Sensitivity of simulations of Zambian heavy rainfall events to the atmospheric boundary layer schemes

Lists

Tools

Bopape, M.-J. M., Waitolo, D., Plant, R. S. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8808-0022, Phaduli, E., Nkonde, E., Simfukwe, H., Mkandwire, S., Rakate, E. and Misha, R. (2021) Sensitivity of simulations of Zambian heavy rainfall events to the atmospheric boundary layer schemes. Climate, 9 (2). 38. ISSN 2225-1154

Preview

Text (Open Access) - Published Version
· Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
· Please see our End User Agreement before downloading.
10MB

Text - Accepted Version
· Restricted to Repository staff only
10MB

It is advisable to refer to the publisher's version if you intend to cite from this work. See Guidance on citing.

To link to this item DOI: 10.3390/cli9020038

Abstract/Summary

Weather forecasting relies on the use of Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP) models, whose resolution is informed by the available computational resources. The models resolve large scale processes, while subgrid processes are parametrized. One of the processes that is parametrized is turbulence which is represented in Planetary Boundary Layer (PBL) schemes. In this study, we evaluate the sensitivity of heavy rainfall events over Zambia to four different PBL schemes in the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model using a parent domain with a 9 km grid length and a 3 km grid spacing child domain. The four PBL schemes are the Yonsei University (YSU), the nonlocal first-order medium-range forecasting (MRF), the University ofWashington (UW) and the Mellor–Yamada–Nakanishi–Niino (MYNN) schemes. Simulations are made for three case studies of extreme rainfall on 17 December 2016, 21 January 2017 and 17 April 2019. Use of the YSU produced the highest rainfall peaks across all three cases, however it produces performance statistics similar to UW that are higher than the two other schemes. These statistics are not maintained when adjusted for random hits indicating that the extra events are mainly random rather than being skilfully placed. UW simulated the lowest PBL height, while MRF produced the highest PBL height, but this is not matched by the temperature simulation. The YSU and MYNN PBL heights were intermediate at the time of the peak, however MYNN is associated with a slower decay, and higher PBL heights at night. WRF underestimates the maximum temperature during all the cases and for all PBL schemes, with a larger bias in the MYNN scheme. We support further use of the YSU scheme, which is the scheme selected for the tropical suite in WRF. The different simulations were in some respects more similar to one another than to the available observations. Satellite rainfall estimates and the ERA5 reanalysis showed different rainfall distributions, which indicate a need for more ground observations to assist with studies like this one.

Item Type:	Article
Refereed:	Yes
Divisions:	Science > School of Mathematical, Physical and Computational Sciences > Department of Meteorology
ID Code:	95301
Uncontrolled Keywords:	flooding; weather forecasting; high performance computing; boundary layer scheme
Publisher:	MDPI

