MEDMEX presentation

 

Main page
Previous

 

MEDMEX

Project presentation


 
 

1. Executive Summary

Several 3D primitive equation models are applied to the general circulation in the Mediterranean Sea. Forced by the same atmospheric data and initialized with an identical hydrological data set, their outputs will be compared on selected hydrodynamical quantities. This will enable an insight in the way the models describe the different physical processes found in the Mediterranean Sea (deep water formation, strong baroclinic structures in two or three layer flows, current instabilities etc.), where possible weaknesses are and how they could be corrected. In a first part, one will focus on the comparison of qualitative and quantitative properties of the general circulation of the Mediterranean Sea on seasonal time scales by using a coarse resolution simulation. In a second phase, an increased resolution will allow to intercompare on interannual variability and deep water formation.

2. Rationale

Ocean sciences have become more and more important during the last decades, especially in the context of interdisciplinary studies and the global change problematic. But the Mediterranean Sea has always been a region of interest for oceanographers: the circulation in the Mediterranean Sea has been studied intensively during this century (e.g. Hopkins 1985 and Millot 1991 for overviews); this fact is in part due to the semi-enclosed nature of the sea. Indeed, surveys (e.g. MEDOC (Medoc group 1970), the Donde va (La Violette 1990), POEM (POEM group 1992) and PRIMO (IOC) programs), mass, heat, salt and tracer budgets (e.g. Bethoux 1990, Bethoux et al. 1990) as well as numerical models (e.g. Stanev and Friedrich 1991, Beckers 1991, Pinardi and Navarra 1993, Roether et al. 1994, Zavatarelli and Mellor 1994, Herbaut et al. 1994, ...) are easier to achieve in such a relatively small and almost closed system than in the world ocean. What is even more interesting in the Mediterranean, is the fact that several important processes of the global ocean can be found in this sea: deep water formation (e.g. Sankey 1973), wind effects (e.g. Font 1990), fresh water influence and frontal instabilities (e.g. Millot et al. 1990), etc. The Mediterranean has thus always being considered as an interesting test basin for studying the global ocean processes (e.g. Robinson and Golnaraghi 1994) and to test complex numerical models.

It is thus not surprising that several international programs deal with the functioning of the Mediterranean. In the framework of MAST1 and MAST2 (in particular the Mediterranean Targeted Project), several programs focus on hydrodynamical modelling aspects. Specifically, MERMAIDS and EUROMODEL programs lead to several studies of the general circulation and subbasin circulations by different 3D hydrodynamical primitive equation models (for a description of the achievements see the corresponding project reports).

Today, there exist thus several models which are applied to the Mediterranean Sea, including different physical processes and numerical techniques, each of the models being applied for a specific purpose, ranging from high resolution local studies to process studies and general circulation simulations. The model design has then often some particularities which are thought to lead to a good model response, but it is not clear if these particularities are necessary or if they can be applied in other cases. In order to understandd these differences, advantages, drawbacks and possibilities of the models, one can calibrate and validate each of them by comparing their results with observational evidence, possibly under different conditions and in different cases. Unfortunately such data are generally not available in a sufficient quantity, and validation and calibrationare done in each particular case depending upon the available data. The models are thus thought to be valid in the cases they have been build up for, but there is a need to understand how they behave in other situations and how other models behave in the same situation. This can be achieved by comparing the outputs of different models applied to the same problem, leading to the intercomparison of models.

This approach has been applied with success in meteorology (e.g. the AMIP program (Gates 1993), where thirty (!) atmospheric models have been applied in the same configuration) and for Atlantic ocean models (TOGA), but in the Mediterranean, no such effort has been done yet. Before continuing extensive fundamental and applied research with the existing Mediterranean models, an intercomparison would thus allow a verification, classification and, possibly, correction of the models.

3. Objectives

The aim of the present concerted action is thus to achieve an intercomparison of the existing models which are currently applied to the Mediterranean Sea. During intercomparison studies, major discussions generally arise about the definition and specification of what is called the "same experiment" on which the intercomparison is based, and about the topics the intercomparison will focus on (numerical, computational, mathematical, ... or physical aspects). To increase the expected benefits from the intercomparison, these discussions have already taken place, and a well defined experimental setup is available at the beginning of the proposed concerted action.

