% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Rler:843657,
author = {Rößler, Thomas and Stein, Olaf and Heng, Yi and
Baumeister, Paul F. and Hoffmann, Lars},
title = {{T}rajectory errors of different numerical integration
schemes diagnosed with the {MPTRAC} advection module driven
by {ECMWF} operational analyses},
journal = {Geoscientific model development},
volume = {11},
number = {2},
issn = {1991-9603},
address = {Katlenburg-Lindau},
publisher = {Copernicus},
reportid = {FZJ-2018-01226},
pages = {575 - 592},
year = {2018},
abstract = {The accuracy of trajectory calculations performed by
Lagrangian particle dispersion models (LPDMs) depends on
various factors. The optimization of numerical integration
schemes used to solve the trajectory equation helps to
maximize the computational efficiency of large-scale LPDM
simulations. We analyzed global truncation errors of six
explicit integration schemes of the Runge–Kutta family,
which we implemented in the Massive-Parallel Trajectory
Calculations (MPTRAC) advection module. The simulations were
driven by wind fields from operational analysis and
forecasts of the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather
Forecasts (ECMWF) at T1279L137 spatial resolution and 3 h
temporal sampling. We defined separate test cases for 15
distinct regions of the atmosphere, covering the polar
regions, the midlatitudes, and the tropics in the free
troposphere, in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere
(UT/LS) region, and in the middle stratosphere. In total,
more than 5000 different transport simulations were
performed, covering the months of January, April, July, and
October for the years 2014 and 2015. We quantified the
accuracy of the trajectories by calculating transport
deviations with respect to reference simulations using a
fourth-order Runge–Kutta integration scheme with a
sufficiently fine time step. Transport deviations were
assessed with respect to error limits based on turbulent
diffusion. Independent of the numerical scheme, the global
truncation errors vary significantly between the different
regions. Horizontal transport deviations in the stratosphere
are typically an order of magnitude smaller compared with
the free troposphere. We found that the truncation errors of
the six numerical schemes fall into three distinct groups,
which mostly depend on the numerical order of the scheme.
Schemes of the same order differ little in accuracy, but
some methods need less computational time, which gives them
an advantage in efficiency. The selection of the integration
scheme and the appropriate time step should possibly take
into account the typical altitude ranges as well as the
total length of the simulations to achieve the most
efficient simulations. However, trying to summarize, we
recommend the third-order Runge–Kutta method with a time
step of 170 s or the midpoint scheme with a time step of
100 s for efficient simulations of up to 10 days of
simulation time for the specific ECMWF high-resolution data
set considered in this study. Purely stratospheric
simulations can use significantly larger time steps of 800
and 1100 s for the midpoint scheme and the third-order
Runge–Kutta method, respectively.},
cin = {JSC},
ddc = {910},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)JSC-20090406},
pnm = {511 - Computational Science and Mathematical Methods
(POF3-511)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-511},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:000424636400002},
doi = {10.5194/gmd-11-575-2018},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/843657},
}