大气模拟中Rosenbrock - Wanner和Crank - Nicolson时间积分器的比较

IF 3 3区 地球科学 Q2 METEOROLOGY & ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society Pub Date : 2023-11-02 DOI:10.1002/qj.4608
David Lee
{"title":"大气模拟中Rosenbrock - Wanner和Crank - Nicolson时间积分器的比较","authors":"David Lee","doi":"10.1002/qj.4608","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Non‐hydrostatic atmospheric models often use semi‐implicit temporal discretisations in order to negate the time step limitation of explicitly resolving the fast acoustic and gravity waves. Solving the resulting system to machine precision using Newton's method is considered prohibitively expensive, and so the non‐linear solver is typically truncated to a fixed number of iterations, often using an approximate Jacobian matrix that is reassembled only once per time step. The present article studies the impact of using various third‐order, four stage Rosenbrock‐Wanner schemes, where integration weights are chosen to meet specific stability and order conditions, in comparison to a Crank‐Nicolson time discretisation, as is done in the UK Met Office's LFRic model. Rosenbrock‐Wanner schemes present a promising alternative on account of their ability to preserve their temporal order with only an approximate Jacobian, and may be constructed to be stiffly‐stable, so as to ensure the decay of fast unresolved modes. These schemes are compared for the 2D rotating shallow water equations and the 3D compressible Euler equations at both planetary and non‐hydrostatic scales and are shown to exhibit improved results in terms of their energetic profiles and stability. Results in terms of computational performance are mixed, with the Crank‐Nicolson method allowing for longer time steps and faster time to solution for the baroclinic instability test case at planetary scales, and the Rosenbrock‐Wanner methods allowing for longer time steps and faster time to solution for a rising bubble test case at non‐hydrostatic scales. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.","PeriodicalId":49646,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society","volume":"11 5","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparison of Rosenbrock‐Wanner and Crank‐Nicolson Time Integrators for Atmospheric Modelling\",\"authors\":\"David Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/qj.4608\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Non‐hydrostatic atmospheric models often use semi‐implicit temporal discretisations in order to negate the time step limitation of explicitly resolving the fast acoustic and gravity waves. Solving the resulting system to machine precision using Newton's method is considered prohibitively expensive, and so the non‐linear solver is typically truncated to a fixed number of iterations, often using an approximate Jacobian matrix that is reassembled only once per time step. The present article studies the impact of using various third‐order, four stage Rosenbrock‐Wanner schemes, where integration weights are chosen to meet specific stability and order conditions, in comparison to a Crank‐Nicolson time discretisation, as is done in the UK Met Office's LFRic model. Rosenbrock‐Wanner schemes present a promising alternative on account of their ability to preserve their temporal order with only an approximate Jacobian, and may be constructed to be stiffly‐stable, so as to ensure the decay of fast unresolved modes. These schemes are compared for the 2D rotating shallow water equations and the 3D compressible Euler equations at both planetary and non‐hydrostatic scales and are shown to exhibit improved results in terms of their energetic profiles and stability. Results in terms of computational performance are mixed, with the Crank‐Nicolson method allowing for longer time steps and faster time to solution for the baroclinic instability test case at planetary scales, and the Rosenbrock‐Wanner methods allowing for longer time steps and faster time to solution for a rising bubble test case at non‐hydrostatic scales. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.\",\"PeriodicalId\":49646,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society\",\"volume\":\"11 5\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.4608\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"METEOROLOGY & ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.4608","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"METEOROLOGY & ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

非流体静力大气模式通常使用半隐式时间离散,以消除显式解析快速声波和重力波的时间步长限制。使用牛顿方法将结果系统求解到机器精度被认为是非常昂贵的,因此非线性求解器通常被截断为固定次数的迭代,通常使用每个时间步只重新组装一次的近似雅可比矩阵。本文研究了使用各种三阶,四阶段Rosenbrock - Wanner方案的影响,其中选择积分权重以满足特定的稳定性和顺序条件,与英国气象局的LFRic模型中所做的曲克-尼科尔森时间离散相比。Rosenbrock - Wanner方案提供了一个有希望的替代方案,因为它们能够仅用一个近似的雅可比矩阵来保持它们的时间顺序,并且可以被构造成刚性稳定的,从而确保快速未解析模态的衰变。在行星和非流体静力尺度下,将这些方案与二维旋转浅水方程和三维可压缩欧拉方程进行了比较,结果表明,这些方案在能量分布和稳定性方面表现出改进的结果。计算性能方面的结果好坏不一,对于行星尺度的斜压不稳定性测试用例,曲克-尼克森方法允许更长的时间步长和更快的时间来解决,而对于非流体静力尺度的上升气泡测试用例,Rosenbrock - Wanner方法允许更长的时间步长和更快的时间来解决。这篇文章受版权保护。版权所有。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Comparison of Rosenbrock‐Wanner and Crank‐Nicolson Time Integrators for Atmospheric Modelling
Non‐hydrostatic atmospheric models often use semi‐implicit temporal discretisations in order to negate the time step limitation of explicitly resolving the fast acoustic and gravity waves. Solving the resulting system to machine precision using Newton's method is considered prohibitively expensive, and so the non‐linear solver is typically truncated to a fixed number of iterations, often using an approximate Jacobian matrix that is reassembled only once per time step. The present article studies the impact of using various third‐order, four stage Rosenbrock‐Wanner schemes, where integration weights are chosen to meet specific stability and order conditions, in comparison to a Crank‐Nicolson time discretisation, as is done in the UK Met Office's LFRic model. Rosenbrock‐Wanner schemes present a promising alternative on account of their ability to preserve their temporal order with only an approximate Jacobian, and may be constructed to be stiffly‐stable, so as to ensure the decay of fast unresolved modes. These schemes are compared for the 2D rotating shallow water equations and the 3D compressible Euler equations at both planetary and non‐hydrostatic scales and are shown to exhibit improved results in terms of their energetic profiles and stability. Results in terms of computational performance are mixed, with the Crank‐Nicolson method allowing for longer time steps and faster time to solution for the baroclinic instability test case at planetary scales, and the Rosenbrock‐Wanner methods allowing for longer time steps and faster time to solution for a rising bubble test case at non‐hydrostatic scales. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
16.80
自引率
4.50%
发文量
163
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society is a journal published by the Royal Meteorological Society. It aims to communicate and document new research in the atmospheric sciences and related fields. The journal is considered one of the leading publications in meteorology worldwide. It accepts articles, comprehensive review articles, and comments on published papers. It is published eight times a year, with additional special issues. The Quarterly Journal has a wide readership of scientists in the atmospheric and related fields. It is indexed and abstracted in various databases, including Advanced Polymers Abstracts, Agricultural Engineering Abstracts, CAB Abstracts, CABDirect, COMPENDEX, CSA Civil Engineering Abstracts, Earthquake Engineering Abstracts, Engineered Materials Abstracts, Science Citation Index, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and more.
期刊最新文献
Multivariate post‐processing of probabilistic sub‐seasonal weather regime forecasts Relationship between vertical variation of cloud microphysical properties and thickness of the entrainment interfacial layer in Physics of Stratocumulus Top stratocumulus clouds Characteristics and trends of Atlantic tropical cyclones that do and do not develop from African easterly waves Teleconnection and the Antarctic response to the Indian Ocean Dipole in CMIP5 and CMIP6 models First trial for the assimilation of radiance data from MTVZA‐GY on board the new Russian satellite meteor‐M N2‐2 in the CMA‐GFS 4D‐VAR system
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1