The program will concentrate on the intercomparison of the models outputs relevant for the physics of the ocean and leave aside questions of efficiency or technical questions like portability, computer implementation (vectorization, parallelization), open coding (active and passive tracers modules) etc. Nevertheless, for completeness, the major features of the different models participating in the project are given in table1 and will be analyzed during the intercomparison process:

From table1 it is clear that the models do not represent a priori all the same physical processes and even if they do, that they are dealing differently with them. There are free surface and rigid lid models, models with Mellor-Yamada (1982) turbulence closure scheme or turbulent kinetic energy closure, some of the models are in z coordinates, others in * or modified * coordinates etc. These differences may influence the way models behave when applied to the same problem.

For the definition of a common experiment, the present proposal intends to avoid interpretation problems due to the use of different initial data, boundary conditions or grid sizes, by prescribing all these parameters. To prescribe a meaningful central experiment (or experiments), the test case to be performed should include the major physical processes that the models should resolve.

At the general circulation scale, one can concentrate on the simulation of the seasonal cycle. Coarse grid (1/4ø) models forced by perpetual year conditions based on monthly mean air-sea interactions would then allow to compare quantitatively and qualitatively the models ability to resolve this cycle.

But the coarse grid models generally suffer from the fact that they do not resolve the first radius of deformation and that baroclinic instabilities are not properly represented. Holloway (1992) suggests that in this case, eddy-topography interactions may be responsible for systematic defects in coarse resolution models. He proposed a parameterization of this NEPTUNE effect, which was tested in the Western Mediterranean on a 22kmx22km grid (Alvarez et al. 1994). It was shown that with the Levitus climatological hydrological data, the additional parameterization improved the overall picture of the general circulation computed by the model. Here, a systematic quantitative evaluation of the effect in the whole Mediterranean will clarify to which extent this parameterization is able to be a substitute of higher resolution models.

In some cases, several processes ask for higher resolution. This is the case if one intends to compare the way the models deal for example with deep water formation. In this case, a daily atmospheric forcing is to be used. By doing so, one is then also able to adress the problem of the natural interannual variability of the Mediterranean Sea and its representation by the models.

The central experiments will thus focus on the representation of the seasonal cycle at the general circulation scale and of the natural interannual variability and deep water formation when using high resolution models. In this way the intercomparison covers major physical processes.

As mentionned above, difficulties in assessing model differences arise when different atmospheric forcings (wind stress, air-sea fluxes) are used. We propose to perform model experiments based on common data set. A problem may be the resolution of atmospheric data. On the one hand, one disposes of METEO-FRANCE PERIDOT analysis, at a relatively high resolution (about 30 kms), but covering only the Western Mediterranean. On the other hand, atmospheric datasets are also available at a lower resolution (typically 1 or 2 degrees), but covering more years (like the ECMWF data). The undesirable effects of a low resolution is that it filters important phenomena such as Mistral gust events, which are required for a correct simulation of deep water formation.

One possibility to overcome this difficulty is to construct a dataset of atmospheric forcing fields, using a combination of recent techniques of data analysis. Starting from the knowledge of the ECMWF synoptic maps of surface pressure and temperature, and the available atmospheric datasets, it is possible to produce higher-resolution fields by *specification (or downscaling) techniques (Klein, 1987). Among these statistical techniques, one finds the analog methods, which have the advantage of producing outputs (the atmospheric forcing) that are nonlinear functions of the inputs (synoptic weather maps). Another advantage is that these methods produce also probability fields. Thus, the statistics of the unresolved components of the forcing fields would be calculated. Other techniques, such as the Canonical Correlation Analysis (Barnett and Preisendorfer, 1987), allow specification of high-resolution fields, but with a linear assumption that renders the construction easier.

Another data set which needs attention concerns the initial fields. In the Mediterranean, Levitus (1982) data are available, but a more recent data base (MED2/2, Brasseur et al. 1994) contains more hydrological stations and was build by using a variational inverse method (Brasseur 1994). The EU programme MODB/IS makes this data available by providing 3D monthly mean temperature and salinity fields appropriate for initialization and assimilation purposes. In the context of intercomparison, using the same initial fields for all models is necessary for the comparison of the spin-up behaviour and the interannual variability.

