mechanistic model simulation initialized on 14 September 2002, forced by 100-hPa geopotential heights from Met Office analyses, reproduced the dynamical features of the 2002 Antarctic major warming. The vortex split on approx.25 September; recovery after the warming, westward and equatorward tilting vortices, and strong baroclinic zones in temperature associated with a dipole pattern of upward and downward vertical velocities were all captured in the simulation. Model results and analyses show a pattern of strong upward wave propagation throughout the warming, with zonal wind deceleration throughout the stratosphere at high latitudes before the vortex split, continuing in the middle and upper stratosphere and spreading to lower latitudes after the split. Three-dimensional Eliassen-Palm fluxes show the largest upward and poleward wave propagation in the 0(deg)-90(deg)E sector prior to the vortex split (coincident with the location of strongest cyclogenesis at the model's lower boundary), with an additional region of strong upward propagation developing near 180(deg)-270(deg)E. These characteristics are similar to those of Arctic wave-2 major warmings, except that during this warming, the vortex did not split below approx.600 K. The effects of poleward transport and mixing dominate modeled trace gas evolution through most of the mid- to high-latitude stratosphere, with a core region in the lower-stratospheric vortex where enhanced descent dominates and the vortex remains isolated. Strongly tilted vortices led to low-latitude air overlying vortex air, resulting in highly unusual trace gas profiles. Simulations driven with several meteorological datasets reproduced the major warming, but in others, stronger latitudinal gradients at high latitudes at the model boundary resulted in simulations without a complete vortex split in the midstratosphere. Numerous tests indicate very high sensitivity to the boundary fields, especially the wave-2 amplitude. Major warmings occurred for initial fields with stronger winds and larger vortices, but not smaller vortices, consistent with the initiation of wind-deceleration by upward-propagating waves near the poleward edge of the region where wave 2 can propagate above the jet core. Thus, given the observed 100-hPa boundary forcing, stratospheric preconditioning is not needed to reproduce a major warming similar to that observed. The anomalously strong forcing in the lower stratosphere can be viewed as the primary direct cause of the major warming.

winds↗