Download Statistics

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Altmetric

Deposit Details

References

Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters. The Human Cost of Weather related Disasters 633 1995-2015. The United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. United Nations 2015. 634 2. World Meteorological Organization. State of the Climate in Africa 2019. WMO 2020, WMO- No. 1253. 635 3. United States Agency International Development. Climate Change Adaptation in Zambia. USAID 2020. 636 4. Venäläinen, A.; Pilli-Sihvola, K.; Tuomenvirta, H.; Ruuhela, R.; Kululanga, E.; Mtilatila, L.; Kanyanga, J.K.; 637 Nkomoki, J. Analysis of the meteorological capacity for early warnings in Malawi and Zambia. Climate 638 and Development 2015, 8, 1–7. doi:10.1080/17565529.2015.1034229. 639 5. Skamarock, W.C.; Klemp, J.B.; Dudhia, J.; Gill, D.O.; Liu, Z.; Berner, J.; Wang, W.; Powers, J.G.; Duda, M.G.; 640 Barker, D.M.; Huang, X.Y. A Description of the Advanced Research WRF Version 4. Technical report, 641 NCAR, 2019. NCAR Tech. Note NCAR/TN-556+STR, 145 pp, doi:10.5065/1dfh-6p97. 642 6. Courtier, P.; Geleyn, J.F. A global numerical weather predictionmodel with variable resolution: Application 643 to the shallow model equations. Q. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc. 1988, 114, 1321–1346. 644 7. Walters, D.; Baran, A.J.; Boutle, I.; Brooks, M.; Earnshaw, P.; Edwards, J.; Furtado, K.; Hill, P.; Lock, A.; 645 Manners, J.; Morcrette, C.; Mulcahy, J.; Sanchez, C.; Smith, C.; Stratton, R.; Tennant, W.; Tomassini, L.; 646 Van Weverberg, K.; Vosper, S.; Willett, M.; Browse, J.; Bushell, A.; Carslaw, K.; Dalvi, M.; Essery, R.; 647 Gedney, N.; Hardiman, S.; Johnson, B.; Johnson, C.; Jones, A.; Jones, C.; Mann, G.; Milton, S.; Rumbold, 648 H.; Sellar, A.; Ujiie, M.; Whitall, M.; Williams, K.; Zerroukat, M. The Met Office Unified Model Global 649 Atmosphere 7.0/7.1 and JULES Global Land 7.0 configurations. Geosci. Model Devel. 2019, 12, 1909–1963. 650 doi:10.5194/gmd-12-1909-2019. 651 8. Sela, J. Implementation of the sigma pressure hybrid coordinate into GFS. NCEP Office Note 2009, 461, 1 – 652 25. Version December 30, 2020 submitted to Climate 31 of 34 653 9. ECMWF. IFS Documentation CY47R1. Technical report, ECMWF, 2020. 654 10. Maidment, R.I.; Grimes, D.I.F.; Black, E.; Tarnavsky, E.; Young, M.; Greatrex, H.; Allan, R.P.; Stein, T.H.M.; 655 Nkonde, E.; Senkunda, S.; Alcántara, E.M.U. A new, long-term daily satellite-based rainfall dataset for 656 operational monitoring in Africa. Nature Scientific Data 2017, 4, 170063. doi:10.1038/sdata.2017.63. 657 11. World Meteorological Organization. Commission for basic systems severe weather forecasting 658 demonstration project (SWFDP): The overall project plan. Technical report, WMO, 2010. 659 12. World Meteorological Organization. WorldWeather Information Service: Official Forecasts. WMO 2020. 660 13. Bauer, P.; Thorpe, A.; Brunet, G. The quiet revolution of numerical weather prediction. Nature 2015, 661 525, 47–55. doi:10.1038/nature14956. 662 14. Carr, H. Atos supercomputer to enhance weather prediction capabilities for leading European numerical 663 weather centre ECMWF. ECMWF 2020. 664 15. Met Office Press Office. Up to £1.2billion for weather and climate supercomputer. Met Office 2020. 665 16. Motshegwa, T.; Wright, C.; Sithole, H.; Ngolwe, C.; Morgan, A. Developing a Cyber-infrastructure for 666 Enhancing Regional Collaboration on Education, Research, Science, Technology and Innovation. 2018 667 IST-AfricaWeek Conference (IST-Africa), 2018, pp. 1–9. 