Journal cover Journal topic
Geoscientific Model Development An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 5.154 IF 5.154
  • IF 5-year value: 5.697 IF 5-year
    5.697
  • CiteScore value: 5.56 CiteScore
    5.56
  • SNIP value: 1.761 SNIP 1.761
  • IPP value: 5.30 IPP 5.30
  • SJR value: 3.164 SJR 3.164
  • Scimago H <br class='hide-on-tablet hide-on-mobile'>index value: 59 Scimago H
    index 59
  • h5-index value: 49 h5-index 49
GMD | Articles | Volume 11, issue 10
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 4069-4084, 2018
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4069-2018
© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 4069-4084, 2018
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-4069-2018
© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Model evaluation paper 10 Oct 2018

Model evaluation paper | 10 Oct 2018

Comparison of dealiasing schemes in large-eddy simulation of neutrally stratified atmospheric flows

Fabien Margairaz et al.
Download
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
Status: closed
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement
Peer review completion
AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision
AR by Fabien Margairaz on behalf of the Authors (02 May 2018)  Author's response    Manuscript
ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (02 May 2018) by Simone Marras
RR by Elie Bou-Zeid (20 May 2018)
ED: Publish as is (05 Jun 2018) by Simone Marras
Post-review adjustments
AA: Author's adjustment | EA: Editor approval
AA by Fabien Margairaz on behalf of the Authors (23 Jul 2018)   Author's adjustment   Manuscript
EA: Adjustments approved (30 Jul 2018) by Simone Marras
Publications Copernicus
Download
Short summary
In this project, we compare three different approaches to integrate the fluid-motion equations when applied to solve atmospheric flow dynamics. Differences between the three methods reside in accuracy as well as computational cost. The results illustrate that there is an intermediate solution that performs well in terms of computational cost while at the same time producing good enough results, as long one is not interested in the smallest turbulent scales.
In this project, we compare three different approaches to integrate the fluid-motion equations...
Citation
Share