Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
12
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
12 results for “LES simulation”
Virtual RHI lidar scans retrieved in high-fidelity wake vortex simulations of landing aircraft under turbulent crosswind conditions - LES Lidar Simulator (LLS)
<p>This dataset contains two types of virtual measurements of multiple pulsed lidar integrated into high-fidelity hybrid RANS-LES wake vortex simulations of a landing Airbus A340 aircraft. Simulations have been performed for four different atmospheric conditions, varying in crosswind and therefore turbulence in the atmosphere.</p> <p>The two lidar simulator types are:</p> <ul> <li>LLS: LES Lidar Simulator (no noise, Signal to Noise Ratio >> 1). The analysis is based on the Range Gate Weighting function (RWF) [based on formulations in for example [1]]. Given the assumption of no instrument noise, no spectral analysis in the frequency domain is required.</li> <li>LLSn: LES Lidar Simulator with noise (realisitic Signal to Noise Ratio). Based on formulations in [2], where non-linear low-pass spatial filters accurately model real field measurements. Both background noise and aerosol noise contained in real lidar measurements are modeled. </li> </ul> <p>Provided are the raw lidar scans in RHI format, with the position and strength of the wake vortices within each lidar scan given by a pressure-vorticity tracking algorithm from the wake vortex simulation (simulation truth, ST). Misidentifications have been removed from the provided dataset. In addition to the labels for each wake vortex lidar scan, also wind background scans are provided for the crosswind simulation cases. These background scans give a better understanding of the prevailing atmospheric condition within which the aircraft lands. </p> <p>Furthermore the evaluation of the LLS scans using the Method of Radial Velocities (RV method) [3], a state-of-the-art wake vortex characterization method for lidar scans is provided for a subset of the LLS dataset. For analysing the impact of the RWF for LLS scans, selected lidar scans are also given in a 'naive' fashion (lidar scans assuming point measurements are possible).</p> <p><strong>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</strong></p> <h3><strong>Overview</strong></h3> <p><strong>In total each dataset (LLS and LLSn) contains 8 Aircraft landing simulation with associated </strong><strong>virtual lidar RHI scans:</strong></p> <ul> <li>2x no wind</li> <li>6x crosswind (specified at height b_0)</li> <li>0.5w_0 from port direction</li> <li>0.5w_0 from starboard direction</li> <li>1.0w_0 from port direction</li> <li>1.0w_0 from starboard direction</li> <li>2.0w_0 from port direction</li> <li>2.0w_0 from starboard direction</li> </ul> <p><strong>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</strong></p> <h3><strong>The dataset has 13 folders:</strong></h3> <div> <p><strong>POS1_POS2_POS8_scans = Individual scans of various simulations as well as background wind scans (no wake vortices). </strong></p> <p>POS1_POS2: 0_0, 0_5, 1_0, 2_0 corresponds to the wind, same as POS1_POS2 below</p> <p>POS8: LLS or LLSn, corresponding to the type of lidar simulator (without or with instrument noise, respectively)</p> </div> <div> </div> <div>Scan naming convention: POS1_POS2_POS3_POS4_POS5_POS6_POS7.csv</div> <div> </div> <div>Example: 0_5_D_248_8_161.2201878198302_168.4201878198237.csv</div> <div> </div> <div> <ul> <li>POS1_POS2: Together they form a factor which is multiplied with the initial descend speed of the wake vortex pair, w_0. The definition for w_0 can be found in [4]. It is common for the crosswind speed to be set according to the multiples of w_0. Due to the landing of the A340 aircraft, and the logarithmic nature of the wind simulation, we set the crosswind at the b_0 altitude of the simulation. For a definition of b_0, also see [4]. For the above example, 0.5w_0 is the crosswind speed. Note that every 26 lidar positions (POS4), the direction of the crosswind changes, if there is a crosswind.