668 17. Bopape, M.M.; Sithole, H.; Motshegwa, T.; Rakate, E.; Engelbrecht, F.; Morgan, A.; Ndimeni, L.; Botai, O.J. 669 A Regional Project in Support of the SADC Cyber-Infrastructure Framework Implementation: Weather 670 and Climate. Data Sci. J. 2019, 18, 34. doi:10.5334/dsj-2019-034. 671 18. Kanno, H.; Sakurai, T.; Shinjo, H.; Miyazaki, H.; Ishimoto, Y.; Saeki, T.; UMETSU, C. Analysis 672 of Meteorological Measurements made over Three Rainy Seasons and Rainfall Simulations in 673 Sinazongwe District, Southern Province, Zambia. Japan Agricultural Research Quarterly 2015, 49, 59–71. 674 doi:10.6090/jarq.49.59. 675 19. Stensrud, D. Parametrization schemes. Keys to understanding numerical weather prediction models. 676 Reprint of the 2007 hardback ed. Parameterization Schemes: Keys to Understanding Numerical Weather 677 Prediction Models 2007, p. 480. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511812590. 678 20. Stull, R.B. An introduction to boundary layer meteorology. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers 1988, p. 679 666. 680 21. Houze, R.A.J. Cloud Dynamics. Academic Press 1994, p. 573. 681 22. Deardorff, J.W. Parameterization of the planetary boundary layer for use in general circulation models. 682 Monthly Weather Review 1974, 100, 93–106. doi:10.1175/1520-0493(1972)100<0093:POTPBL>2.3.CO;2. 683 23. Qian, Y.; Yan, H.; Berg, L.K.; Hagos, S.; Feng, Z.; Yang, B.; Huang, M. Assessing Impacts of PBL and 684 Surface Layer Schemes in Simulating the Surface-Atmosphere Interactions and Precipitation over the 685 Tropical Ocean Using Observations from AMIE/DYNAMO. Journal of Climate 15 Nov. 2016, 29, 8191 – 686 8210. doi:10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0040.1. 687 24. Jahn, D.; Gallus, W. Impacts of Modifications to a Local Planetary Boundary Layer Scheme 688 on Forecasts of the Great Plains Low-Level Jet Environment. Weather and Forecasting 2018, 33. 689 doi:10.1175/WAF-D-18-0036.1. 690 25. Hong, S.Y.; Noh, Y.; Dudhia, J. A New Vertical Diffusion Package with an Explicit Treatment of Entrainment 691 Processes. Monthly Weather Review 2006, 134, 2318–2341. doi:10.1175/MWR3199.1. 692 26. Nakanishi, M.; Niino, H. Development of an Improved Turbulence Closure Model for the Atmospheric 693 Boundary Layer. Journal of the Meteorological Society of Japan 2009, 87, 895–912. doi:10.2151/jmsj.87.895. 694 27. Bélair, S.; Mailhot, J.; Strapp, J.W.; MacPherson, J.I. An Examination of Local versus Nonlocal Aspects of a 695 TKE-Based Boundary Layer Scheme in Clear Convective Conditions. Journal of Applied Meteorology 1999, 696 38, 1499 – 1518. doi:10.1175/1520-0450(1999)038<1499:AEOLVN>2.0.CO;2. 697 28. Cohen, A.E.; Cavallo, S.M.; Coniglio, M.C.; Brooks, H.E.; Jirak, I.L. Evaluation of Multiple Planetary 698 Boundary Layer Parameterization Schemes in Southeast U.S. Cold Season Severe Thunderstorm 699 Environments. Weather and Forecasting 2017, 32, 1857 – 1884. doi:10.1175/WAF-D-16-0193.1. 700 29. Comin, A.; Justino, F.; Pezzi, L.; Gurjão, C.; Schumacher, V.; Fernández, A.; Sutil, U. Extreme rainfall event 701 in the Northeast coast of Brazil: a numerical sensitivity study. Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics 2020. 702 doi:10.1007/s00703-020-00747-0. 703 30. Hu, X.M.; Nielsen-Gammon, J.W.; Zhang, F. Evaluation of Three Planetary Boundary Layer 704 Schemes in the WRF Model. Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology 2010, 49, 1831 – 1844. 705 doi:10.1175/2010JAMC2432.1. Version December 30, 2020 submitted to Climate 32 of 34 706 31. de Lange, A.; Naidoo, M.; Garland, R.; Dyson, L. Sensitivity of meteorological variables on planetary 707 boundary layer parameterization schemes in the WRF-ARW model. Atmospheric Research 2020, p. 105214. 708 doi:10.1016/j.atmosres.2020.105214. 709 32. Libanda, B.; Ogwang, B.; Ongoma, V.; Ngonga, C.; Nyasa, L. Diagnosis of the 2010 DJF flood over Zambia. 710 Natural Hazards 2015. doi:10.1007/s11069-015-2069-z. 711 33. Hachigonta, S.; Reason, C. Interannual variability in dry and wet spell characteristics over Zambia. Climate 712 Research 2006, 32, 49–62. doi:10.3354/cr032049. 713 34. Thurlow, J.; Zhu, T.; Diao, X. The Impact of Climate Variability and Change on Economic Growth and 714 Poverty in Zambia. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), IFPRI discussion papers 2009. 715 35. Nyambe, S.; Gomes, C.; Lubasi, F.; Gomes, A. Analysis of lightning occurence in Zambia. 2014, pp. 716 1919–1925. doi:10.1109/ICLP.2014.6973442. 717 36. Libanda, B.; Nkolola, N.; Bathsheba, M. Rainfall Variability over Northern Zambia. Journal of Scientific 718 Research and Reports 2015, 6, 416–425. doi:10.9734/JSRR/2015/16189. 719 37. del Ninno, C.; Marini, A. Household’s vulnerability to shocks in Zambia. Social Protection Discussion paper, 720 the World Bank 2005, 526, 43. 721 38. Luque-Fernandez, M.; Bauernfeind, A.; Díaz, J.; Linares, C.; Omeiri, N.; Guibert, D. Influence of 722 temperature and rainfall on the evolution of cholera epidemics in Lusaka, Zambia, 2003–2006: analysis 723 of a time series. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 2008, 103, 137–43. 724 doi:10.1016/j.trstmh.2008.07.017. 725 39. Chinowsky, P.; Schweikert, A.; Strzepek, N.; Strzepek, K. Infrastructure and climate change: a 726 study of impacts and adaptations in Malawi, Mozambique, and Zambia. Climatic Change 2014, 130. 727 doi:10.1007/s10584-014-1219-8. 728 40. Thurlow, J.; Diao, X. Current Climate Variability and Future Climate Change: Estimated 729 Growth and Poverty Impacts for Zambia. Review of Development Economics 2012, 16. 730 doi:10.1111/j.1467-9361.2012.00670.x. 731 41. Clark, P.; Roberts, N.; Lean, H.; Ballard, S.; Charlton-Perez, C. Convection-permitting models: A 732 step-change in rainfall forecasting. Meteorol Appl 2016, 23. doi:10.1002/met.1538. 733 42. Wang, W. WRF: More Runtime Options. WRF Tutorial, UNSW, Sydney, Australia 2017, p. 46. 734 43. Sun, B.Y.; Bi, X. Validation for a tropical belt version of WRF: sensitivity tests on radiation and 735 cumulus convection parameterizations. Atmospheric and Oceanic Science Letters 2019, pp. 1–9. 736 doi:10.1080/16742834.2019.1590118. 737 44. Iacono, M.; Delamere, J.; Mlawer, E.; Shepard, M.; Clough, S.; Collins, W. Radiative Forcing by 738 Long-Lived Greenhouse Gases: Calculations with the AER Radiative Transfer Models. J. Geophys Res, 113. 739 doi:10.1029/2008JD009944. 740 45. Hong, S.Y.; Kim, J.H.; Lim, J.O.; Dudhia, J. The WRF single moment microphysics scheme (WSM). Journal 741 of the Korean Meteorological Society 2006, 42, 129–151. 742 46. Tiedtke, M.A. A Comprehensive Mass Flux Scheme For Cumulus Parameterization In Large-Scale Models. 743 Mon Weather Rev 1989, 117. doi:10.1175/1520-0493(1989)117<1779:ACMFSF>2.0.CO;2. 744 47. Zhang, C.; Wang, Y.; Hamilton, K. Improved Representation of Boundary Layer Clouds over the Southeast 745 Pacific in ARW-WRF Using a Modified Tiedtke Cumulus Parameterization Scheme. Mon Weather Rev 2011, 746 139, 3489–3513. doi:10.1175/MWR-D-10-05091.1. 747 48. Zhang, S.; Matsui, T.; Cheung, S.; Zupanski, M.; Peters-Lidard, C. Impact of Assimilated 748 Precipitation-Sensitive Radiances on the NU-WRF Simulation of the West African Monsoon. Mon Weather 749 Rev 2017, 145. doi:10.1175/MWR-D-16-0389.1. 