How To Model An Ac Cloud



Similar documents
Description of zero-buoyancy entraining plume model

Using Cloud-Resolving Model Simulations of Deep Convection to Inform Cloud Parameterizations in Large-Scale Models

An economical scale-aware parameterization for representing subgrid-scale clouds and turbulence in cloud-resolving models and global models

Evalua&ng Downdra/ Parameteriza&ons with High Resolu&on CRM Data

Unified Cloud and Mixing Parameterizations of the Marine Boundary Layer: EDMF and PDF-based cloud approaches

Trimodal cloudiness and tropical stable layers in simulations of radiative convective equilibrium

A Review on the Uses of Cloud-(System-)Resolving Models

Frank and Charles Cohen Department of Meteorology The Pennsylvania State University University Park, PA, U.S.A.

Dutch Atmospheric Large-Eddy Simulation Model (DALES v3.2) CGILS-S11 results

Continental and Marine Low-level Cloud Processes and Properties (ARM SGP and AZORES) Xiquan Dong University of North Dakota

Comparison of the Vertical Velocity used to Calculate the Cloud Droplet Number Concentration in a Cloud-Resolving and a Global Climate Model

What the Heck are Low-Cloud Feedbacks? Takanobu Yamaguchi Rachel R. McCrary Anna B. Harper

Diurnal Cycle of Convection at the ARM SGP Site: Role of Large-Scale Forcing, Surface Fluxes, and Convective Inhibition

MICROPHYSICS COMPLEXITY EFFECTS ON STORM EVOLUTION AND ELECTRIFICATION

Chapter 6: Cloud Development and Forms

Large Eddy Simulation (LES) & Cloud Resolving Model (CRM) Françoise Guichard and Fleur Couvreux

SPOOKIE: The Selected Process On/Off Klima Intercomparison Experiment

Long-term Observations of the Convective Boundary Layer (CBL) and Shallow cumulus Clouds using Cloud Radar at the SGP ARM Climate Research Facility

Developing Continuous SCM/CRM Forcing Using NWP Products Constrained by ARM Observations

The formation of wider and deeper clouds through cold-pool dynamics

GCMs with Implicit and Explicit cloudrain processes for simulation of extreme precipitation frequency

A new positive cloud feedback?

Lecture 3. Turbulent fluxes and TKE budgets (Garratt, Ch 2)

Parameterization of Cumulus Convective Cloud Systems in Mesoscale Forecast Models

1D shallow convective case studies and comparisons with LES

Turbulence-microphysics interactions in boundary layer clouds

Convective Clouds. Convective clouds 1

Chapter 6 - Cloud Development and Forms. Interesting Cloud

Month-Long 2D Cloud-Resolving Model Simulation and Resultant Statistics of Cloud Systems Over the ARM SGP

Mass flux fluctuation in a cloud resolving simulation with diurnal forcing

The impact of parametrized convection on cloud feedback.

Evaluation of precipitation simulated over mid-latitude land by CPTEC AGCM single-column model

Improving Low-Cloud Simulation with an Upgraded Multiscale Modeling Framework

Usama Anber 1, Shuguang Wang 2, and Adam Sobel 1,2,3

Turbulent mixing in clouds latent heat and cloud microphysics effects

Convective Vertical Velocities in GFDL AM3, Cloud Resolving Models, and Radar Retrievals

Cloud Thickness Estimation from GOES-8 Satellite Data Over the ARM-SGP Site

Cloud Development and Forms. LIFTING MECHANISMS 1. Orographic 2. Frontal 3. Convergence 4. Convection. Orographic Cloud. The Orographic Cloud

Not all clouds are easily classified! Cloud Classification schemes. Clouds by level 9/23/15

Fundamentals of Climate Change (PCC 587): Water Vapor

Stability and Cloud Development. Stability in the atmosphere AT350. Why did this cloud form, whereas the sky was clear 4 hours ago?

Formation & Classification

T.A. Tarasova, and C.A.Nobre

Measurement of the effect of biomass burning aerosol on inhibition of cloud formation over the Amazon

Analysis of Cloud Variability and Sampling Errors in Surface and Satellite Measurements

Total radiative heating/cooling rates.

