[RegCNET] RegCM and map projections

[Pir S. Ali]

Dear Suman & RegCNET,



Thank you for your reply and suggesting me Lambert Conformal but Lambert
Conformal projection covers around 45 degrees and my domain is Crossing  45
degrees extent in latitude.



I request RegCNET please comments. Is the map projection also effect the
sensitivity of the model or it is only for display purposes?



With regards,

Ali

On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:46 AM, Suman Maity <suman.buie at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear
> Ali
> This is Suman Maity from Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, India.I
> have got your problem. I don't know about the comparative study but as a
> suggestion as in my case (domain having low and middle latitude) you can
> use Lambert Confomal. I have done language study and taken this decision.
>
> With Regards
> 'S Maity'
> ********************************************************
> Suman Maity*
> Research Scholar
> Center for Ocean, Rivers, Atmosphere and Land Sciences(CORAL)
> Indian Institute Of Technology Kharagpur.
> *
> ******************************************************* *
> *  *
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Pir S. Ali <pirshauki at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear All,
>>
>>
>>
>> I am running RegCM 4.3.3 for the attached model domain with map
>> projection of Rotated Mercator . I read the follow statements in RegCM user
>> guide:
>>
>>
>>
>> • Middle latitudes (around 45 degrees) - Lambert Conformal
>>
>> • Polar latitudes (more than 75 degrees) - Polar Stereographic
>>
>> • Low latitudes (up to 30 degrees and crossing the equator) - Mercator
>>
>> • Crossing more than 45 degrees extent in latitude - Rotated Mercator
>>
>>
>>
>> My domain consist of both Low latitudes and Middle latitudes. Please help
>> me in the following two queries:
>>
>>
>>
>> 1)      Which map projection is the best choice for the attached domain.
>> Lambert Conformal or Rotated Mercator?
>>
>> 2)      Is there any comparative study or research paper on the effect
>> of map projections for a particular domain using RegCM?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> With regards,
>>
>> Ali
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RegCNET mailing list
>> RegCNET at lists.ictp.it
>> https://lists.ictp.it/mailman/listinfo.cgi/regcnet
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ictp.it/pipermail/regcnet/attachments/20120905/255a52ef/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: domain2.png
Type: image/png
Size: 31483 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.ictp.it/pipermail/regcnet/attachments/20120905/255a52ef/attachment-0001.png>