Extended Abstract

G33. ConclusionsThe 30km resolution ETA/SMN model was compared with 10km and nonhydrostatic one in terms of their climatology in the high precipitation categoriesto asses the value added with later. Results show significant differencesbetween models. In particular the High resolution model shows ability inactivation the convection that results in higher precipitation amounts whenconvective systems where present. Both resolution and hydrostaticity might playa significant role in activating convection, which cannot be assessed in thisstudy but it can be inferred that hydrotaticity plays a major role in intensifyingthe system (as shown figure 3).The value added with the high resolution model was subjectively evaluated,showing that much improvement could be obtained in the forecasts. Betterperformance in all precipitation categories was shown but in particular in higherbins. When dry conditions are present both models have similar skills.4. ReferencesCiappesoni, H.H., y R. Valdivieso: Verificación de los Pronósticos Públicos y delModelo ETA/SMN del Servicio Meteorológico Nacional Argentino durante elaño 2003 Y 2004. Congremet IX, 2005.Suaya, M., y R. Valdivieso, 2009: Modelo ETA SMN 2003-2008 - usos,experiencias y resultados. Congremet X/Climet XII, 2009.Weisman Morris L., and coauthors: Experiences with 0–36-h Explicit ConvectiveForecasts with the WRF-ARW Model. Weather and Forecasting, June 2008,vol. 23, 407-437.Xue, M, and Coauthors, 2001: The Advanced Regional Prediction System(ARPS)—A multi-scale nonhydrostatic atmospheric simulation and predictiontool. Part II: Model physics and applications. Meteor. Atmos. Phys., 76, 1435-356-