E- modeling Of The Arctic Cloud System

TOPIC: CLOUD CLASSIFICATION

Clouds and Convection

Turbulence in Continental Stratocumulus, Part I: External Forcings and Turbulence Structures

Climate Models: Uncertainties due to Clouds. Joel Norris Assistant Professor of Climate and Atmospheric Sciences Scripps Institution of Oceanography

Improvement in the Assessment of SIRS Broadband Longwave Radiation Data Quality

The Effect of Droplet Size Distribution on the Determination of Cloud Droplet Effective Radius

Cloud/Hydrometeor Initialization in the 20-km RUC Using GOES Data

Observed Cloud Cover Trends and Global Climate Change. Joel Norris Scripps Institution of Oceanography

The Next Generation Flux Analysis: Adding Clear-Sky LW and LW Cloud Effects, Cloud Optical Depths, and Improved Sky Cover Estimates

Assessing Cloud Spatial and Vertical Distribution with Infrared Cloud Analyzer

Clouds. A simple scientific explanation for the weather-curious. By Kira R. Erickson

Limitations of Equilibrium Or: What if τ LS τ adj?

Sensitivity of Surface Cloud Radiative Forcing to Arctic Cloud Properties

Harvard wet deposition scheme for GMI

This chapter discusses: 1. Definitions and causes of stable and unstable atmospheric air. 2. Processes that cause instability and cloud development

Assessing the performance of a prognostic and a diagnostic cloud scheme using single column model simulations of TWP ICE

Evaluating the Impact of Cloud-Aerosol- Precipitation Interaction (CAPI) Schemes on Rainfall Forecast in the NGGPS

Number of activated CCN as a key property in cloud-aerosol interactions. Or, More on simplicity in complex systems

Impact of microphysics on cloud-system resolving model simulations of deep convection and SpCAM

Evaluation of the Effect of Upper-Level Cirrus Clouds on Satellite Retrievals of Low-Level Cloud Droplet Effective Radius

Transcription:

Development of an Elevated Mixed Layer Model for Parameterizing Altocumulus Cloud Layers S. Liu and S. K. Krueger Department of Meteorology University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah Introduction Altocumulus (Ac) clouds play an important role in the earth s energy budget through their effects on solar and infrared radiation, yet they are typically too thin to be vertically resolved in global climate models. Ac layers have been either neglected or implicitly represented through a "fractional cloudiness" scheme in climate models (Randall et al. 1989). Since such schemes are empirically rather than physically based, they are not suitable for climate change prediction. Radiosonde measurements and our cloud-resolving model (CRM) simulations indicate that Ac layers are approximately well-mixed (Liu and Krueger 1996). This suggested that Ac layers may be parameterized using an elevated mixed layer model (MLM). In this paper, we report on the development and testing of an elevated MLM for Ac. This is a step toward incorporating a physically based parameterization for thin Ac layers into a general circulation model. First, we introduce the CRM and Ac MLM. Then, we briefly discuss a cloud water snapshot of the Ac layer. Finally, we compare some cloud characteristics from the CRM and Ac MLM simulations in order to test the MLM. Description of Models The CRM is based on the 2D (x-z) anelastic set of equations. It includes the hydrostatic, continuity, vorticity, thermodynamic, and total water equations. The CRM also includes a third-moment turbulence closure, a turbulence-scale condensation scheme, a bulk microphysics parameterization, and an advanced radiative transfer code. Neither ice-phase nor precipitation is considered in this study. The CRM is more fully described in Krueger (1988), Xu and Krueger (1991), and Krueger et al. (1995a,b). The radiative transfer parameterization used in the CRM is described in Fu (1991), Fu and Liou (1992), and Krueger et al. (1995a,b). The mixed layer prognostic equations for elevated Ac mixedlayer moist static energy h M, total water mixing ratio q wm, top height z T, and base height z B are described in Liu and Krueger (1996). The turbulent fluxes of moisture static energy h and total water mixing ratio q w at the Ac layer boundaries are also described in the above reference. To close the MLM, the entrainment velocities must be parameterized based on assumptions about the turbulent structure of the mixed layer. We use a closure which is based on the entrainment parameterization of Turton and Nicholls (TN 1987). The entrainment velocity at the mixed layer top is s v z c A w et ' (z T &z b ))s vt m zt zb wnsn v dz BIR' IzC z (wnsn B v ) dz < BIR I z max, T z (wnsn C v ) dz )s vt where is the virtual dry static energy and is the jump in s v across the upper inversion layer. We set the constant A=2.5. We do not directly determine w eb. Instead, we use TN s decoupling condition: z B BIR max BIR max where is the height of the cloud base, and is a negative constant representing the maximum allowable turbulent kinetic energy loss due to buoyant consumption. As the mixed-layer top rises due to entrainment, must typically also rise to prevent BIR from falling below. Simulations and Results The profiles of potential temperature 2 and water vapor mixing ratio q v we used to simulate a thick cloud and a thin cloud are similar to those used by Starr and Cox (SC 1985b). These are shown in Figures 1a and 1b, respectively. 227

