Cargando…
Intercomparison of methods of coupling between convection and large‐scale circulation: 1. Comparison over uniform surface conditions
As part of an international intercomparison project, a set of single‐column models (SCMs) and cloud‐resolving models (CRMs) are run under the weak‐temperature gradient (WTG) method and the damped gravity wave (DGW) method. For each model, the implementation of the WTG or DGW method involves a simula...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5006259/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27642500 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/2015MS000468 |
_version_ | 1782451029146599424 |
---|---|
author | Daleu, C. L. Plant, R. S. Woolnough, S. J. Sessions, S. Herman, M. J. Sobel, A. Wang, S. Kim, D. Cheng, A. Bellon, G. Peyrille, P. Ferry, F. Siebesma, P. van Ulft, L. |
author_facet | Daleu, C. L. Plant, R. S. Woolnough, S. J. Sessions, S. Herman, M. J. Sobel, A. Wang, S. Kim, D. Cheng, A. Bellon, G. Peyrille, P. Ferry, F. Siebesma, P. van Ulft, L. |
author_sort | Daleu, C. L. |
collection | PubMed |
description | As part of an international intercomparison project, a set of single‐column models (SCMs) and cloud‐resolving models (CRMs) are run under the weak‐temperature gradient (WTG) method and the damped gravity wave (DGW) method. For each model, the implementation of the WTG or DGW method involves a simulated column which is coupled to a reference state defined with profiles obtained from the same model in radiative‐convective equilibrium. The simulated column has the same surface conditions as the reference state and is initialized with profiles from the reference state. We performed systematic comparison of the behavior of different models under a consistent implementation of the WTG method and the DGW method and systematic comparison of the WTG and DGW methods in models with different physics and numerics. CRMs and SCMs produce a variety of behaviors under both WTG and DGW methods. Some of the models reproduce the reference state while others sustain a large‐scale circulation which results in either substantially lower or higher precipitation compared to the value of the reference state. CRMs show a fairly linear relationship between precipitation and circulation strength. SCMs display a wider range of behaviors than CRMs. Some SCMs under the WTG method produce zero precipitation. Within an individual SCM, a DGW simulation and a corresponding WTG simulation can produce different signed circulation. When initialized with a dry troposphere, DGW simulations always result in a precipitating equilibrium state. The greatest sensitivities to the initial moisture conditions occur for multiple stable equilibria in some WTG simulations, corresponding to either a dry equilibrium state when initialized as dry or a precipitating equilibrium state when initialized as moist. Multiple equilibria are seen in more WTG simulations for higher SST. In some models, the existence of multiple equilibria is sensitive to some parameters in the WTG calculations. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5006259 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-50062592016-09-16 Intercomparison of methods of coupling between convection and large‐scale circulation: 1. Comparison over uniform surface conditions Daleu, C. L. Plant, R. S. Woolnough, S. J. Sessions, S. Herman, M. J. Sobel, A. Wang, S. Kim, D. Cheng, A. Bellon, G. Peyrille, P. Ferry, F. Siebesma, P. van Ulft, L. J Adv Model Earth Syst Research Articles As part of an international intercomparison project, a set of single‐column models (SCMs) and cloud‐resolving models (CRMs) are run under the weak‐temperature gradient (WTG) method and the damped gravity wave (DGW) method. For each model, the implementation of the WTG or DGW method involves a simulated column which is coupled to a reference state defined with profiles obtained from the same model in radiative‐convective equilibrium. The simulated column has the same surface conditions as the reference state and is initialized with profiles from the reference state. We performed systematic comparison of the behavior of different models under a consistent implementation of the WTG method and the DGW method and systematic comparison of the WTG and DGW methods in models with different physics and numerics. CRMs and SCMs produce a variety of behaviors under both WTG and DGW methods. Some of the models reproduce the reference state while others sustain