Since the common experimental conditions are defined, the practical intercomparison will concentrate on the models capabilities to resolve some selected and predefined processes at given time and space scales:

Indeed, all these models represent different physical processes on a wide range of space and time scales. A careful intercomparison of the different models simulations must thus be addressed on filtered outputs at several different time and space scales. One model might appear to be more performing than another model with respect to one particular range of scales. These remarks are crucial because the variability of the Mediterranean flow covers a wide range of time and spatial scales. However, one has to keep in mind that available observations are rare, which intrinsically restricts the models validation process. Three time scales must be distinguished : (i) the climatological seasonal time scale, (ii) the interannual variability, and (iii) the intraseasonal variability. The way in which (i) will be examined is through climatological monthly averages, whereas for the other ones, the use of second-order moments, at least, is necessary. We propose here to benefit from the experience acquired in statistical analysis of atmospheric climate model ouputs, and to apply classical tools developed there. This includes first linear statistics, such as spectral analysis in the frequency domain, Singular Spectrum Analysis (in the time/frequency domain; Vautard et al., 1992; Plaut and Vautard, 1994), analysis of the variance within various spectral bands, in order to separate intraseasonal variability, the annual cycle and the interannual variability, and EOF analysis at different time/space scales, as well as different depths. It will in particular emphasize the major trends found in the model outputs, *that is, their long-term drifts with respect to initial conditions. The various time/space modes of variability will be linked to the evolution of integrated quantities. The contribution, for instance, of interannual variability to the heat and salt budgets, fluxes through various straits, will be estimated, and compared between the models.

Second, a more refined analysis of circulation regimes will be performed. Indeed, the modes obtained from the previous linear analysis are often difficult to interpret in physical terms. The Mediterranean circulation is known to offer a great variability of circulation regimes, determined mostly by mesoscale eddies. Standard EOF analysis is not suited to study these phenomena since they are nonlinear by essence, or may result from the combination of several modes. However, these regimes can be identified, by analogy with studies of atmospheric weather regimes (Vautard, 1990; Kimoto and Ghil, 1993; Cheng and Wallace, 1993; Michelangeli et al., 1994), by nonlinear techniques such as Cluster Analysis or Nonlinear Equilibration. These analysis can be performed over various time scales. That is, circulation regimes can be found within the natural intraseasonal variability or the interannual variability. In the former case, one works with daily maps or 5-10 day averages, while in the latter, monthly or annual means are processed.

One particularly interesting issue is to relate these regimes to the regimes of Atmospheric forcing, a work that is already performed at LMD. The underlying question is to determine the sensitivity of models to the atmospheric forcing. The frequency of occurrence of regimes can also be intercompared between the model outputs, throwing light on the model deficiencies.

The analysis of circulation regimes will be carried out from long model integrations (10 years). Many statistical tools exists, allowing to assess the confidence in the results. However, all the studies we propose belong to the domain of statistical analysis requiring many independent data to be analysed. Above all, these analysis are designed to quantify in an objective way the difference in the dynamics of the models to be intercompared.

The intercomparison issues have thus to be defined from two different aspects :

(1) quantitative intercomparison based on the four dimensional data analysis described above and summarizing quantities (e.g. Integral quantities) will address the following topics:

- Sensitivity of models in computing fluxes through straits, specially when increasing or decreasing the models resolution

- Effect of the rigid-lid approximation (does it affect only the gravity waves mode or are the other modes also different?)

- Transfer of water masses in each subbasin and establishment of conveyor belt like features.

- Oceanic variability and circulation regimes resolved by the models.

(2) specific phenomena intercomparison when they cannot be described quantitatively in a straightforward way. This is certainly of crucial importance for the Mediterranean basin, because the known flaws of the models in deep water formation, strait dynamics, topography constraints. A primary issue is then model resolution. Questions in this section concern the representation of

- deep water formation; overflow/downflow and early spreading

- intermediate water formation and early spreading

- flows through straits.

To summarize the benefits of an intercomparison, we can say that they allow for:

(1) a classification and evaluation of currently used GCM models, and possible improvements of each of them,

(2) an insight in physical processes resolved or unresolved by the models at seasonal scales,

(3) a study of natural interannual variability when the baroclinic instability is resolved,

(4) an understanding how the models represent the deep water formation process or other specific processes,

(5) to know to which extent the NEPTUNE parameterization allows to use coarse resolution models and thus less computer resources.

4. Current status

The project started in February 1995, and now, in June 1995, the topographic files have been prepared and the atmospheric data are being implemented for distribution among the partners.

5. References

ALVAREZ A., TINTORE J., HOLLOWAY G., EBY H. and BECKERS J.M., 1994, Effect of topographic stress on the circulation in the Western Mediterranean, Journal of Geophysical Research, 99, 16053-16064.

