![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Our results explain why in many WRF-Chem simulations PM 10 concentrations were exaggerated. The cumulative effect of the found inconsistencies led to the significantly higher dust content in the atmosphere in comparison with the corrected WRF-Chem version. Thirdly, we show that the gravitational settling procedure, in comparison with the corrected version, caused higher dust column loadings by 4 %–6 %, PM 10 surface concentrations by 2 %–4 %, and mass of the gravitationally settled dust by 5 %–10 %. Therefore, aerosol optical depth (AOD) in the old version was 25 %–30 % less than in the corrected one. Secondly, we demonstrate that submicron dust particles' contribution was incorrectly accounted for in the calculation of optical properties. Firstly, we show that the old version underestimates the PM 2.5 diagnostic output by 7 % and overestimates PM 10 by 5 % in comparison with the corrected one. Here, we use a WRF-Chem experimental setup configured over the Middle East (ME) to estimate the effects of these inconsistencies. ![]() These inconsistencies have been reported, and corrections have been implemented in WRF-Chem v4.1.3. In this paper, we rectify inconsistencies that emerge in the Weather Research and Forecasting model with chemistry (WRF-Chem) v3.2 code when using the Goddard Chemistry Aerosol Radiation and Transport (GOCART) aerosol module. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |