AES or NWP for km-scale simulations?

Use Cases
1

Hello. In my group we are wondering which flavor of ICON is most appropriate for km-scale simulations: AES or NWP? Our final domain covers Europe, with several nested levels.

Thanks in advance for your help!

2

Hi, if it is the limited-area mode you’re looking for, then I would recommend NWP physics as it is not well tested (if used at all?) with AES physics. There are different NWP setups available, which are well documented in the tutorial, and setups in climate mode (CLM | ICON-CLM).

3

Hi,

Thanks for your quick answer!

Our set up is not just a LAM one. Out outermost domain is global, and then we have subdomains until we reach Europe at very high resolution. Given this configuration, do you think NWP is still the right choice?

Thanks!

4

There is no right or wrong here, I would say, it depends a lot on your aims and preferences.
But also with nesting (from my knowledge), setups with NWP physics are more common (examples can be found in run/checksuite.nwp). NWP physics can be used both for global simulations (maybe up to 80 km resolution, results can degrade for much coarser resolutions) and for convection-permitting ones down to about ~1 km resolution.

1 Like
5

I understand, thank you very much for your help!