750 49. Holtslag, A.A.M.; Boville, B.A. Local Versus Nonlocal Boundary-Layer Diffusion in a Global Climate 751 Model. Journal of Climate 1993, 6, 1825–1842. doi:10.1175/1520-0442(1993)006<1825:LVNBLD>2.0.CO;2. 752 50. Bretherton, C.S.; Park, S. A NewMoist Turbulence Parameterization in the Community AtmosphereModel. 753 Journal of Climate 2009, 22, 3422–3448. doi:10.1175/2008JCLI2556.1. 754 51. Hong, S.Y.; Pan, H.L. Nonlocal Boundary Layer Vertical Diffusion in a Medium-Range Forecast Model. 755 Monthly Weather Review 1996, 124, 2322–2339. doi:10.1175/1520-0493(1996)124<2322:NBLVDI>2.0.CO;2. 756 52. Lean, H.W.; Clark, P.A.; Dixon, M.; Roberts, N.M.; Fitch, A.; Forbes, R.; Halliwell, C. Characteristics of 757 High-Resolution Versions of the Met Office Unified Model for Forecasting Convection over the United 758 Kingdom. Mon. Weather Rev. 2008, 136, 3408–3424. Version December 30, 2020 submitted to Climate 33 of 34 759 53. Kain, J.S.; Weiss, S.J.; Levit, J.J.; Baldwin, M.E.; Bright, D.R. Examination of convection-allowing 760 configurations of theWRF model for the prediction of severe convective weather: The SPC/NSSL Spring 761 Program 2004. Wea. Forecasting 2006, 21, 167–181. 762 54. Crook, J.; Klein, C.; Folwell, S.; Taylor, C.M.; Parker, D.J.; Stratton, R.; Stein, T. Assessment of the 763 Representation ofWest African Storm Lifecycles in Convection-Permitting Simulations. Earth Space Sci. 764 2019, 6, 818–835. doi:10.1029/2018EA000491. 765 55. Tarnavsky, E.; Grimes, D.; Maidment, R.; Black, E.; Allan, R.; Stringer, M.; Chadwick, R.; Kayitakire, F. 766 Extension of the TAMSAT Satellite-Based Rainfall Monitoring over Africa and from 1983 to Present. J Appl 767 Meteorol and Clim 2014, 53, 2805–2822. doi:10.1175/JAMC-D-14-0016.1. 768 56. Huffman, G.; Bolvin, D.; Braithwaite, D.; Hsu, K.; Joyce, R.; P., X. Integrated Multi-satellitE Retrievals for 769 GPM (IMERG), version 4.4. NASA’s Precipitation Processing Center. NASA 2014. 770 57. Hersbach, H.; Dee, D. ERA5 reanalysis is in production. ECMWF 2016. 771 58. Davis, C.; Brown, B.; Bullock, R. Object-Based Verification of Precipitation Forecasts. Part I: 772 Methodology and Application to Mesoscale Rain Areas. Monthly Weather Review 2006, 134, 1772 – 1784. 773 doi:10.1175/MWR3145.1. 774 59. Davis, C.; Brown, B.; Bullock, R. Object-Based Verification of Precipitation Forecasts. Part II: Application to 775 Convective Rain Systems. Monthly Weather Review 2006, 134, 1785 – 1795. doi:10.1175/MWR3146.1. 776 60. Brown, B.; Bullock, R.; Gotway, J.; Ahijevch, D.; Davis, C.; Gilleland, E.; Holland, L. Application of the 777 MODE object-based verification tool for the evaluation of model precipitation fields. Preprints, 22nd Conf. 778 on Weather Analysis and Forecasting/18th Conf. on Numerical Weather Prediction, Park City, UT, Amer. Meteor. 779 Soc., 10A.2. [Available online at http://ams.confex.com/ams/pdfpapers/124856.pdf] 2007. 780 61. Beusch, L.; Foresti, L.; Gabella, M.; Hamann, U. Satellite-Based Rainfall Retrieval: From Generalized Linear 781 Models to Artificial Neural Networks. Remote Sensing 2018, 10, 939. doi:10.3390/rs10060939. 782 62. Kerns, B.; Chen, S. ECMWF and GFS model forecast verification during DYNAMO: Multiscale variability 783 in MJO initiation over the equatorial Indian Ocean. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres 2014, 119. 784 doi:10.1002/2013JD020833. 785 63. Dias, J.; Gehne, M.; Kiladis, G.; Sakaeda, N.; Bechtold, P.; Haiden, T. Equatorial Waves and the Skill 786 of NCEP and ECMWF Numerical Weather Prediction Systems. Monthly Weather Review 2018, 146. 787 doi:10.1175/MWR-D-17-0362.1. 