Just turn
on subgrid positioning and get things just right with the grid you've already got.
Principal changes in the physics in the current version of the model are use of a step - mountain C - grid atmospheric vertical coordinate [109], addition of a drag in the grid - scale momentum equation in both atmosphere and ocean based
on subgrid topography variations, and inclusion of realistic ocean tides based on exact positioning of the Moon and Sun.
Not exact matches
Iorio, J.P., et al., 2004: Effects of model resolution and
subgrid scale physics
on the simulation of precipitation in the continental United States.
I will try to give some insight into the reasons behind this success, focusing in particular
on the importance of
subgrid models and the associated limitations.
The results may depend
on tons of parameters like the computer speed and numerical accuracy, the initial conditions, the
subgrid parametrization, the adjustment routines (mass and energy is not necessarily conserved between t and t + dt because of numerical errors) etc..
If you don't have a strong handle
on numerical error, parameter estimation for the many
subgrid models you have is really little better than guessing.
I have also studied, for example, the effects of snow grain shape
on the reflection of solar radiation by snow, and the effects of
subgrid - scale cloud features (clouds too small to be resolved by a climate model)
on radiative transfer.
I used
subgrid positioning
on Nova Launcher to arrange my home screen icons in a gently slanted grid.