Loading…

Confronting the Convective Gray Zone in the Global Configuration of the Met Office Unified Model

In atmospheric models with kilometer‐scale grids the resolution approaches the scale of convection. As a consequence the most energetic eddies in the atmosphere are partially resolved and partially unresolved. The modeling challenge to represent convection partially explicitly and partially as a sub...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of advances in modeling earth systems 2023-05, Vol.15 (5), p.n/a
Main Authors: Tomassini, Lorenzo, Willett, Martin, Sellar, Alistair, Lock, Adrian, Walters, David, Whitall, Michael, Sanchez, Claudio, Heming, Julian, Earnshaw, Paul, Rodriguez, José M., Ackerley, Duncan, Xavier, Prince, Franklin, Charmaine, Senior, Catherine A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4504-9c4d63ea21d157080ce79b675bcb9572864ff392af8a1984393321bf1a7404c43
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4504-9c4d63ea21d157080ce79b675bcb9572864ff392af8a1984393321bf1a7404c43
container_end_page n/a
container_issue 5
container_start_page
container_title Journal of advances in modeling earth systems
container_volume 15
creator Tomassini, Lorenzo
Willett, Martin
Sellar, Alistair
Lock, Adrian
Walters, David
Whitall, Michael
Sanchez, Claudio
Heming, Julian
Earnshaw, Paul
Rodriguez, José M.
Ackerley, Duncan
Xavier, Prince
Franklin, Charmaine
Senior, Catherine A.
description In atmospheric models with kilometer‐scale grids the resolution approaches the scale of convection. As a consequence the most energetic eddies in the atmosphere are partially resolved and partially unresolved. The modeling challenge to represent convection partially explicitly and partially as a subgrid process is called the convective gray zone problem. The gray zone issue has previously been discussed in the context of regional models, but the evolution in regional models is constrained by the lateral boundary conditions. Here we explore the convective gray zone starting from a defined global configuration of the Met Office Unified Model using initialized forecasts and comparing different model formulations to observations. The focus is on convection and turbulence, but some aspects of the model dynamics are also considered. The global model is run at nominal 5 km resolution and thus contributions from both resolved and subgrid turbulent and convective fluxes are non‐negligible. The main conclusion is that in the present assessment, the configurations which include scale‐aware turbulence and a carefully reduced and simplified mass‐flux convection scheme outperform both the configuration with fully parameterized convection as well as a configuration in which the subgrid convection parameterization is switched off completely. The results are more conclusive with regard to convective organization and tropical variability than extratropical predictability. The present study thus endorses the strategy to further develop scale‐aware physics schemes and to pursue an operational implementation of the global 5 km‐resolution model to be used alongside other ensemble forecasts to allow researchers and forecasters to further assess these simulations. Plain Language Summary An in‐depth exploration of kilometer‐scale global atmospheric modeling in the context of the current Met Office modeling system, the Met Office Unified Model, is presented. All simulations were performed using a global atmosphere model at nominal 5 km resolution. The model resolution thus resides in the so‐called convective gray zone where the grid length approaches the scale of turbulence and convection, and contributions from both resolved and subgrid convective and turbulent fluxes are non‐negligible. A case study approach has been taken in which various testbed cases are defined and model forecasts are evaluated against observations. The focus is on the representation of convection, turbulence
doi_str_mv 10.1029/2022MS003418
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_24cf3b8bc9c54db788177ff4a7132a34</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_24cf3b8bc9c54db788177ff4a7132a34</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>2818611722</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4504-9c4d63ea21d157080ce79b675bcb9572864ff392af8a1984393321bf1a7404c43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kTtPwzAUhSMEEs-NH2CJlYB97fgxoqoUEFEHYGExjmMXVyEGJwX135M2CDEx3cf5dM6VbpadEnxBMKhLwADlA8aUEbmTHRDFIAfG-e6ffj877LolxpxzKA6yl0lsfYptH9oF6l8dGuZPZ_vw6dAsmTV6jq1Dod1qsyZWptkgPixWyfQhtij6rVa6Hs29D9ahpzb44GpUxto1x9meN03nTn7qUfZ0PX2c3OT389nt5Oo-t6zALFeW1Zw6A6QmhcASWydUxUVR2UoVAiRn3lMFxktDlGRUUQqk8sQIhpll9Ci7HX3raJb6PYU3k9Y6mqC3i5gW2qQ-2MZpYNbTSlZW2YLVlZCSCOE9M4JQMHTjdTZ6vaf4sXJdr5dxldrhfA2SSE6IABio85GyKXZdcv43lWC9-Yf--48BpyP-FRq3_pfVd1flFIYgRr8BE--JtQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2818611722</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Confronting the Convective Gray Zone in the Global Configuration of the Met Office Unified Model</title><source>Publicly Available Content Database (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</source><source>Open Access: Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Journals</source><creator>Tomassini, Lorenzo ; Willett, Martin ; Sellar, Alistair ; Lock, Adrian ; Walters, David ; Whitall, Michael ; Sanchez, Claudio ; Heming, Julian ; Earnshaw, Paul ; Rodriguez, José M. ; Ackerley, Duncan ; Xavier, Prince ; Franklin, Charmaine ; Senior, Catherine A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Tomassini, Lorenzo ; Willett, Martin ; Sellar, Alistair ; Lock, Adrian ; Walters, David ; Whitall, Michael ; Sanchez, Claudio ; Heming, Julian ; Earnshaw, Paul ; Rodriguez, José M. ; Ackerley, Duncan ; Xavier, Prince ; Franklin, Charmaine ; Senior, Catherine A.