NavList:

   

Reply

... when I wrote last night the above comment related to the powers of
temperature and pressure I should have added that I don't understand
(yet) the reason for it. I therefore can't absolutely exclude an
artefact of the calculation itself. However, thanks to Andrew T. Young
the program could be tested beforehand carefully on several less and
more critical bench mark calculations. The more critical cases were
situations just at the edge before ducting occurs and situations with
ducting, this for different observer positions. The results compared
well. We found that the (small) differences we had resulted mainly
from calculating/using gravity slightly different when calculating the
pressure for the different layers. Andy used one same gravity value
for all layers, calculated for an intermediate hight of the atmosphere
(which is for his simulations absolutely sufficient) whereas in my
model the gravity is calculated for an intermediate height within each
layer.

When I dug again in the files which were produced one year ago I
selected "a" set of available graphs without finding out whether they
really corresponded to the latest results found at that time. The aim
was to show you what I meant with exponential behaviour, not more.
It's clear that it would be interesting to understand the reason for
this.

Marcel

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Navigation List archive: www.fer3.com/arc
To post, email NavList@fer3.com
To , email NavList-@fer3.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

   

Reply