Boundary layer and mixing layer height: Models vs. Ground-based
measurements intercomparison

J 2025

Boundary layer and mixing layer height: Models vs. Ground-based measurements intercomparison

JULAHA, Kajal; Vladimír ŽDÍMAL; Adéla HOLUBOVÁ ŠMEJKALOVÁ; Kateřina KOMÍNKOVÁ; Naděžda ZÍKOVÁ et. al.

Basic information

Original name

Boundary layer and mixing layer height: Models vs. Ground-based measurements intercomparison

Authors

JULAHA, Kajal; Vladimír ŽDÍMAL; Adéla HOLUBOVÁ ŠMEJKALOVÁ; Kateřina KOMÍNKOVÁ (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution) and Naděžda ZÍKOVÁ

Edition

Atmospheric Research, Elsevier Ltd, 2025, 0169-8095

Other information

Language

English

Type of outcome

Article in a journal

Field of Study

10509 Meteorology and atmospheric sciences

Country of publisher

United States of America

Confidentiality degree

is not subject to a state or trade secret

References:

URL

Impact factor

Impact factor: 4.500 in 2023

Organization unit

Faculty of Science

DOI

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2024.107897

UT WoS

001400282600001

EID Scopus

2-s2.0-85213857935

Keywords in English

Boundary layer; Mixing Layer; Ceilometer; Reanalysis; ERA5; HYSPLIT

Abstract

V originále

Detailed characterization of the planetary boundary layer (PBL) and mixing layer height (MLH) is essential for gaining insights into air quality, pollutant dispersion, and the dynamics of the lower atmosphere. This research involves MLH from four atmospheric models—ERA5 (European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts Reanalysis v5), Reanalysis, GDAS (Global Data Assimilation System), and GFS (Global Forecast System), representing diverse approaches commonly applied in atmospheric research, mainly in air quality studies. The intercomparison analyzes the simulated MLH from the models, comparing them with observations from radiosondes and ceilometers to capture diurnal and seasonal variations in boundary layer dynamics. The study reveals significant diurnal and seasonal variations, with a close alignment between ERA5 boundary layer and ceilometer mixing layer observations, Reanalysis consistently underestimating MLH altitude, and both GFS and GDAS models demonstrating reasonable diurnal cycles of MLH. During summer, all models underestimate MLH compared to ceilometer observations by 34–42 %, while in winter, overestimation relative to ceilometer observations ranges from 11 to 20 %. Factors contributing to this discrepancy, including meteorological variables and synoptic situations, were examined. GFS and GDAS tend to overestimate global radiation after 12:00 but underestimate MLH, while ERA5 consistently underestimated both radiation and MLH. Dependence in agreement between models and ceilometer observations was also observed for various synoptic situations. The interconnected nature of atmospheric stability and turbulence, highlighted by Richardson number analysis, further emphasizes the importance of understanding turbulence patterns for accurate MLH predictions.

Links

90230, large research infrastructures

Name: ACTRIS-CZ III

Cite

JULAHA, Kajal; Vladimír ŽDÍMAL; Adéla HOLUBOVÁ ŠMEJKALOVÁ; Kateřina KOMÍNKOVÁ and Naděžda ZÍKOVÁ. Boundary layer and mixing layer height: Models vs. Ground-based measurements intercomparison. Atmospheric Research. Elsevier Ltd, 2025, vol. 315, April, p. 1-12. ISSN 0169-8095. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2024.107897.

@article{2474180,
   author = {Julaha, Kajal and Ždímal, Vladimír and Holubová Šmejkalová, Adéla and Komínková, Kateřina and Zíková, Naděžda},
   article_number = {April},
   doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2024.107897},
   keywords = {Boundary layer; Mixing Layer; Ceilometer; Reanalysis; ERA5; HYSPLIT},
   language = {eng},
   issn = {0169-8095},
   journal = {Atmospheric Research},
   title = {Boundary layer and mixing layer height: Models vs. Ground-based measurements intercomparison},
   url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169809524006793},
   volume = {315},
   year = {2025}
}

TY  - JOUR
ID  - 2474180
AU  - Julaha, Kajal - Ždímal, Vladimír - Holubová Šmejkalová, Adéla - Komínková, Kateřina - Zíková, Naděžda
PY  - 2025
TI  - Boundary layer and mixing layer height: Models vs. Ground-based measurements intercomparison
JF  - Atmospheric Research
VL  - 315
IS  - April
SP  - 1-12
EP  - 1-12
PB  - Elsevier Ltd
SN  - 01698095
KW  - Boundary layer
KW  - Mixing Layer
KW  - Ceilometer
KW  - Reanalysis
KW  - ERA5
KW  - HYSPLIT
UR  - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169809524006793
N2  - Detailed characterization of the planetary boundary layer (PBL) and mixing layer height (MLH) is essential for gaining insights into air quality, pollutant dispersion, and the dynamics of the lower atmosphere. This research involves MLH from four atmospheric models—ERA5 (European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts Reanalysis v5), Reanalysis, GDAS (Global Data Assimilation System), and GFS (Global Forecast System), representing diverse approaches commonly applied in atmospheric research, mainly in air quality studies. The intercomparison analyzes the simulated MLH from the models, comparing them with observations from radiosondes and ceilometers to capture diurnal and seasonal variations in boundary layer dynamics. The study reveals significant diurnal and seasonal variations, with a close alignment between ERA5 boundary layer and ceilometer mixing layer observations, Reanalysis consistently underestimating MLH altitude, and both GFS and GDAS models demonstrating reasonable diurnal cycles of MLH. During summer, all models underestimate MLH compared to ceilometer observations by 34–42 %, while in winter, overestimation relative to ceilometer observations ranges from 11 to 20 %. Factors contributing to this discrepancy, including meteorological variables and synoptic situations, were examined. GFS and GDAS tend to overestimate global radiation after 12:00 but underestimate MLH, while ERA5 consistently underestimated both radiation and MLH. Dependence in agreement between models and ceilometer observations was also observed for various synoptic situations. The interconnected nature of atmospheric stability and turbulence, highlighted by Richardson number analysis, further emphasizes the importance of understanding turbulence patterns for accurate MLH predictions.
ER  -

JULAHA, Kajal; Vladimír ŽDÍMAL; Adéla HOLUBOVÁ ŠMEJKALOVÁ; Kateřina KOMÍNKOVÁ and Naděžda ZÍKOVÁ. Boundary layer and mixing layer height: Models vs. Ground-based measurements intercomparison. \textit{Atmospheric Research}. Elsevier Ltd, 2025, vol.~315, April, p.~1-12. ISSN~0169-8095. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2024.107897.

Přehled o publikaci