</creatorcontrib><description>In atmospheric models with kilometer‐scale grids the resolution approaches the scale of convection. As a consequence the most energetic eddies in the atmosphere are partially resolved and partially unresolved. The modeling challenge to represent convection partially explicitly and partially as a subgrid process is called the convective gray zone problem. The gray zone issue has previously been discussed in the context of regional models, but the evolution in regional models is constrained by the lateral boundary conditions. Here we explore the convective gray zone starting from a defined global configuration of the Met Office Unified Model using initialized forecasts and comparing different model formulations to observations. The focus is on convection and turbulence, but some aspects of the model dynamics are also considered. The global model is run at nominal 5 km resolution and thus contributions from both resolved and subgrid turbulent and convective fluxes are non‐negligible. The main conclusion is that in the present assessment, the configurations which include scale‐aware turbulence and a carefully reduced and simplified mass‐flux convection scheme outperform both the configuration with fully parameterized convection as well as a configuration in which the subgrid convection parameterization is switched off completely. The results are more conclusive with regard to convective organization and tropical variability than extratropical predictability. The present study thus endorses the strategy to further develop scale‐aware physics schemes and to pursue an operational implementation of the global 5 km‐resolution model to be used alongside other ensemble forecasts to allow researchers and forecasters to further assess these simulations. Plain Language Summary An in‐depth exploration of kilometer‐scale global atmospheric modeling in the context of the current Met Office modeling system, the Met Office Unified Model, is presented. All simulations were performed using a global atmosphere model at nominal 5 km resolution. The model resolution thus resides in the so‐called convective gray zone where the grid length approaches the scale of turbulence and convection, and contributions from both resolved and subgrid convective and turbulent fluxes are non‐negligible. A case study approach has been taken in which various testbed cases are defined and model forecasts are evaluated against observations. The focus is on the representation of convection, turbulence and dynamics, the key aspects of the model formulation in the convective gray zone. The main finding is that in the present assessment the configurations which include a scale‐aware representation of turbulence and a carefully reduced and simplified convection scheme outperform both the reference model with fully parameterized convection as well as a configuration in which the subgrid convection parameterization is switched off completely. An outlook on further work toward the development of an adequate kilometer‐scale resolution global coupled modeling system for use across weather and climate time scales is given. Key Points The representation of turbulence and convection in the convective gray zone is investigated at global 5 km resolution In the examined context a reduced mass‐flux convection scheme is beneficial in 5 km‐resolution global model forecasts The assessment is more conclusive with regard to convective organization and tropical variability than extratropical predictability</description><identifier>ISSN: 1942-2466</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1942-2466</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1029/2022MS003418</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Atmospheric models ; atmospheric variability and predictability ; Boundary conditions ; Climate change ; Convection ; convection‐circulation interaction ; convective gray zone ; Eddies ; Ensemble forecasting ; kilometer‐scale global atmospheric modeling ; Modelling ; Parameterization ; Physics ; Resolution ; Simulation ; Turbulence ; Turbulence models</subject><ispartof>Journal of advances in modeling earth systems, 2023-05, Vol.15 (5), p.n/a</ispartof><rights>2023 Crown copyright and Commonwealth of Australia. This article is published with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the King’s Printer for Scotland.</rights><rights>2023. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4504-9c4d63ea21d157080ce79b675bcb9572864ff392af8a1984393321bf1a7404c43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4504-9c4d63ea21d157080ce79b675bcb9572864ff392af8a1984393321bf1a7404c43</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-6289-030X ; 0000-0003-3361-7384 ; 0000-0003-0237-4033 ; 0000-0002-2955-7254 ; 0000-0002-4124-0612 ; 0000-0002-1381-384X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2818611722/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2818611722?