8000 [JOSS REVIEW]: Clarification on pressure level interpolation · Issue #52 · slcs-jsc/mptrac · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to content

[JOSS REVIEW]: Clarification on pressure level interpolation #52

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Open
dostuffthatmatters opened this issue May 30, 2025 · 0 comments
Open

[JOSS REVIEW]: Clarification on pressure level interpolation #52

dostuffthatmatters opened this issue May 30, 2025 · 0 comments

Comments

@dostuffthatmatters
Copy link
dostuffthatmatters commented May 30, 2025 •
edited
Loading

This issue is part of the JOSS review of MPTRAC (openjournals/joss-reviews#8177)

In the documentation, it states:

It is possible to provide meteo data on model levels rather than pressure levels. In this case, pressure on model levels (PL) is required as an additional 3-D input variable in order to perform a vertical interpolation from model levels to pressure levels.

The model still runs on pressure levels, right? How do you determine the pressure levels to be used? If they are significantly coarser than the met data, you might have very strong interpolation artifacts.

Is it technically possible (in the future) to run the model on model levels? Because that has been the strategy with many LPDM runs using partially turbulence resolving meteorological models.

EDIT: I overlooked the example of ECMWF to pressure-level interpolation. So I assume the model just uses the pressure levels you give it. The second question remains.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@dostuffthatmatters
0