Numerical Investigation of Boundary-Layer Evolution and Nocturnal Low-Level Jets: Local versus Non-Local PBL Schemes

Numerical simulations of the evolution of the planetary boundary layer (PBL) and nocturnal low-level jets (LLJ) have been carried out using MM5 (version 3.3) with four-dimensional data assimilation (FDDA) for a high pollution episode in the northeastern United States during July 15–20, 1999. In this paper, we assess the impact of different parameterizations on the PBL evolution with two schemes: the Blackadar PBL, a hybrid local (stable regime) and non-local (convective regime) mixing scheme; and the Gayno–Seaman PBL, a turbulent kinetic energy (TKE)-based eddy diffusion scheme. No FDDA was applied within the PBL to evaluate the ability of the two schemes to reproduce the PBL structure and its temporal variation. The restriction of the application of FDDA to the atmosphere above the PBL or the lowest 8 model levels, whichever is higher, has significantly improved the predicted strength and timing of the LLJ during the night. A systematic analysis of the PBL evolution has been performed for the primary meteorological fields (temperature, specific humidity, horizontal winds) and for the derived parameters such as the PBL height, virtual potential temperature, relative humidity, and cloud cover fraction. There are substantial differences between the PBL structures and evolutions simulated by these two different schemes. The model results were compared with independent observations (that were not used in FDDA) measured by aircraft, RASS and wind profiler, lidar, and tethered balloon platforms during the summer of 1999 as part of the NorthEast Oxidant and Particle Study (NE-OPS). The observations tend to support the non-local mixing mechanism better than the layer-to-layer eddy diffusion in the convective PBL.

[1]  Daewon W. Byun,et al.  Simulation of Atmospheric Boundary Layer Processes Using Local- and Nonlocal-Closure Schemes , 1997 .

[2]  X. Bian,et al.  Low-Level Jet Climatology from Enhanced Rawinsonde Observations at a Site in the Southern Great Plains , 1997 .

[3]  S. Rao,et al.  Uncertainties in Episodic Ozone Modeling Stemming from Uncertainties in the Meteorological Fields , 2001 .

[4]  A. Holtslag,et al.  A High Resolution Air Mass Transformation Model for Short-Range Weather Forecasting , 1990 .

[5]  D. Stauffer,et al.  Use of Four-Dimensional Data Assimilation in a Limited-Area Mesoscale Model. Part I: Experiments with Synoptic-Scale Data , 1990 .

[6]  Nelson L. Seaman,et al.  Meteorological modeling for air-quality assessments , 2000 .

[7]  K. Pfeiffer,et al.  A Terminal Area PBL Prediction System at Dallas : Fort Worth and its application in simulating diurnal PBL jets , 2000 .

[8]  C. Russell Philbrick,et al.  Numerical Investigation of the Effects of Boundary-Layer Evolution on the Predictions of Ozone and the Efficacy of Emission Control Options in the Northeastern United States , 2001 .

[9]  A. Blackadar,et al.  High resolution models of the planetary boundary layer , 1979 .

[10]  Julius Chang,et al.  A non-local closure model for vertical mixing in the convective boundary layer , 1992 .

[11]  D. Byun.  Science algorithms of the EPA Models-3 community multi-scale air quality (CMAQ) modeling system , 1999 .

[12]  H. Pan,et al.  Nonlocal Boundary Layer Vertical Diffusion in a Medium-Range Forecast Model , 1996 .

[13]  G. Grell,et al.  A description of the fifth-generation Penn State/NCAR Mesoscale Model (MM5) , 1994 .

[14]  J. Dudhia.  A Nonhydrostatic Version of the Penn State–NCAR Mesoscale Model: Validation Tests and Simulation of an Atlantic Cyclone and Cold Front , 1993 .

[15]  Stephen A. Cohn,et al.  Boundary Layer Height and Entrainment Zone Thickness Measured by Lidars and Wind-Profiling Radars , 2000 .

[16]  Jian Zhang,et al.  The Role of Vertical Mixing in the Temporal Evolution of Ground-Level Ozone Concentrations , 1999 .

[17]  John C. Wyngaard,et al.  Statistics of Conservative Scalars in the Convective Boundary Layer , 1984 .

[18]  I. Troen,et al.  A simple model of the atmospheric boundary layer; sensitivity to surface evaporation , 1986 .

[19]  G. Kallos,et al.  An Operational Evaluation of Two Regional-Scale Ozone Air Quality Modeling Systems over the Eastern United States. , 2001 .

[20]  C. Walcek.  Cloud Cover and Its Relationship to Relative Humidity during a Springtime Midlatitude Cyclone , 1994 .

[21]  Nelson L. Seaman,et al.  Evaluation of Numerical Predictions of Boundary Layer Structure during the Lake Michigan Ozone Study , 2000 .

[22]  John C. Wyngaard,et al.  Evaluation of turbulent transport and dissipation closures in second-order modeling , 1989 .

[23]  Da‐Lin Zhang,et al.  A High-Resolution Model of the Planetary Boundary Layer—Sensitivity Tests and Comparisons with SESAME-79 Data , 1982 .

[24]  Jia-Yeong Ku,et al.  Spatial and Temporal Variation in the Mixing Depth over the Northeastern United States during the Summer of 1995 , 1999 .

[25]  C. Moeng.  A Large-Eddy-Simulation Model for the Study of Planetary Boundary-Layer Turbulence , 1984 .

[26]  A. Holtslag,et al.  A comparison of boundary layer diffusion schemes in unstable conditions over land , 1995 .

[27]  B. Anderson,et al.  Regional simulation of the low‐level monsoon winds over the Gulf of California and southwestern United States , 2000 .

[28]  R. Jayanty,et al.  Measurement of toxic and related air pollutants , 1990 .

[29]  David R. Stauffer,et al.  Use of Four-Dimensional Data Assimilation in a Limited-Area Mesoscale Model Part II: Effects of Data Assimilation within the Planetary Boundary Layer , 1991 .

[30]  K. Davis,et al.  Wind Profiler and RASS Measurements Compared with Measurements from a 450-m-Tall Tower , 1998 .