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,11562,25753,27924,27925,37012,44590,46052,46476,75126</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Tomassini, Lorenzo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Willett, Martin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sellar, Alistair</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lock, Adrian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Walters, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Whitall, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sanchez, Claudio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heming, Julian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Earnshaw, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rodriguez, José M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ackerley, Duncan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xavier, Prince</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Franklin, Charmaine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Senior, Catherine A.</creatorcontrib><title>Confronting the Convective Gray Zone in the Global Configuration of the Met Office Unified Model</title><title>Journal of advances in modeling earth systems</title><description>In atmospheric models with kilometer‐scale grids the resolution approaches the scale of convection. As a consequence the most energetic eddies in the atmosphere are partially resolved and partially unresolved. The modeling challenge to represent convection partially explicitly and partially as a subgrid process is called the convective gray zone problem. The gray zone issue has previously been discussed in the context of regional models, but the evolution in regional models is constrained by the lateral boundary conditions. Here we explore the convective gray zone starting from a defined global configuration of the Met Office Unified Model using initialized forecasts and comparing different model formulations to observations. The focus is on convection and turbulence, but some aspects of the model dynamics are also considered. The global model is run at nominal 5 km resolution and thus contributions from both resolved and subgrid turbulent and convective fluxes are non‐negligible. The main conclusion is that in the present assessment, the configurations which include scale‐aware turbulence and a carefully reduced and simplified mass‐flux convection scheme outperform both the configuration with fully parameterized convection as well as a configuration in which the subgrid convection parameterization is switched off completely. The results are more conclusive with regard to convective organization and tropical variability than extratropical predictability. The present study thus endorses the strategy to further develop scale‐aware physics schemes and to pursue an operational implementation of the global 5 km‐resolution model to be used alongside other ensemble forecasts to allow researchers and forecasters to further assess these simulations. Plain Language Summary An in‐depth exploration of kilometer‐scale global atmospheric modeling in the context of the current Met Office modeling system, the Met Office Unified Model, is presented. All simulations were performed using a global atmosphere model at nominal 5 km resolution. The model resolution thus resides in the so‐called convective gray zone where the grid length approaches the scale of turbulence and convection, and contributions from both resolved and subgrid convective and turbulent fluxes are non‐negligible. A case study approach has been taken in which various testbed cases are defined and model forecasts are evaluated against observations. The focus is on the representation of convection, turbulence and dynamics, the key aspects of the model formulation in the convective gray zone. The main finding is that in the present assessment the configurations which include a scale‐aware representation of turbulence and a carefully reduced and simplified convection scheme outperform both the reference model with fully parameterized convection as well as a configuration in which the subgrid convection parameterization is switched off completely. An outlook on further work toward the development of an adequate kilometer‐scale resolution global coupled modeling system for use across weather and climate time scales is given. Key Points The representation of turbulence and convection in the convective gray zone is investigated at global 5 km resolution In the examined context a reduced mass‐flux convection scheme is beneficial in 5 km‐resolution global model forecasts The assessment is more conclusive with regard to convective organization and tropical variability than extratropical predictability</description><subject>Atmospheric models</subject><subject>atmospheric variability and predictability</subject><subject>Boundary conditions</subject><subject>Climate change</subject><subject>Convection</subject><subject>convection‐circulation interaction</subject><subject>convective gray zone</subject><subject>Eddies</subject><subject>Ensemble forecasting</subject><subject>kilometer‐scale global atmospheric modeling</subject><subject>Modelling</subject><subject>Parameterization</subject><subject>Physics</subject><subject>Resolution</subject><subject>Simulation</subject><subject>Turbulence</subject><subject>Turbulence models</subject><issn>1942-2466</issn><issn>1942-2466</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kTtPwzAUhSMEEs-NH2CJlYB97fgxoqoUEFEHYGExjmMXVyEGJwX135M2CDEx3cf5dM6VbpadEnxBMKhLwADlA8aUEbmTHRDFIAfG-e6ffj877LolxpxzKA6yl0lsfYptH9oF6l8dGuZPZ_vw6dAsmTV6jq1Dod1qsyZWptkgPixWyfQhtij6rVa6Hs29D9ahpzb44GpUxto1x9meN03nTn7qUfZ0PX2c3OT389nt5Oo-t6zALFeW1Zw6A6QmhcASWydUxUVR2UoVAiRn3lMFxktDlGRUUQqk8sQIhpll9Ci7HX3raJb6PYU3k9Y6mqC3i5gW2qQ-2MZpYNbTSlZW2YLVlZCSCOE9M4JQMHTjdTZ6vaf4sXJdr5dxldrhfA2SSE6IABio85GyKXZdcv43lWC9-Yf--48BpyP-FRq3_pfVd1flFIYgRr8BE--JtQ</recordid><startdate>202305</startdate><enddate>202305</enddate><creator>Tomassini, Lorenzo</creator><creator>Willett, Martin</creator><creator>Sellar, Alistair</creator><creator>Lock, Adrian</creator><creator>Walters, David</creator><creator>Whitall, Michael</creator><creator>Sanchez, Claudio</creator><creator>Heming, Julian</creator><creator>Earnshaw, Paul</creator><creator>Rodriguez, José M.</creator><creator>Ackerley, Duncan</creator><creator>Xavier, Prince</creator><creator>Franklin, Charmaine</creator><creator>Senior, Catherine A.</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</general><general>American Geophysical Union (AGU)</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6289-030X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3361-7384</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0237-4033</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2955-7254</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4124-0612</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1381-384X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202305</creationdate><title>Confronting the Convective Gray Zone in the Global Configuration of the Met Office Unified Model</title><author>Tomassini, Lorenzo ; Willett, Martin ; Sellar, Alistair ; Lock, Adrian ; Walters, David ; Whitall, Michael ; Sanchez, Claudio ; Heming, Julian ; Earnshaw, Paul ; Rodriguez, José M. ; Ackerley, Duncan ; Xavier, Prince ; Franklin, Charmaine ; Senior, Catherine A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4504-9c4d63ea21d157080ce79b675bcb9572864ff392af8a1984393321bf1a7404c43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Atmospheric models</topic><topic>atmospheric variability and predictability</topic><topic>Boundary conditions</topic><topic>Climate change</topic><topic>Convection</topic><topic>convection‐circulation interaction</topic><topic>convective gray zone</topic><topic>Eddies</topic><topic>Ensemble forecasting</topic><topic>kilometer‐scale global atmospheric modeling</topic><topic>Modelling</topic><topic>Parameterization</topic><topic>Physics</topic><topic>Resolution</topic><topic>Simulation</topic><topic>Turbulence</topic><topic>Turbulence models</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Tomassini, Lorenzo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Willett, Martin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sellar, Alistair</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lock, Adrian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Walters, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Whitall, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sanchez, Claudio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heming, Julian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Earnshaw, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rodriguez, José M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ackerley, Duncan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xavier, Prince</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Franklin, Charmaine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Senior, Catherine A.</creatorcontrib><collection>Open Access: Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Journals</collection><collection>Wiley Journals</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy &amp; Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Journal of advances in modeling earth systems</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Tomassini, Lorenzo</au><au>Willett, Martin</au><au>Sellar, Alistair</au><au>Lock, Adrian</au><au>Walters, David</au><au>Whitall, Michael</au><au>Sanchez, Claudio</au><au>Heming, Julian</au><au>Earnshaw, Paul</au><au>Rodriguez, José M.</au><au>Ackerley, Duncan</au><au>Xavier, Prince</au><au>Franklin, Charmaine</au><au>Senior, Catherine A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Confronting the Convective Gray Zone in the Global Configuration of the Met Office Unified Model</atitle><jtitle>Journal of advances in modeling earth systems</jtitle><date>2023-05</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>5</issue><epage>n/a</epage><issn>1942-2466</issn><eissn>1942-2466</eissn><abstract>In atmospheric models with kilometer‐scale grids the resolution approaches the scale of convection. As a consequence the most energetic eddies in the atmosphere are partially resolved and partially unresolved. The modeling challenge to represent convection partially explicitly and partially as a subgrid process is called the convective gray zone problem. The gray zone issue has previously been discussed in the