</li> </ul> </div> <div> - Crosswind approaches from port side: POS4: 0-25, 52-77, 104-129, 156-181, 208-233, 260-285</div> <div> - Crosswind approaches from starboard side: POS4: 26-51, 78-103, 130-155, 182-207, 234-259, 286-311</div> <div> <ul> <li>POS3: Label indicating which part of the numerical simulation this scan belongs to (a full landing simulation consists of A-D). A: Hybrid RANS-LES, B,C,D: temporal LES (in order). For the above example, D indicates that the lidar scan was recorded during the last part of the simulation. W: Prior to the wake vortex simulations with crosswind, a background wind scan for each lidar position is recorded.</li> </ul> </div> <div> <ul> <li>POS4: Specifies the number of the lidar, implications are the longitudinal position along the glide path of the aircraft. In the packs of lidar positions described in the description of POS1_POS2, the last lidar position is the closest to the touchdown point of the aircraft, smaller lidar positions within this pack are further away (in order) - also see the lid_plane_info directory. Note that the lidar position also adjusts the spectrum of the elevation angles used (and thus the size of the lidar scan). For that see the associated virtual lidar scan raw data. In the above example we have lidar position 248, thus crosswind approaching from starboard and rather mid-way of the longitudinal glide path direction.</li> </ul> </div> <div> <ul> <li>POS5: Specifies the number of the scan for this lidar position (POS4) and simulation (POS1__POS2). In the above example this is scan number 8.</li> </ul> </div> <div> <ul> <li>POS6_POS7: Specifies the simulation time within which the scan was measured during the aircraft landing simulation (POS1__POS2). In the above example this is 161.2201878198302 s to 168.4201878198237 s.</li> </ul> </div> <div>The scans purely with wind, an no wake vortices are stored in an additional directory within conv_scans. The case '0_0' (no wind) does not require wind scans. </div> <div> </div> <div>Within the scan files, we have a four (LLS) or five (LLSn) columns:</div> <div> <ul> <li>t: Simulation time</li> <li>ELE: Elevation angle [deg] of the lidar beam</li> <li>R: Range from lidar [m]</li> <li>v_r: LOS velocity (radial velocity) along lidar beam</li> <li>snr: Signal to Noise Ratio </li> </ul> <p> </p> <p><strong>wind_POS8_scans = Simulated lidar scans of the background wind for LLS and LLSn.</strong></p> <p>POS8: LLS or LLSn, corresponding to the type of lidar simulator (without or with instrument noise, respectively)</p> <p>Scans simulated here are in the same format as <em>POS1_POS2_POS8_scans</em>. Wind scans for point measurement scans are found in <em>naive_scan_subset </em>- the scans with POS4 = 0 should be used if more are available.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>naive_scan_subset = Simulated lidar scans simulating velocity point measurements.</strong></p> </div> <div> <p>The format is the same as for <em>POS1_POS2_POS8_scans</em>, with the difference of being sorted first by wind subdirectories and then lidar number (LID).</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>labels = Labels of wake vortices for the above wake vortex scans. </strong></p> </div> <div>We have 4 main files, where each file represents the targets for one wind strength 0.0w_0, 0.5w_0, 1.0w_0, 2.0w_0.</div> <div>Within the labels files, we have a multitude of columns with different data:</div> <div> <ul> <li>#Time: Simulation (not scan) time.</li> <li>y_uw : lateral position in simulation domain of upwind (port) vortex.</li> <li>z_uw : height position in simulation domain of upwind (port) vortex.</li> <li>y_dw : lateral position in simulation domain of downwind (starboard) vortex.</li> <li>z_dw : height position in simulation domain of downwind (starboard) vortex.</li> <li>G_515_uw: Gamma 515 Circulation strength (see additional notes) of upwind (port) vortex [m^2/s].</li> <li>G_515_dw: Gamma 515 Circulation strength (see additional notes) of downwind (starboard) vortex [m^2/s].</li> <li>cr_uw: Core radius of upwind (port) vortex (in meters).</li> <li>cr_dw: Core radius of downwind (starboard) vortex (in meters).</li> <li>uw distance from lidar [m]: Horizontal distance of upwind (port) vortex from respective lidar.</li> <li>dw distance from lidar [m]: Horizontal distance of downwind (starboard) vortex from respective lidar.</li> <li>uw height [m]: Vertical distance of upwind (port) vortex from respective lidar (floor, as lidars are place at an altitude of 0 m).</li> <li>dw height [m]: Vertical distance of downwind (starboard) vortex from respective lidar (floor, as lidars are place at an altitude of 0 m).</li> <li>vortex age uw [s]: Age of upwind (port) vortex (after first generated by aircraft at respective measurement plane of lidar).</li> <li>vortex age dw [s]: Age of downwind (starboard) vortex (after first generated by aircraft at respective measurement plane of lidar).</li> <li>scan: Associated scan.</li> <li>LID: Associated lidar number.</li> </ul> <p>On top of the summarizing files for each simulation, in the subdirectory <em>individual</em>, the label for each scan is given in a separate file.</p> <p>The above gives information on the simulation truth, furthermore the file <em>labels_with_rv.csv</em> can be found here, where the following extra label columns are given for a subset of scans: [in the following Conv and Naive refer to LLS scans and point measurement scans, respectively]</p> <ul> <li>wind: Strength of crosswind, same as POS1_POS2 in <em>POS1_POS2_scans. </em>The sign corresponds to the wind direction. Negative is a crosswind from the port side of the aircraft, positive is a crosswind from the starboard side of the aircraft.</li> <li>Conv RV: 1 indicates the RV method has been evaluated for LLS scans, 0 if not.</li> <li>Naive RV: 1 indicates the RV method has been evaluated for point measurement scans, 0 if not.</li> <li>conv rv G_515_uw: Gamma 515 Circulation strength (see additional notes) of upwind (port) vortex computed using the RV method on LLS scans [m^2/s].</li> <li>conv rv G_515_dw: Gamma 515 Circulation strength (see additional notes) of downwind (starboard) vortex computed using the RV method on LLS scans [m^2/s].</li> <li>conv rv uw distance from lidar [m]: Horizontal distance of upwind (port) vortex from respective lidar using the RV method on LLS scans.</li> <li>conv rv dw distance from lidar [m]: Horizontal distance of downwind (starboard) vortex from respective lidar using the RV method on LLS scans.</li> <li>conv rv uw height [m]: Vertical distance of upwind (port) vortex from respective lidar (floor, as lidars are place at an altitude of 0 m) using the RV method on LLS scans.</li> <li>conv rv dw height [m]: Vertical distance of downwind (starboard) vortex from respective lidar (floor, as lidars are place at an altitude of 0 m) using the RV method on LLS scans.</li> <li>naive rv G_515_uw: Gamma 515 Circulation strength (see additional notes) of upwind (port) vortex computed using the RV method on point measurement scans [m^2/s].</li> <li>naive rv G_515_dw: Gamma 515 Circulation strength (see additional notes) of downwind (starboard) vortex computed using the RV method on point measurement scans [m^2/s].</li> <li>naive rv uw distance from lidar [m]: Horizontal distance of upwind (port) vortex from respective lidar using the RV method on point measurement scans.</li> <li>naive rv dw distance from lidar [m]: Horizontal distance of downwind (starboard) vortex from respective lidar using the RV method on point measurement scans.</li> <li>naive rv uw height [m]: Vertical distance of upwind (port) vortex from respective lidar (floor, as lidars are place at an altitude of 0 m) using the RV method on point measurement scans.</li> <li>naive rv dw height [m]: Vertical distance of downwind (starboard) vortex from respective lidar (floor, as lidars are place at an altitude of 0 m) using the RV method on point measurement scans.</li> <li>uw phi [deg]: Elevation angle to the center of the upwind (port) vortex from the simulation truth.</li> <li>uw range [m]: Range from the lidar to the center of the upwind (port) vortex from the simulation truth.</li> <li>dw phi [deg]: Elevation angle to the center of the downwind (starboard) vortex from the simulation truth.</li> <li>dw range [m]: Range from the lidar to the center of the downwind (starboard) vortex from the simulation truth.</li> <li>conv rv uw phi [deg]: Elevation angle to the center of the upwind (port) vortex using the RV method on LLS scans.</li> <li>conv rv uw range [m]: Range from the lidar to the center of the upwind (port) vortex using the RV method on LLS scans.</li> <li>conv rv dw phi [deg]: Elevation angle to the center of the downwind (starboard) vortex using the RV method on LLS scans.</li> <li>conv rv dw range [m]: Range from the lidar to the center of the downwind (starboard) vortex using the RV method on LLS scans.</li> <li>naive rv uw phi [deg]: Elevation angle to the center of the upwind (port) vortex using the RV method on point measurement scans.</li> <li>naive rv uw range [m]: Range from the lidar to the center of the upwind (port) vortex using the RV method on point measurement scans.</li> <li>naive rv dw phi [deg]: Elevation angle to the center of the downwind (starboard) vortex using the RV method on point measurement scans.</li> <li>naive rv dw range [m]: Range from the lidar to the center of the downwind (starboard) vortex using the RV method on point measurement scans.</li> <li>y err conv uw [m]: Cartesian localization error (RV minus ST) in y-direction (lateral) between simulation truth and RV method of upwind (port) vortex center on LLS scans.</li> <li>y err conv dw [m]: Cartesian localization error (RV minus ST) in y-direction (lateral) between simulation truth and RV method of downwind (starboard) vortex center on LLS scans.</li> <li>z err conv uw [m]: Cartesian localization error (RV minus ST) in z-direction (vertical) between simulation truth and RV method of upwind (port) vortex center on LLS scans.</li> <li>z err conv dw [m]: Cartesian localization error (RV minus ST) in z-direction (vertical) between simulation truth and RV method of downwind (starboard) vortex center on LLS scans.</li> <li>y err naive uw [m]: Cartesian localization error (RV minus ST) in y-direction (lateral) between simulation truth and RV method of upwind (port) vortex center on point measurement scans.</li> <li>y err naive dw [m]: Cartesian localization error (RV minus ST) in y-direction (lateral) between simulation truth and RV method of downwind (starboard) vortex center on point measurement scans.</li> <li>z err naive uw [m]: Cartesian localization error (RV minus ST) in z-direction (vertical) between simulation truth and RV method of upwind (port) vortex center on point measurement scans.</li> <li>z err naive dw [m]: Cartesian localization error (RV minus ST) in z-direction (vertical) between simulation truth and RV method of downwind (starboard) vortex center on point measurement scans.</li> <li>D err conv uw [m]: Euclidean distance error for the Cartesian coordinates to the vortex center between simulation truth and RV method of upwind (port) vortex center on LLS scans.</li> <li>D err conv dw [m]: Euclidean distance for the Cartesian coordinates to the vortex center between simulation truth and RV method of downwind (starboard) vortex center on LLS scans.</li> <li>D err naive uw [m]: Euclidean distance error for the Cartesian coordinates to the vortex center between simulation truth and RV method of upwind (port) vortex center on point measurement scans.</li> <li>D err naive dw [m]: Euclidean distance for the Cartesian coordinates to the vortex center between simulation truth and RV method of downwind (starboard) vortex center on point measurement scans.</li> <li>plus_minus_phi: Indicates whether a RHI lidar scan features a positive lidar scanning rate (plus), or a negative one (negative).