BARNETT T. P. and PREISENDORFER R. 1987: Origins and levels of monthly and seasonal forecast skill for United States surface air temperatures determined by canonical correlation analysis. Mon. Wea. Rev., 115, 1825-1850.

BECKERS J.M., 1991, Application of a 3D model to the Western Mediterranean, Journal of Marine Systems 1, pp.315-332.

BETHOUX J.P., 1990, Budgets of the Mediterranean Sea: their dependence on the local climate and on the characteristics of the Atlantic waters. Ocean. Acta, 2, 157-163.

BETHOUX J.P., GENTILI B., RAUNET J. and TAILLIEZ D., 1990, Warming trend in the western Mediterreanean deep water, Nature, 347, 660-662.

BRASSEUR P., 1994, Reconstruction de champs d'observations océanographiques par le Modèle Variationnel Inverse: Méthodologie et Applications, Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Liège, pp267.

BRASSEUR P., BECKERS J.M., BRANKART J.M. and SCHOENAUEN, 1994. Seasonal Temperature and Salinity Fields in the Mediterranean Sea: Climatological Analyses of an Historical Data Set, submitted to Deep Sea Research.

CHENG, X. and WALLACE, J. M. 1993: Cluster analysis of the Northern hemisphere wintertime 500-hPa Height field: Spatial patterns. J. Atmos. Sci., 50, 2674-2696.

FONT J., 1990, A Comparison of Seasonal Winds With Currents on the Continental Slope of the Catalan Sea (Northwestern Mediterranean), Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol.95, NøC2, pp.1537-1645.

GATES W.L., 1993, Activities of the CAS/JSC working group on numerical Experimentation, Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project, Research Activities in Atmospheric and Ocean Modelling, G.J. Boer (ed.)

HERBAUT C., MORTIER L. and CREPON M., 1994, A sensitivity study of the general circulation of the Western Mediterranean Sea. Part I: The response to density forcings through the straits. Submitted to Journal of Physical Oceanography.

HOLLOWAY G., 1992, Representing topographic stress for large-scale ocean models, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 22, 1033-1046.

HOPKINS T.S., 1985, Physics of the Sea, in MARGALEF R. (ed.), Western Mediterranean, Pergamon Press, pp.100-125.

KIMOTO, M. and GHIL, M. 1993: Multiple flow regimes in the Northern hemisphere winter. Part II: Sectorial regimes and preferred transitions. J. Atmos. Sci., 50, 2645-2673.

KLEIN, W. H., and H. J. BLOOM, 1987, Specificationn of monthly precipitation over the United States from the surrounding 700 mb height field. Mon Wea Rev 115, 2118-2132.

LA VIOLETTE P.E., 1990, The Western Mediterranean Circulation Experiment (WMCE): Introduction, Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol.95, NøC2, pp.1511-1514.

LEVITUS S., 1982, Climatological Atlas of the world ocean, NOAA Prof. Paper 13, US Gov., Washington DC, 173p.

MEDOC group, 1970, Observation of Formation of Deep Water in the Mediterranean, Nature, 227, pp. 1037-1040.

MELLOR G.L., and YAMADA T, 1982 : Development of a turbulence closure model for geophysical fluid problems, Rev. Geophys.,20,851-875.

MICHELANGELI P.-A., R. VAUTARD, and B. LEGRAS, 1994: Weather regimes: recurrence and quasi-stationarity, J. Atmos. Sci., submitted.

MILLOT C., 1991, Mesoscale and seasonal variabilities of the circulation in the western Mediterranean. Dynamics of Atmospheres and Oceans, 15, pp.179-214.

MILLOT C., TAUPIER-LETAGE I., BENZOHRA M., 1990, The Algerian Eddies, Earth-Science Reviews, 27, pp.203-219.

PINARDI N. and NAVARRA A., 1993, Baroclinic wind adjustment processes in the Mediterranean Sea, Deep-Sea Research, Vol.40, Nø6, pp.1299-1326.

PLAUT G. and R. VAUTARD, 1994: Spells of low-frequency oscillations and weather regimes in the Northern Hemisphere. J. Atmos. Sci., 51, 210-236.

POEM group (A.R. Robinson et al.), 1992, General Circulation of the Eastern Mediterranean, Earth-Science Reviews, 32, pp.285-309.