a large‐scale circulation which results in either substantially lower or higher precipitation compared to the value of the reference state. CRMs show a fairly linear relationship between precipitation and circulation strength. SCMs display a wider range of behaviors than CRMs. Some SCMs under the WTG method produce zero precipitation. Within an individual SCM, a DGW simulation and a corresponding WTG simulation can produce different signed circulation. When initialized with a dry troposphere, DGW simulations always result in a precipitating equilibrium state. The greatest sensitivities to the initial moisture conditions occur for multiple stable equilibria in some WTG simulations, corresponding to either a dry equilibrium state when initialized as dry or a precipitating equilibrium state when initialized as moist. Multiple equilibria are seen in more WTG simulations for higher SST. In some models, the existence of multiple equilibria is sensitive to some parameters in the WTG calculations. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2015-10-24 2015-12 /pmc/articles/PMC5006259/ /pubmed/27642500 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/2015MS000468 Text en © 2015. The Authors. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Articles Daleu, C. L. Plant, R. S. Woolnough, S. J. Sessions, S. Herman, M. J. Sobel, A. Wang, S. Kim, D. Cheng, A. Bellon, G. Peyrille, P. Ferry, F. Siebesma, P. van Ulft, L. Intercomparison of methods of coupling between convection and large‐scale circulation: 1. Comparison over uniform surface conditions |
title | Intercomparison of methods of coupling between convection and large‐scale circulation: 1. Comparison over uniform surface conditions |
title_full | Intercomparison of methods of coupling between convection and large‐scale circulation: 1. Comparison over uniform surface conditions |
title_fullStr | Intercomparison of methods of coupling between convection and large‐scale circulation: 1. Comparison over uniform surface conditions |
title_full_unstemmed | Intercomparison of methods of coupling between convection and large‐scale circulation: 1. Comparison over uniform surface conditions |
title_short | Intercomparison of methods of coupling between convection and large‐scale circulation: 1. Comparison over uniform surface conditions |
title_sort | intercomparison of methods of coupling between convection and large‐scale circulation: 1. comparison over uniform surface conditions |
topic | Research Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5006259/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27642500 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/2015MS000468 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT daleucl intercomparisonofmethodsofcouplingbetweenconvectionandlargescalecirculation1comparisonoveruniformsurfaceconditions AT plantrs intercomparisonofmethodsofcouplingbetweenconvectionandlargescalecirculation1comparisonoveruniformsurfaceconditions AT woolnoughsj intercomparisonofmethodsofcouplingbetweenconvectionandlargescalecirculation1comparisonoveruniformsurfaceconditions AT sessionss intercomparisonofmethodsofcouplingbetweenconvectionandlargescalecirculation1comparisonoveruniformsurfaceconditions AT hermanmj intercomparisonofmethodsofcouplingbetweenconvectionandlargescalecirculation1comparisonoveruniformsurfaceconditions AT sobela intercomparisonofmethodsofcouplingbetweenconvectionandlargescalecirculation1comparisonoveruniformsurfaceconditions AT wangs intercomparisonofmethodsofcouplingbetweenconvectionandlargescalecirculation1comparisonoveruniformsurfaceconditions AT kimd intercomparisonofmethodsofcouplingbetweenconvectionandlargescalecirculation1comparisonoveruniformsurfaceconditions AT chenga intercomparisonofmethodsofcouplingbetweenconvectionandlargescalecirculation1comparisonoveruniformsurfaceconditions AT bellong intercomparisonofmethodsofcouplingbetweenconvectionandlargescalecirculation1comparisonoveruniformsurfaceconditions AT peyrillep intercomparisonofmethodsofcouplingbetweenconvectionandlargescalecirculation1comparisonoveruniformsurfaceconditions AT ferryf intercomparisonofmethodsofcouplingbetweenconvectionandlargescalecirculation1comparisonoveruniformsurfaceconditions AT siebesmap intercomparisonofmethodsofcouplingbetweenconvectionandlargescalecirculation1comparisonoveruniformsurfaceconditions AT vanulftl intercomparisonofmethodsofcouplingbetweenconvectionandlargescalecirculation1comparisonoveruniformsurfaceconditions |