</li> <li>conv err G_515_uw: Circulation error (RV minus ST) between simulation truth and RV method of upwind (port) on LLS scans [m^2/s]. </li> <li>conv err G_515_dw: Circulation error (RV minus ST) between simulation truth and RV method of downwind (starboard) on LLS scans [m^2/s]. </li> <li>naive err G_515_uw: Circulation error (RV minus ST) between simulation truth and RV method of upwind (port) on point measurement scans [m^2/s]. </li> <li>naive err G_515_dw: Circulation error (RV minus ST) between simulation truth and RV method of downwind (starboard) on point measurement scans [m^2/s]. </li> <li>conv err uw phi: Elevation angle error (RV minus ST) between simulation truth and RV method of upwind (port) vortex center on LLS scans [deg].</li> <li>conv err dw phi: Elevation angle error (RV minus ST) between simulation truth and RV method of downwind (starboard) vortex center on LLS scans [deg].</li> <li>naive err uw phi: Elevation angle error (RV minus ST) between simulation truth and RV method of upwind (port) vortex center on LLS scans [deg].</li> <li>naive err dw phi: Elevation angle error (RV minus ST) between simulation truth and RV method of downwind (starboard) vortex center on point measurement scans [deg].</li> <li>conv err uw range: Range from lidar error (RV minus ST) between simulation truth and RV method of upwind (port) vortex center on LLS scans [m].</li> <li>conv err dw range: Range from lidar error (RV minus ST) between simulation truth and RV method of downwind (starboard) vortex center on LLS scans [m].</li> <li>naive err uw range: Range from lidar error (RV minus ST) between simulation truth and RV method of upwind (port) vortex center on point measurement scans [m].</li> <li>naive err dw range: Range from lidar error (RV minus ST) between simulation truth and RV method of downwind (starboard) vortex center on point measurement scans [m].</li> </ul> <p><em>0_0_movement.csv</em> gives insight on the vertical movement on selected vortices in selected lidar scans of the 0_0 wind case. </p> <p>The following data columns exist within the file (note csv file with ; separator):</p> <ul> <li>Str_dw: Vertical movement of the downwind (starboard) vortex, 0 is neutral, -1 is downward, and 1 is upward.</li> <li>Prt_uw: Vertical movement of the upwind (port) vortex, 0 is neutral, -1 is downward, and 1 is upward.</li> <li>scan_code: Identfies associated lidar scan with POS3_POS4_POS5 as in <em>POS1_POS2_scans.</em></li> </ul> <p> </p> <p><strong>lid_plane_info = Additional guidance on the simulated lidars.</strong></p> <p>Each simulation case has a separate file due to minimal ground speed changes of the aircraft. </p> <p>The following data columns exist within each file:</p> <ul> <li>Index: Gives the lidar number corresponding to POS4 and LID.</li> <li>Plane Pos [x]: Gives the longitudinal position of the lidar with respect to the glide path of the aircraft in meters.</li> <li>time plane passed [s]: Gives the simulation time when the aircraft first passes the measurement plane (related to the previous column.</li> <li>height plane passed [m]: Aircraft altitude at the respective lidar positon.</li> <li>lateral position lidar from GP [m]: Lateral position of the lidar from the glide path of the aircraft.</li> </ul> <p><strong>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</strong></p> </div> <h3>Additional Notes: </h3> <div> <ul> <li>Gamma 515 circulation [4]: The Gamma 515 circulation is the averaged circulation of a vortex evaluated at radii 5-15m from the vortex center. </li> </ul> </div> <div> <div> <ul> <li>Lidar scans may contain 2 or 1 vortex. In the case of 1 vortex, the other has G_515_?? set to nan. Note that the position may still available in the labels data sets, but only vortices with available G_515_?? values should be used.</li> <li>The upwind and downwind definitions should purely be taken as names, rather than physical meaning. The names are derived from the simulation, due to mirroring and other post-processing these can be misleading however.