English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

. Dust aerosol plays an important role in the radiative budget andhydrological cycle, but large uncertainties remain for simulating dustemission and dry deposition processes in models. In this study, weinvestigated dust simulation sensitivity to two dust emission schemes andthree dry deposition schemes for a severe dust storm during May 2017 overEast Asia using the Weather Research and Forecasting model coupled withchemistry (WRF-Chem). Results showed that simulated dust loading is verysensitive to different dry deposition schemes, with the relative differencein dust loading using different dry deposition schemes ranging from20 %–116 %. Two dust emission schemes are found to produce significantlydifferent spatial distributions of dust loading. The difference in drydeposition velocity in different dry deposition schemes comes from theparameterization of collection efficiency from impaction and rebound effect.An optimal combination of dry deposition scheme and dust emission scheme hasbeen identified to best simulate the dust storm in comparison withobservation. The optimal dry deposition scheme accounts for the reboundeffect and its collection efficiency from impaction changes with the landuse categories and therefore has a better physical treatment of drydeposition velocity. Our results highlight the importance of dry depositionschemes for dust simulation.

WRF-Chem v3.9 simulations of the East Asian dust storm in May 2017: modeling sensitivities to dust emission and dry deposition schemes