context of regional models, but the evolution in regional models is constrained by the lateral boundary conditions. Here we explore the convective gray zone starting from a defined global configuration of the Met Office Unified Model using initialized forecasts and comparing different model formulations to observations. The focus is on convection and turbulence, but some aspects of the model dynamics are also considered. The global model is run at nominal 5 km resolution and thus contributions from both resolved and subgrid turbulent and convective fluxes are non‐negligible. The main conclusion is that in the present assessment, the configurations which include scale‐aware turbulence and a carefully reduced and simplified mass‐flux convection scheme outperform both the configuration with fully parameterized convection as well as a configuration in which the subgrid convection parameterization is switched off completely. The results are more conclusive with regard to convective organization and tropical variability than extratropical predictability. The present study thus endorses the strategy to further develop scale‐aware physics schemes and to pursue an operational implementation of the global 5 km‐resolution model to be used alongside other ensemble forecasts to allow researchers and forecasters to further assess these simulations. Plain Language Summary An in‐depth exploration of kilometer‐scale global atmospheric modeling in the context of the current Met Office modeling system, the Met Office Unified Model, is presented. All simulations were performed using a global atmosphere model at nominal 5 km resolution. The model resolution thus resides in the so‐called convective gray zone where the grid length approaches the scale of turbulence and convection, and contributions from both resolved and subgrid convective and turbulent fluxes are non‐negligible. A case study approach has been taken in which various testbed cases are defined and model forecasts are evaluated against observations. The focus is on the representation of convection, turbulence and dynamics, the key aspects of the model formulation in the convective gray zone. The main finding is that in the present assessment the configurations which include a scale‐aware representation of turbulence and a carefully reduced and simplified convection scheme outperform both the reference model with fully parameterized convection as well as a configuration in which the subgrid convection parameterization is switched off completely. An outlook on further work toward the development of an adequate kilometer‐scale resolution global coupled modeling system for use across weather and climate time scales is given. Key Points The representation of turbulence and convection in the convective gray zone is investigated at global 5 km resolution In the examined context a reduced mass‐flux convection scheme is beneficial in 5 km‐resolution global model forecasts The assessment is more conclusive with regard to convective organization and tropical variability than extratropical predictability</abstract><cop>Washington</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</pub><doi>10.1029/2022MS003418</doi><tpages>38</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6289-030X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3361-7384</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0237-4033</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2955-7254</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4124-0612</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1381-384X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1942-2466
ispartof Journal of advances in modeling earth systems, 2023-05, Vol.15 (5), p.n/a
issn 1942-2466
1942-2466
language eng
recordid cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_24cf3b8bc9c54db788177ff4a7132a34
source Publicly Available Content Database (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3); Open Access: Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Journals
subjects Atmospheric models
atmospheric variability and predictability
Boundary conditions
Climate change
Convection
convection‐circulation interaction
convective gray zone
Eddies
Ensemble forecasting
kilometer‐scale global atmospheric modeling
Modelling
Parameterization
Physics
Resolution
Simulation
Turbulence
Turbulence models
title Confronting the Convective Gray Zone in the Global Configuration of the Met Office Unified Model
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T12%3A16%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Confronting%20the%20Convective%20Gray%20Zone%20in%20the%20Global%20Configuration%20of%20the%20Met%20Office%20Unified%20Model&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20advances%20in%20modeling%20earth%20systems&rft.au=Tomassini,%20Lorenzo&rft.date=2023-05&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=5&rft.epage=n/a&rft.issn=1942-2466&rft.eissn=1942-2466&rft_id=info:doi/10.1029/2022MS003418&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_doaj_%3E2818611722%3C/proquest_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4504-9c4d63ea21d157080ce79b675bcb9572864ff392af8a1984393321bf1a7404c43%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2818611722&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true