</li> </ul> </div> </div> <div><strong>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</strong></div> <div> <p><strong>Funding</strong>: This dataset was generated within the mFUND <a href="https://bmdv.bund.de/SharedDocs/DE/Artikel/DG/mfund-projekte/kiwi.html">KIWI project</a> funded by the Federal Ministry for Digital and Transportation Germany and the DLR undertaking "Wetter und Disruptive Ereignisse".</p> <p><strong>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</strong></p> <p><strong>Acknowledgements:</strong></p> <p>The necessary RANS simulations were performed as part of the EU-funded AWIATOR by DLR's Institute of Aerodynamics and Flow Technology.</p> <p>We acknowledge Airbus for the allowance to use the RANS data.</p> <p>The LES was performed with the incompressible Navier-Stokes code MGLET [5] and kindly provided by the Technical University of Munich, Hydromechanics.</p> <p>The wake vortex simulations were computed on the high performance computer SuperMUC-NG by Leibniz-Rechenzentrum (LRZ).</p> </div> <div><strong>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</strong></div> <div> </div> <div><strong>References</strong>: </div> <div> </div> <div>[1] Robey, Rachel, and Julie K. Lundquist. "Behavior and mechanisms of Doppler wind lidar error in varying stability regimes." <em>Atmospheric Measurement Techniques</em> 15.15 (2022): 4585-4622.</div> <div> </div> <div>[2] Stephan, Anton, Norman Wildmann, and Igor Smalikho. "Effectiveness of the MFAS Method for Determining the Wind Velocity Vector from Windcube 200s Lidar Measurements." <em>Atmospheric and Oceanic Optics</em> 32.5 (2019): 555-563.</div> <div> </div> <div>[3] Smalikho, Igor., et al. "Method of radial velocities for the estimation of aircraft wake vortex parameters from data measured by coherent Doppler lidar." <em>Optics Express</em> 23.19 (2015): A1194-A1207.</div> <div> </div> <div>[4] Gerz, Thomas, Frank Holzäpfel, and Denis Darracq. "Commercial aircraft wake vortices." <em>Progress in Aerospace Sciences</em> 38.3 (2002): 181-208. </div> <div> </div> <div>[5] Manhart, Michael. "A zonal grid algorithm for DNS of turbulent boundary layers." <em>Computers & fluids</em> 33.3 (2004): 435-461.</div>
Case simulation: LES RF20 composite case
<p>This dataset contains the model configuration files and selected output data of the large-eddy simulation experiments as described in the publication: "Aerosol-cloud-turbulence interactions in well-coupled Arctic<br> boundary layers over open water"</p>
Storm-scale and fine-scale boundary layer structures of tropical cyclones simulated with the WRF-LES framework
<p>The numerical simulations were carried out on the Tianhe Supercomputer, China. The TCBL data used in this study are uploaded here. Due to the large number, the original simulation data are available on request (liuqy@cma.gov.cn or liguangwu@fudan.edu.cn).</p>
LES-DPM simulation dataset for oscillatory flow over a mobile, rippled bed
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Liquid water content and vertical velocity from RICO-based LES simulations
<p>The RICO-based simulations by implementing the LES module of WRF model 4.0 generate the raw data. The simulation continued for 40 hours with a time step of 0.5 second. The domain size is 12.8×12.8×4 km<sup>3</sup>, with a resolution of 50 m and 40 m in the horizontal and vertical orientation, respectively. The outputs during 8~40 hour were retained every 20 minutes. Two parameters (LWC and vertical velocity) were then extracted by using MATLAB to create the following dataset. Additionally, LWC at 1 min before each moment was also uploaded for tracking. The "q" and "w" in the filename represent LWC and vertical velocity, respectively, and the number in the filename represents the corresponding hour and minute (e.g. "q24_20" means LWC value at 24h20m). The unit of "q" and "w" are "kg/kg" and "m/s' respectively.</p>
Data for "Cloud thinning in the mixed-phase regime as geoengineering concept" : Satellite data, ICON-LES simulations, and ECHAM-HAM simulations
