Jakub L. Nowak, Ian C. D. V. Dragaud, Junhong Lee, Piotr Dziekan, Juan Pedro Mellado, Bjorn Stevens
{"title":"风暴解析模式中低空云层的全球气候学初探","authors":"Jakub L. Nowak, Ian C. D. V. Dragaud, Junhong Lee, Piotr Dziekan, Juan Pedro Mellado, Bjorn Stevens","doi":"10.1029/2024MS004340","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The representation of subtropical stratocumulus and trade-wind cumulus clouds by preliminary versions of Integrated Forecasting System (IFS) and ICON km-scale global coupled climate models is explored. These models differ profoundly in their strategy to represent subgrid-scale processes. The IFS employs complex parameterizations, including eddy-diffusivity mass-flux and convection schemes. ICON applies a minimal set of paramaterizations, including the Smagorinsky-Lilly closure. Five-year simulations are performed and evaluated for their representation of cloud albedo, its variability with environmental parameters and the vertical structure of the atmospheric boundary layer in eight regions: four corresponding to canonical Atlantic and Pacific stratocumulus and four in their downstream trades. For stratocumulus, both models capture the albedo's mean, annual cycle, and its relationship with the parameters relevant for low cloudiness, including lower tropospheric stability. They simulate an expected thermodynamic vertical structure of a stratocumulus-topped boundary layer. ICON largely exhibits a lower cloud base and inversion height than IFS. We speculate the disagreement can be attributed to the contrasting treatment of subgrid mixing and cloud top entrainment. In the case of trade-wind cumulus, both models well differentiate the cloud amount, the character of annual cycles and parameter correlations, and the vertical structure from the upstream stratocumulus. The annual cycles and parameter correlations reflect the dry and wet periods. Both models overestimate mean albedo and underestimate the strength of trade-wind inversion. With an additional ICON run, we demonstrate the strong sensitivity of stratocumulus and the weaker response of trade-wind cumulus to the treatment of subgrid mixing.</p>","PeriodicalId":14881,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems","volume":"17 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/2024MS004340","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A First Look at the Global Climatology of Low-Level Clouds in Storm Resolving Models\",\"authors\":\"Jakub L. Nowak, Ian C. D. V. Dragaud, Junhong Lee, Piotr Dziekan, Juan Pedro Mellado, Bjorn Stevens\",\"doi\":\"10.1029/2024MS004340\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The representation of subtropical stratocumulus and trade-wind cumulus clouds by preliminary versions of Integrated Forecasting System (IFS) and ICON km-scale global coupled climate models is explored. These models differ profoundly in their strategy to represent subgrid-scale processes. The IFS employs complex parameterizations, including eddy-diffusivity mass-flux and convection schemes. ICON applies a minimal set of paramaterizations, including the Smagorinsky-Lilly closure. Five-year simulations are performed and evaluated for their representation of cloud albedo, its variability with environmental parameters and the vertical structure of the atmospheric boundary layer in eight regions: four corresponding to canonical Atlantic and Pacific stratocumulus and four in their downstream trades. For stratocumulus, both models capture the albedo's mean, annual cycle, and its relationship with the parameters relevant for low cloudiness, including lower tropospheric stability. They simulate an expected thermodynamic vertical structure of a stratocumulus-topped boundary layer. ICON largely exhibits a lower cloud base and inversion height than IFS. We speculate the disagreement can be attributed to the contrasting treatment of subgrid mixing and cloud top entrainment. In the case of trade-wind cumulus, both models well differentiate the cloud amount, the character of annual cycles and parameter correlations, and the vertical structure from the upstream stratocumulus. The annual cycles and parameter correlations reflect the dry and wet periods. Both models overestimate mean albedo and underestimate the strength of trade-wind inversion. With an additional ICON run, we demonstrate the strong sensitivity of stratocumulus and the weaker response of trade-wind cumulus to the treatment of subgrid mixing.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14881,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems\",\"volume\":\"17 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/2024MS004340\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024MS004340\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"METEOROLOGY & ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024MS004340","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"METEOROLOGY & ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
A First Look at the Global Climatology of Low-Level Clouds in Storm Resolving Models
The representation of subtropical stratocumulus and trade-wind cumulus clouds by preliminary versions of Integrated Forecasting System (IFS) and ICON km-scale global coupled climate models is explored. These models differ profoundly in their strategy to represent subgrid-scale processes. The IFS employs complex parameterizations, including eddy-diffusivity mass-flux and convection schemes. ICON applies a minimal set of paramaterizations, including the Smagorinsky-Lilly closure. Five-year simulations are performed and evaluated for their representation of cloud albedo, its variability with environmental parameters and the vertical structure of the atmospheric boundary layer in eight regions: four corresponding to canonical Atlantic and Pacific stratocumulus and four in their downstream trades. For stratocumulus, both models capture the albedo's mean, annual cycle, and its relationship with the parameters relevant for low cloudiness, including lower tropospheric stability. They simulate an expected thermodynamic vertical structure of a stratocumulus-topped boundary layer. ICON largely exhibits a lower cloud base and inversion height than IFS. We speculate the disagreement can be attributed to the contrasting treatment of subgrid mixing and cloud top entrainment. In the case of trade-wind cumulus, both models well differentiate the cloud amount, the character of annual cycles and parameter correlations, and the vertical structure from the upstream stratocumulus. The annual cycles and parameter correlations reflect the dry and wet periods. Both models overestimate mean albedo and underestimate the strength of trade-wind inversion. With an additional ICON run, we demonstrate the strong sensitivity of stratocumulus and the weaker response of trade-wind cumulus to the treatment of subgrid mixing.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems (JAMES) is committed to advancing the science of Earth systems modeling by offering high-quality scientific research through online availability and open access licensing. JAMES invites authors and readers from the international Earth systems modeling community.
Open access. Articles are available free of charge for everyone with Internet access to view and download.
Formal peer review.
Supplemental material, such as code samples, images, and visualizations, is published at no additional charge.
No additional charge for color figures.
Modest page charges to cover production costs.
Articles published in high-quality full text PDF, HTML, and XML.
Internal and external reference linking, DOI registration, and forward linking via CrossRef.