ROBINSON A. and GOLNARAGHI M., 1994, The Physical and Dynamical Oceanography of the Mediterranean Sea, Ocean Processes in Climate Dynamics: Global and Mediterranean Examples (ed. Malanotte-Rizolli P. and Robinson A.), NATO ASI Series, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht-Boston-London, pp.255-306.

ROETHER W. , ROUSSENOV V.M. , and WELL R., 1994: A tracer study of the thermohaline circulation of the Eastern Mediterranean. In: Ocean Processes in Climate Dynamics: Global and Mediterranean Examples (P. Malanotte-Rizzoli, A. R. Robinson, Eds.), p. 371-394.

ROETHER W. et al., 1993, A chlorofluoromethane and hydrographic section across Drake Passage: deep water ventilation and meridional property transport, J. Geophys. Research, 98, pp.14423-14435.

SANKEY T., 1973, The formation of deep water in the northwest Mediterranean, Prog. Oceanogr., 6, pp.159-179.

STANEV E.V. and FRIEDRICH H.J., 1991, On the assimilation of climatological data by means of numerical circulation models, examplified for the Mediterranean Sea. Oceanologica Acta, Vol.14, Nø2, pp.97-114.

TOGA, Numerical Experimentation Group, Intercomparison of Tropical Ocean GCMs, STOCKDALE T., ANDERSON D., DELECLUDE P., KUTTENBERG A., KITAMURA Y., LATIF M. and YAMAGATA T., World Climate Research Programme, WCRP 79, WMN/TD 545.

VAUTARD, R., 1990: Multiple weather regimes over the north Atlantic: Analysis of precursors and successors. Mon. Wea. Rev., 118, 2056-2081.

VAUTARD R., P. YIOU, and M. GHIL, 1992: Singular spectrum analysis: A toolkit for short, noisy chaotic signals. Physica D, 58, 95-126.

ZAVATARELLI M. and MELLOR G.L. , 1994, A numeical study of the Mediterranean Sea circulation, J. Phys. Oceanogr.

6. Work content


i) Coarse resolution model intercomparison, general circulation

a) Definition and preparation of the simulation:

domain : Mediterranean Sea

horizontal and vertical resolution: equivalent resolution of 1/4ø with 31 vertical levels

topographic file: to be created or adapted from the topographic file used at IMGA-CNR (from 1/12ø latitude on 1/8ø longitude resolution of the US-NAVY)

air-sea interactions

-ECMWF wind stress (monthly climatology)
-Sea surface temperature and salinity value restored to monthly climatology (MED/2 data base, Brasseur et al. 1994)
initial data: MED/2 3D temperature and salinity fields, remaining state variables diagnostically adjusted

Gibraltar open boundary conditions: relaxation towards T,S climatology in a box representing the Atlantic ocean.

duration of the simulation: Perpetual year run for 10 years

horizontal diffusion: minimal value possible with each model.

b) Definition of outputs to be compared:

1) time evolution during the complete simulation, based on daily mean values:

integral quantities: Kinetic energy, Potential energy, heat content, salt content

heat and salt budget at the air-sea interface

mass, heat and salt fluxes to selected straits (Gibraltar, Sicily, Corsica, Otranto, Rhodos) and sections (vertical sections defined hereafter)

2) monthly mean values during the last two years of simulation:

2D sections (horizontal and vertical): Surface (10m), Atlantic waters (50m), eastern basin Levantine waters (200m), Levantine Intermediate Waters (500m) and Deep waters (2000m), 4 meridional (5øE through the Gulf of Lions, 12øE through the Tyrrenian sea and the Strait of Sicily, 18øE through the Ionian Sea and Otranto strait, 30øE, through the Rhode gyre) and 2 zonal sections (34øN, eastern basin and 40øN, western basin) with values of temperature, salinity, density and velocity.

meridional and zonal monthly mean stream function (horizontal integration) in the eastern and western basin.

potential vorticity on isopygnals of Atlantic waters, Levantine waters and Deep waters.

3) EOF and Circulation Regimes

EOF analysis of sea surface elevation/pressure

Circulation Regimes as defined in the objectives

c) Comparison of results:

Delivery of model outputs in a unique numerical format, identical units and on the same grid (to be specified during a first meeting) for EOF analysis, centralisation and plotting for comparison.