<p><br> This repository contains:</p> <p>- Satellite product combination: Used to evaluate the cloud radiative effect of mixed-phase regime clouds.</p> <p>- ICON-LES simulations: Mixed-phase stratocumulus deck during M-PACE simulated with artificial droplet freezing.<br> - ref: reference.<br> - 0P1Nd:1% per hour<br> - 0P01Nd:0.1% per hour<br> - 0P001Nd:0.01% per hour</p> <p>- ECHAM-HAM 2-year simulations: Different scenarios with enhanced droplet freezing and with seeding concentrations of dust ice-nucleating particles.<br> - ori: reference<br> - ABS_1e4: 1e1 per Liter<br> - ABS_1e8: 1e5 per Liter<br> - CDNCx1e_7: 1e-4% per hour<br> - CDNCx1e_0 : 1e3% per hour</p> <p>- ECHAM-HAM 25-year simulations of Mixed-phase regime Cloud Thinning (MCT) including a mixed-layer ocean.<br> - ori: reference<br> - CDNCx1e_3: SEED simulation</p>
Reference LES Simulations for Ocean Models Validation
<p>All Large-Eddy Simulations (LES) computations are conducted with the open-source PALM solver (<a href="https://palm.muk.uni-hannover.de/trac">https://palm.muk.uni-hannover.de/trac</a>) and version 5.0 of the Los Alamos National Laboratory (<a href="https://github.com/lanl/palm_lanl">https://github.com/lanl/palm_lanl</a>) branch. The simulations use a cubical domain with length L=128m, three grid resolutions (N=128<sup>3</sup>, 256<sup>3</sup>, or 512<sup>3</sup>), and mimic four single-column canonical oceanic regimes in which the surface flux and background stratification profiles are imposed. These simulations are named cooling (c), stratification (s), evaporation (e), and mixed (m):</p> <ul> <li><strong>cooling cases</strong> test different surface heat fluxes: Q<sub>h</sub>=-1.185x10<sup>-5</sup> (c<sub>01</sub>), -2.371x10<sup>-5</sup> (c<sub>02</sub>), -4.742x10<sup>-5</sup> (c<sub>04</sub>), and -18.966x10<sup>-5</sup> (c<sub>16</sub>) [K.m/s]. The background stratification is set through a vertical temperature gradient (T<sub>z</sub>) equal to 0.1 [K/m], and both the salinity surface flux (Q<sub>s</sub>) and the background stratification due to vertical salinity gradient (S<sub>z</sub>) are equal to zero.</li> <li><strong>stratification cases</strong> are similar to the cooling c<sub>02</sub> case, but Q<sub>h</sub>=-2.371x10<sup>-5</sup> [K.m/s], and T<sub>z</sub>=0.01 (s<sub>01</sub>), 0.1 (s<sub>10</sub>), or 0.2 (s<sub>20</sub>) [K/m].</li> <li><strong>evaporation cases</strong> define Q<sub>h</sub>=T<sub>z</sub>=0, S<sub>z</sub>=-0.025 [PSU/m], and Q<sub>s</sub>=3.115x10<sup>-6</sup> (e<sub>01</sub>) or 1.225x10<sup>-5</sup> (e<sub>04</sub>) [PSU/(m<sup>2</sup>.s)].</li> <li><strong>mixed cases</strong> combine heat and salinity surface fluxes, and the background stratification is imposed by both vertical temperature and salinity gradients. There are four mixed cases in which Q<sub>h</sub>=-1.185x10<sup>-6</sup> [K.m/s], T<sub>z</sub>=0.05 [K/m], S<sub>z</sub>=-0.025 [PSU/m], and Q<sub>s</sub> is either 0 (m<sub>01</sub>), 3.115x10<sup>-6</sup> (m<sub>02</sub>), 9.10x10<sup>-6</sup> (m<sub>03</sub>), or 4.55x10<sup>-5</sup> (m<sub>04</sub>) [PSU/(m<sup>2</sup>.s)].</li> </ul> <p>The simulations run 96h at a latitude of 43.29<sup>o</sup>, and utilize a linear equation of state where the reference temperature and salinity are 293.15 K and 35 PSU. The subgrid turbulent scales are modeled through the Moeng and Wyngaard SGS closure (see PALM documentation), and the flow is perturbed during the first 150 s of simulation with normally distributed fluctuations with a maximum amplitude of 10<sup>-4</sup>. The dataset provides 1D and 3D statistics. The 1D profiles are time-averaged during 3600 s and written every 3600 s. The 3D fields are not time-averaged and written every 3600 s, except those obtained with the grid having 512<sup>3</sup> points. In this case, the data are written every 21,600 s. The 3D fields are not in the tar file but can be requested by emailing the authors (fmsoarespereira@lanl.gov). The PALM input decks of the simulations are included in the shared files.<br> <br> <strong>Note:</strong> the PALM version used in this work requires the 1D salinity flux profiles to be normalized by the product of N<sub>x </sub>and<sub> </sub>N<sub>y </sub>(number of grid points in x and y)</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>LA-UR-22-32996</strong></p>