788 64. Molongwane, C.; Bopape, M.J.; Fridlind, A.; Motshegwa, T.; Matsui, T.; Phaduli, E.; Sehurutshi, B.; Maisha, 789 R. Sensitivity of Botswana Ex-Tropical Cyclone Dineo rainfall simulations to cloud microphysics scheme. 790 AAS Open Research 2020, 3, 30. doi:10.12688/aasopenres.13062.1. 791 65. Ndarana, T.; Rammopo Tsholanang, S.; Chikoore, H.; Barnes, M.A.; Bopape, M.J. A quasi-geostrophic 792 diagnosis of the zonal flow associated with cut-off lows over South Africa and surrounding oceans. Clim. 793 Dyn. 2020. 794 66. Somses, S.; Bopape, M.J.M.; Ndarana, T.; Fridlind, A.; Matsui, T.; Phaduli, E.; Limbo, A.; Maikhudumu, S.; 795 Maisha, R.; Rakate, E. Convection parametrization and multi-nesting dependence of a heavy rainfall event 796 over Namibia with Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model. Climate 2020. 797 67. Thorne, V.; Coakeley, P.; Grimes, D.; Dugdale, G. Comparison of TAMSAT and CPC Rainfall 798 Estimates with rainfall, for southern Africa. International Journal of Remote Sensing 2001, 22, 1951–1974. 799 doi:10.1080/01431160118816. 800 68. Syama, S.; Masocha, M.; Dube, T. Evaluation of TAMSAT satellite rainfall estimates for southern 801 Africa: An inter-product comparison study. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C 2019. 802 doi:10.1016/j.pce.2019.02.008. 803 69. Beck, H.; Pan, M.; Roy, T.; Weedon, G.; Pappenberger, F.; van Dijk, A.; Huffman, G.; Adler, R.; Wood, E. 804 Daily evaluation of 26 precipitation datasets using Stage-IV gauge-radar data for the CONUS. Hydrol. 805 Earth Syst. Sci. 2019, 23, 207–224. doi:10.5194/hess-23-207-2019. 806 70. Bopape, M.J.; Engelbrecht, F.; Randall, D.; Landman, W. Simulations of an isolated two-dimensional 807 thunderstorm: Sensitivity to cloud droplet size and the presence of graupel. Asia-Pac J Atmos Sci 2014, 50. 808 doi:10.1007/s13143-014-0003-z. 809 71. Champion, A.; Hodges, K. Importance of resolution and model configuration when downscaling extreme 810 precipitation. Tellus A 2014, 66. doi:10.3402/tellusa.v66.23993. Version December 30, 2020 submitted to Climate 34 of 34 72. Medeiros, 811 B.; Hall, A.; Stevens, B. What controls the mean depth of the PBL? Earth Space Sci. 2005, 812 18, 3157–3172. 813 73. Efstathiou, G.A.; Plant, R.S.; Bopape, M.J.M. Simulation of an Evolving Convective Boundary Layer Using 814 a Scale-Dependent Dynamic Smagorinsky Model at Near-Gray-Zone Resolutions. J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim. 815 2018, 57, 2197–2214. 816 74. Bopape, M.J.; Plant, R.; Coceal, O.; Efstathiou, G.; Valdivieso, M. Effects of stability functions in a dynamic 817 model convective boundary layer simulation. Atmospheric Science Letters 2020. doi:10.1002/asl.1008. 818 75. Steeneveld, G.J.; Peerlings, E. Mesoscale Model Simulation of a Severe Summer Thunderstorm in The 819 Netherlands: Performance and Uncertainty Assessment for Parameterised and Resolved Convection. 820 Atmosphere 2020, 11. doi:10.3390/atmos11080811. 821 76. Cintineo, R.; Otkin, J.A.; Xue, M.; Kong, F. Evaluating the Performance of Planetary Boundary Layer 822 and Cloud Microphysical Parameterization Schemes in Convection-Permitting Ensemble Forecasts 823 Using Synthetic GOES-13 Satellite Observations. Monthly Weather Review 2014, 142, 163 – 182. 824 doi:10.1175/MWR-D-13-00143.1.

University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record

University of Reading

CentAUR: Central Archive at the University of Reading

Accessibility navigation

Sensitivity of simulations of Zambian heavy rainfall events to the atmospheric boundary layer schemes

Abstract/Summary

Downloads

Page navigation

See also

Footer navigation