Output of monthly mean salt and heat content to be compared to MODB/IS



ii) High resolution model intercomparison, interannual variability

a) Definition and preparation of the simulation:

domain : Mediterranean Sea

topographic file: to be created or adapted from the topographic file used at IMGA-CNR (from 1/12ø latitude on 1/8ø longitude resolution of the US-NAVY)

horizontal and vertical resolution: equivalent resolution of 1/8ø with 31 vertical levels

air-sea interactions

-ECMWF wind stress (daily values) and heat fluxes
-Sea surface salinity value restored to monthly climatology (MED/2 data base)
initial data: MED/2 3D temperature and salinity fields, remaining state variables diagnostically adjusted.

Gibraltar open boundary conditions: relaxation towards T,S climatology in a box representing the Atlantic ocean.

duration of the simulation: Perpetual year run for 10 years

horizontal diffusion: minimal value possible with each model.

b) Definition of outputs to be compared

1) time evolution during the complete simulation, based on daily mean values:

integral quantities: Kinetic energy, Potential energy, heat content, salt content

heat and salt budget at the air-sea interface

mass, heat and salt fluxes to selected straits (Gibraltar, Sicily, Corsica, Otranto, Rhodos) and sections (vertical sections defined hereafter)

2) final 8 year average of monthly mean values and standard deviation over the 8 years of the monthly mean values

2D sections (horizontal and vertical): Surface (10m), Atlantic waters (50m), eastern basin Levantine waters (200m), Levantine Intermediate Waters (500m) and Deep waters (2000m), 4 meridional (5øE through the Gulf of Lions, 12øE through the Tyrrenian sea and the Strait of Sicily, 18øE through the Ionian Sea and Otranto strait, 30øE, through the Rhode gyre) and 2 zonal sections (34øN, eastern basin and 40øN, western basin) with values of temperature, salinity, density and velocity.

meridional and zonal monthly mean stream function (horizontal integration) in the eastern and western basin.

potential vorticity on isopygnals of Atlantic waters, Levantine waters and Deep waters.

3)EOF and Circulation Regimes

EOF analysis of sea surface elevation/pressure

Circulation Regimes (cluster analysis)

c) Comparison of results:

Delivery of model outputs in a unique numerical format, identical units and on the same grid (to be specified during a first meeting) for EOF analysis, centralisation and plotting for comparison.

Output of monthly mean salt and heat content to be compared to MODB/IS

Neptune effect: Parameterization of eddy-topography interaction

Use of the coarse grid MOM model, but with addition of NEPTUNE paramaterization (Alvarez et al. 1994). Comparison of outputs on the same basis as the coarse resolution model intercomparison (i)

iv) Workshops

Once a year a workshop should be organized, with all participants attending, to follow the current situation of the concerted action, to analyse and explain intercomparison results, and to promote exchanges between the participants.

7. Corresponding tasks

0. Data preparation for high and low resolution experiments

0.1 Topographic files (GHER, IMGA)
to be implemented into MODB/IS data base server.

0.2 ECMWF data (LMD, CETIIS, GHER)
to be prepared as described in "objectives".

0.3 ECMWF data (GHER, CETIIS)
Implementation into MEDMEX data base.

1. Low resolution experiment

1.0.1 Low resolution run GHER model (GHER, ALL)
Interpolation of data prepared during task 0. to model grids
Simulation and computing of outputs specified in section 3
Delivery of outputs for 4D data analysis on a grid specified on the data server (including the mask file)

1.0.2 Low resolution run LODYC (OPA) model (CETIIS, ALL)
Interpolation of data prepared during task 0. to model grids
Simulation and computing of outputs specified in section 3
Delivery of outputs for 4D data analysis on a grid specified on the data server (including the mask file)

1.0.3 Low resolution run MOM model (IMGA, ALL)
Interpolation of data prepared during task 0. to model grids
Simulation and computing of outputs specified in section 3
Delivery of outputs for 4D data analysis on a grid specified on the data server (including the mask file)

1.0.4 Low resolution run POM model (UA, ALL)
Interpolation of data prepared during task 0. to model grids
Simulation and computing of outputs specified in section 3
Delivery of outputs for 4D data analysis on a grid specified on the data server (including the mask file)

1.0.5 Low resolution run MOM model (UIB, ALL)
Interpolation of data prepared during task 0. to model grids
Simulation and computing of outputs specified in section 3
Delivery of outputs for 4D data analysis on a grid specified on the data server (including the mask file)
The run is done with the specfic NEPTUNE parameterization

