Home page  
Home   Your Room   Login   Contact   Feedback   Site Map   Search:  
Discover this product  
About Us
Overview
Getting here
Committees
Products
Forecasts
Order Data
Order Software
Services
Computing
Archive
PrepIFS
Research
Modelling
Reanalysis
Seasonal
Publications
Newsletters
Manuals
Library
News&Events
Calendar
Employment
Open Tenders
   
Home > Research > Ifsdocs > PHYSICS >  
 

DYNAMICS

IFS documentation Front Page


Table of contents

Chapter 1. Introduction

Chapter 2. Basic equations and discretization

Chapter 3. Semi-Lagrangian formulation

Chapter 4. Computational details

REFERENCES
 

  Next Section
Previous Section


4.4 Analysis of CPU time




In developing a high-resolution spectral model, the cost of the transforms (particularly the Legendre transforms) may be a cause for concern (e.g. Côté and Staniforth, 1990). In the case of a semi-Lagrangian model, it is clearly important that the gain obtained through the use of longer time steps is not outweighed by the extra cost of the semi-Lagrangian scheme. In view of these concerns, it is of interest to analyse the CPU time required for our model. Table 4.1 shows the percentage breakdown for the Eulerian version, for the fully interpolating semi-Lagrangian scheme and for the vertically non-interpolating scheme, at T213/L31 resolution.


Table 4.1 Analysis of CPU time (%)

Eulerian
Fully interpolating semi-Lagrangian
Vertically non-interpolating semi-Lagrangian
Dynamics
21
15
17
Physics
53
42
45
FFT
6
3
4
Legendre
transforms
20
13
14
Semi-Lagrangian

27
20



This analysis suggests that the spectral method is still perfectly viable at this resolution, and that considerably higher resolutions can be achieved before the cost of the transforms becomes a matter for serious concern. The overhead of the semi-Lagrangian scheme, particularly the non-interpolating version, is also quite modest; for the present resolution it permits a timestep of 15 minutes compared with 3 minutes for the Eulerian version, and the resulting reduction in the CPU time for the forecast is about a factor of four. The semi-Lagrangian overhead is in fact slightly less than suggested by the figures in Table , since there is a simultaneous reduction in the number of transforms compared with the Eulerian scheme. Comparing the two variants of the semi-Lagrangian scheme, the overall CPU time for the non-interpolating version is 8.5% less than that for the fully interpolating version.





Next Section
Previous Section



 

Top of page 08.04.2002
 
   Page Details         © ECMWF
shim shim shim