To initiate motions, random perturbations in potential temperature are used. The maximum initial magnitude of the perturbations is 0.1 K. The resulting surface turbulent flux is near zero. The solar radiation for these cases is zero, corresponding to nocturnal conditions. The total simulation time is 6 hours. In Figure 2, the simulated field of liquid water mixing ratio q c for the thick cloud simulation at t = 1 hour is displayed. Figure 1. Initial profiles of (a) potential temperature and (b) water vapor mixing ratio for a thin and a thick cloud of CRM simulations. Figure 2. Contour plot of the cloud water mixing ratio (g/kg) at time t = 1 hour for the thick cloud of CRM simulations. This q snapshot is typical of both simulations. There are sevc eral cells, or regions of larger q, which are due to updrafts. c The model domain is 6.4 km long and 8.9 km high. The hori- As there is not a mixed layer in the initial profiles used for the zontal grid interval is 100 m, while the vertical grid interval is CRM simulations, we use the profiles from the last 5 minutes 1 km from surface to 5 km, 500 m from 5 to 5.5 km, and 50 m of the first hour of the CRM simulations as the initial from 5.5 to 8.9 km. The time step is 5 seconds. For the thick conditions for the MLM simulations. For the moist static cloud simulations, 2 and q v from 5.5 km to 8.9 km are energy and total water mixing ratio at the inversion top initialized the same as in SC. As the thick cloud depth is (assumed to be 50 m above the mixed layer top), we use the thicker than the normal Ac cloud depth, we also simulated a following linear relations derived from the CRM simulations: thin cloud for which the initial supersaturation region is half of the thick cloud. 228

h T+(J/kg) = 3.84131z + 284574 q wt+(g/kg) = -4-1.12565 x 10 z + 1.11125 for the thick cloud h T+(J/kg) = 3.53798z + 287848 q wt+(g/kg) = -4-2.29849 x 10 z + 0.993865 for the thin cloud, where z is the height in meters. The radiation code used in the MLM is the same as the one used in the CRM. In order to calculate the radiative fluxes within the cloud layer, we divide it into twenty equal layers. We fixed the total number of levels above and below the mixed layer for convenience. The value of BIR used in the MLM simulations is its max average value in the CRM simulations between 1 and 6 hours. It is 0.0266 for the thin-cloud simulation and 0.0199 for the thick-cloud simulation. These values are about a tenth the size of the values used by TN and Bretherton and Wyant (1997) for the STBL. The simulated Ac layers rise due to entrainment at cloud top and detrainment at the mixed layer base. Figures 3a and 3b show that in the simulations, the cloud top entrainment -1 velocity decreases slowly and its values are between 1-3 cm. The evolution of the LWP for the CRM and MLM simulations of thin and thick Ac cloud layers is compared in Figures 4a and 4b, respectively. In the MLM simulation of the thin cloud, the LWP decreases about 30% during the first 2 hours, then becomes steady. However, in the corresponding CRM simulation, the LWP remains near its initial value. In the MLM simulation of the thick cloud, the LWP remains close to its initial value, while it decreases by nearly 40% during the CRM simulation. It is interesting that the LWP reached a quasi-steady value in both MLM simulations. The agreement between the LWPs from the MLM and the CRM simulations is only fair. However, it is difficult to predict this quantity accurately. For example, the range of LWP at the end of 2- hour-long simulations of a stratocumulus-topped boundary layer (STBL) by six 1-D models and ten large-eddy simulation (LES) codes was about equal to the average LWP (Bechtold et al. 1996). Summary We have developed and tested an elevated MLM for Ac. The Ac MLM uses a method for determining the entrainment rate at the mixed layer top that is used in many MLMs of the STBL. At the mixed layer base, the Ac mixed-layer model detrains at a rate that keeps BIR, the ratio of buoyant Figure 3. Evolution of cloud base and top heights, and Ac mixed layer base for (a) the thin cloud and (b) the thick clouds of the CRM and MLM simulations, respectively. consumption of turbulent kinetic energy in the subcloud layer to buoyant production in the cloud layer, equal to BIR max. This approach is based on that used by Turton and Nicholls (1987) in their multiple mixed layer model. The numerical value of BIR max determined from CRM simulations of Ac layers is about 0.02, which is about a tenth the size of the values used by TN and Bretherton and Wyant (1997) for decoupled STBLs. 229