1.1 4D Data analysis (LMD, ALL)
EOF analysis, regimes etc from 1.0
Delivery for comparison in (1.2)

1.2 Centralization, graphical output and comparison (GHER, ALL)

1.3 Workshop 1 (GHER, ALL)
Discussion of progress in task 1

1.4 Intermediate report (GHER, ALL)

2. High resolution experiment

2.0.1 High resolution run GHER model (GHER, ALL)
Interpolation of data prepared during task 0. to model grids
Simulation and computing of outputs specified in section 3
Delivery of outputs for 4D data analysis on a grid specified on the data server (including the mask file)

2.0.2 High resolution run LODYC (OPA) model (CETIIS, ALL)
Interpolation of data prepared during task 0. to model grids
Simulation and computing of outputs specified in section 3
Delivery of outputs for 4D data analysis on a grid specified on the data server (including the mask file)

2.0.3 High resolution run MOM model (IMGA, ALL)
Interpolation of data prepared during task 0. to model grids
Simulation and computing of outputs specified in section 3
Delivery of outputs for 4D data analysis on a grid specified on the data server (including the mask file)

2.0.4 High resolution run POM model (UA, ALL)
Interpolation of data prepared during task 0. to model grids
Simulation and computing of outputs specified in section 3
Delivery of outputs for 4D data analysis on a grid specified on the data server (including the mask file)

2.1 4D Data analysis (LMD, GHER, CETIIS, IMGA, UA)
EOF analysis, regimes etc from 2.0
Delivery for comparison in (2.2)

2.2 Centralization, graphical output and comparison (GHER, ALL)

2.3 Workshop 2 (GHER, ALL)
Discussion of final results obtained in task 1 and progress in task 2

2.4 Intermediate report (GHER, ALL)

3. Final workshop and report

3.0 Workshop 3 (GHER, ALL)
Discussion of final results obtained in task 2
Synthesis of program results

3.1 Final report (GHER, ALL)
Discussion and synthesis of program results

8. Working plan schedule, starting 1/2/95

Task Month (1 to 36)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

0.1 * * * *

0.2 * * * *

0.3 * * *

1.0 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

1.1 * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

1.2 * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

1.3 *

1.4 *

2.0 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

2.1 * * * * * * * * *

2.2 * * * * * * * * * * * * *

2.3 *

2.4 *

3.0 *

3.1 *

COORDINATOR :

Dr. J.M. Beckers
GeoHydrodynamics and Environment Research GHER
University of Liège
Sart Tilman B5
B-4000 Liège, Belgium
e-mail: jmb@ocean.oce.ulg.ac.be
Tel.: +32-41-66.33.58
Fax.: +32-41-66.23.55

PARTNERS :

Dr. F. Martel
CETIIS
24, bd Paul Vaillant-Couturier
F-94200 Ivry sur Seine, France
e-mail: fmartel@ocean.cetiis.fr
Tel.: +33-1-49590454
Fax.: +33-1-49590449

Prof. A. Lascaratos
University of Athens
Lab. of Meteorology and Oceanography
Ippocratus 33
GR 10680 ATHENS, Greece
e-mail: alasc@pelagos.ocean.uoa.ariadne-t.gr
Tel.: + 30-1-3613504
Fax.: + 30-1-3608518

Dr. N. Pinardi
IMGA-CNR
770 via Emilia Est
IT-41100 MODENA, Italy
e-mail: pinardi@aida.bo.cnr.it
Tel.: +39-59-362388
Fax.: +39-59-374506

Dr. R. Vautard
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Tour 15 Boîte 99
4 Place Jussieu
F-75252 PARIS CEDEX 05, FRANCE
e-mail: vautard@lmd.ens.fr
Tel.: +33-1-44277353
Fax:  +33-1-44276272

Prof. J. Tintore
Universitat de les Illes Balears
Dept. Fisica
km 7.5, crta. de Valldemossa
ES-07071 PALMA DE MALLORCA, Espagna
e-mail: dfsjts0@ps.uib.es
Tel.: +34-71-173227
Fax.: +34-71-173426

 


[MEDMEX presentation] [Topographic data] [Atmospheric data : CR] [Atmospheric data : HR] [ Initial conditions] [Temperature and salinity] [Output specifications '96] [Output specifications '97] [Output specifications '98] [Artist contest]
[Main page]
[Previous]

support@modb.oce.ulg.ac.be

 Last modified 09/26/01