% 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{Gama:866668,
author = {Gama, C. and Ribeiro, I. and Lange, A. C. and Vogel, A. and
Ascenso, A. and Seixas, V. and Elbern, H. and Borrego, C.
and Friese, E. and Monteiro, A.},
title = {{P}erformance assessment of {CHIMERE} and {EURAD}-{IM}’
dust modules},
journal = {Atmospheric pollution research},
volume = {10},
number = {4},
issn = {1309-1042},
address = {Blackburn, Vic.},
publisher = {TUNCAP},
reportid = {FZJ-2019-05747},
pages = {1336 - 1346},
year = {2019},
abstract = {The purpose of this study is to investigate how two
different atmospheric 3D modelling systems, with different
dust modules, simulate a Saharan dust episode, using
satellite data and in-situ observations to validate their
performances. The episode occurred during 19–23 February
2016 and impacted the Iberian Peninsula. The two numerical
modelling systems applied are the CHIMERE and the EURAD-IM
chemistry transport models with different dust modules, both
forced by the same WRF meteorological input. A common domain
and resolution (27 × 27 km2) was adopted for the
modelling setup. The comparison and evaluation of the two
modelling results have shown that both models are able to
capture the occurrence of the natural event, which was
initiated by a cut-off low above the coast of Morocco,
inducing a strong meridional transport of dust loaded air
from Algeria straight towards eastern parts of the Iberian
Peninsula. The most notable differences between the two
model outputs concern the emission strengths and the
emission source regions. In fact, different emission
patterns and strengths are simulated by each model despite
they use the same soil database, identical clay/silt/sand
contribution for each soil type, and the same meteorological
simulation. In general, CHIMERE simulates higher PM10,
PM2.5, and dust concentrations than EURAD-IM for this event.
In the South of Portugal, CHIMERE shows better agreement
with observations, while in Central Portugal, EURAD-IM is
closer to particle related measurements.},
cin = {IEK-8 / JARA-HPC},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-8-20101013 / $I:(DE-82)080012_20140620$},
pnm = {243 - Tropospheric trace substances and their
transformation processes (POF3-243) / CAMS,HITEC,ESKP,
REKLIM+,UBA $(jicg21_20180501)$},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-243 / $G:(DE-Juel1)jicg21_20180501$},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:000472996900031},
doi = {10.1016/j.apr.2019.03.005},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/866668},
}