Liquid water content and vertical velocity from RICO-based LES simulations
<p>The RICO-based simulations by implementing the LES module of WRF model 4.0 generate the raw data. The simulation continued for 40 hours with a time step of one second. The domain size is 12.8×12.8×4 km3, with a resolution of 100 m and 40 m in the horizontal and vertical orientation, respectively. The outputs during 8~40 hour were retained every 10 minutes. Two parameters (LWC and vertical velocity) were then extracted by using MATLAB to create the following dataset. The "q" and "w" in the filename represent LWC and vertical velocity, respectively, and the "a"~"e" in the filename represents the corresponding minute in each hour (e.g. "q24a" means LWC value at 24h10m). The unit of "q" and "w" are "kg/kg" and "m/s' respectively. </p>
Air parcels extracted from LES simulations of a deep convective cloud observed during DC3 field campaign
<p>The dataset consists of 500 files describing air parcels retrieved from the simulation of the deep convective cloud event observed on May 29, 2012, during the DC3 field campaign. Values for coordinate (X, Y, Z), velocity components (U, V, W), potential temperature (PTIL), total water content (QT), water vapor (QV), condensate density (QC), precipitation density (QR), net precipitation change (QR_FLUX), relative humidity (RH), buoyancy (BUOY), temperature (T), pressure (P), resolved TKE (KRES), SGS TKE (SGS_TKE), turbulent diffusion (TDIFF) are provided for each parcel at every time step of the simulation.</p>
Mobile flux plane dataset for the paper Evaluating the Mobile Flux Plane (MFP) Method to Estimate Methane Emissions using Large Eddy Simulations (LES)"
<p>This dataset contains the mobile flux planes generated from the WRF-LES simulations at the sampling distances of 10m, 20m, 30m, 40m, 50m, 75m, 100m, 125m, and 150m downwind of different well pads. Each flux plane is 400 m long and 1 km high with 81 vertical levels. </p>
Liquid water content and vertical velocity from RICO-based LES simulations
<p>The RICO-based simulations by implementing the LES module of WRF model 4.0 generate the raw data. The simulation continued for 40 hours with a time step of 0.5 second. The domain size is 12.8×12.8×4 km<sup>3</sup>, with a resolution of 50 m and 40 m in the horizontal and vertical orientation, respectively. The outputs during 8~40 hour were retained every 20 minutes. Two parameters (LWC and vertical velocity) were then extracted by using MATLAB to create the following dataset. Additionally, LWC at 1 min before each moment was also uploaded for tracking. The "q" and "w" in the filename represent LWC and vertical velocity, respectively, and the number in the filename represents the corresponding hour and minute (e.g. "q24_20" means LWC value at 24h20m). The unit of "q" and "w" are "kg/kg" and "m/s' respectively.</p>
The trajectories of deep convective cloud air parcels over Manaus, Brazil simulated by MIMICA LES / CRM
<p>The dataset contains trajectories of the deep convective clouds simulated with MIMICA code based on soundings retrieved on April 8, 2020, April 23, 2020, and April 27, 2020, over Manaus, Brazil.</p> <p><br> OUTPUT folder contains all 500 air parcel trajectories retrieved from MIMICA.<br> OUTPUT_MEAN folder contains all the bin averaged parcels</p> <p>Parcel data contains values for coordinate (X, Y, Z), velocity components (U, V, W), potential temperature (PTIL), total water content (QT), water vapor (QV), condensate density (QC), precipitation density (QR), net precipitation change (QR_FLUX), relative humidity (RH), buoyancy (BUOY), temperature (T), pressure (P), resolved TKE (KRES), SGS TKE (SGS_TKE), turbulent diffusion (TDIFF) are provided for each parcel at every time step of the simulation.</p>
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.