Acknowledgments This research was supported by the Environmental Science Division, U.S. Department of Energy, under Grant DE-FG03-94ER61769 and by the National Science Foundation under Grant ATM 89-14348. Computing assistance was provided by the National Center for Atmospheric Research Scientific Computing Division (SCD). References Bechtold, P. S., S. K. Krueger, W. S. Lewellen, E. van Meijgaard, C.-H. Moeng, D. A. Randall, A. van Ulden, and S. Wang, 1996: Modeling a stratocumulus-topped PBL: Intercomparison among different one-dimensional codes and with large eddy simulation. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 77, 2033-2042. Bretherton, C. S., and M. C. Wyant, 1997: Moisture transport, lower tropospheric stability, and decoupling of cloudtopped boundary layers. J. Atmos. Sci., 54, 148-167. Fu, Q., 1991: Parameterization of radiative processes in vertically nonhomogeneous multiple scattering atmospheres. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. Fu, Q. and K. N. Liou, 1992: On the correlated k-distribution method for radiative transfer in nonhomogeneous atmospheres. J. Atmos. Sci., 49, 2139-2156. Krueger, S. K., 1988: Numerical simulation of tropical cumulus clouds and their interaction with the subcloud layer. J. Atmos. Sci., 45, 2221-2250. Figure 4. Evolution of the vertically integrated liquid mixing ratio (LWP) for (a) the thin cloud and (b) the thick clouds of the CRM and MLM simulations, respectively. To test the Ac MLM, we compared results from it with those from a CRM for a thin Ac layer and a thick Ac layer. The MLM results were good compared with the CRM results for the cloud top, cloud base, and mixed layer base heights, and fair for the LWP. Krueger, S. K., G. T. McLean, and Q. Fu, 1995a: Numerical simulation of the stratus to cumulus transition in the subtropical marine boundary layer. Part I: Boundary layer structure. J. Atmos. Sci., 52, 2839-2850. Krueger, S. K., G. T. McLean, and Q. Fu, 1995 b: Numerical simulation of the stratus to cumulus transition in the subtropical marine boundary layer. Part II: Boundary layer circulation. J. Atmos. Sci., 52, 2851-2868. Liu, S. and S. K. Krueger, 1996: Numerical simulations of altocumulus using an eddy resolving model and a mixed layer model. Presented at the Sixth Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Meeting, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C. 230

Randall, D. A., Harshvardhan, D. A. Dazlich, and T. G. Turton, J. D., and S. Nicholls, 1987: A study of the diurnal Corsetti, 1989: Interactions among radiation, convection, and variation of stratocumulus using a multiple mixed layer model. large-scale dynamics in a general circulation model. J. Atmos. Quart. J. R. Met. Soc., 113, 969-1009. Sci., 46. Xu, K.-M., and S. K. Krueger, 1991: Evaluation of cloudiness Starr, D.O C., and S. K. Cox, 1985: Cirrus clouds. Part II: parameterizations using a cumulus ensemble model. Mon. Numerical experiments on the formation and maintenance of Wea. Rev., 119, 342-367. cirrus. J. Atmos. Sci., 42, 2682-2694. 231