Loading…

Assessment of marine boundary layer cloud simulations in the CAM with CLUBB and updated microphysics scheme based on ARM observations from the Azores

To assess marine boundary layer (MBL) cloud simulations in three versions of the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM), three sets of short‐term global hindcasts are performed and compared to Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Program (ARM) observations on Graciosa Island in the Azores from June 2009 to D...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of geophysical research. Atmospheres 2016-07, Vol.121 (14), p.8472-8492
Main Authors: Zheng, X., Klein, S. A., Ma, H.‐Y., Bogenschutz, P., Gettelman, A., Larson, V. E.
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-c4662-f33ed2b222c5746cdf49ade5928a656f9d83363d21de3b803a9ae992da6126b43
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4662-f33ed2b222c5746cdf49ade5928a656f9d83363d21de3b803a9ae992da6126b43
container_end_page 8492
container_issue 14
container_start_page 8472
container_title Journal of geophysical research. Atmospheres
container_volume 121
creator Zheng, X.
Klein, S. A.
Ma, H.‐Y.
Bogenschutz, P.
Gettelman, A.
Larson, V. E.
description To assess marine boundary layer (MBL) cloud simulations in three versions of the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM), three sets of short‐term global hindcasts are performed and compared to Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Program (ARM) observations on Graciosa Island in the Azores from June 2009 to December 2010. The three versions consist of CAM5.3 with default schemes (CAM5.3), CAM5.3 with Cloud Layers Unified By Binormals (CLUBB‐MG1), and CAM5.3 with CLUBB and updated microphysics scheme (CLUBB‐MG2). Our results show that relative to CAM5.3 default schemes, simulations with CLUBB better represent MBL cloud base height, the height of the major cloud layer, and the daily cloud cover variability. CLUBB also better simulates the relationship of cloud fraction to cloud liquid water path (LWP) most likely due to CLUBB's consistent treatment of these variables through a probability distribution function (PDF) approach. Subcloud evaporation of precipitation is substantially enhanced in simulations with CLUBB‐MG2 and is more realistic based on the limited observational estimate. Despite these improvements, all model versions underestimate MBL cloud cover. CLUBB‐MG2 reduces biases in in‐cloud LWP (clouds are not too bright) but there are still too few of MBL clouds due to an underestimate in the frequency of overcast scenes. Thus, combining CLUBB with MG2 scheme better simulates MBL cloud processes, but because biases remain in MBL cloud cover CLUBB‐MG2 does not improve the simulation of the surface shortwave cloud radiative effect (CRESW). Key Points Three versions of CAM short‐term hindcasts are performed and compared to ARM observations from the Azores CAM5 with CLUBB and MG2 scheme (CLUBB‐MG2) better simulates MBL cloud processes CLUBB‐MG2 does not improve the surface SW CRE mainly due to its MBL cloud cover biases
doi_str_mv 10.1002/2016JD025274
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_osti_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_osti_scitechconnect_1342072</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1815700255</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4662-f33ed2b222c5746cdf49ade5928a656f9d83363d21de3b803a9ae992da6126b43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqN0s9rFDEUB_BBFCy1N_-AoBcPriYvk8zMcbrVatkiFAvehkzyhk2ZSda8Gcv6f_T_bXSLiIdiLgnkwxfej6J4Kfg7wTm8By70xRkHBVX5pDgCoZtV3TT66Z939e15cUJ0w_OpuSxVeVTctURINGGYWRzYZJIPyPq4BGfSno1mj4nZMS6OkZ-W0cw-BmI-sHmLbN1esls_b9l6c316ykxwbNk5M6Njk7cp7rZ78pYY2S1OOdZQ_omBtVeXLPaE6cdD3pDi9Dux_RkT0ovi2WBGwpOH-7i4_vjh6_rTavPl_PO63axsqTWsBinRQQ8AVlWltm4oG-NQNVAbrfTQuFpKLR0Ih7LPJZvGYNOAM1qA7kt5XLw65EaafUfWz2i3NoaAdu6ELIFXkNGbA9ql-H1BmrvJk8VxNAHjQp2opdLAFYj_oEJVeVhKZfr6H3oTlxRytR3wUotchCgfUzlLNKC51lm9PajccqKEQ7dLPo9y3wne_VqO7u_lyFwe-K0fcf-o7S7Or86UFBzkPYFYuO0</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1811926066</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Assessment of marine boundary layer cloud simulations in the CAM with CLUBB and updated microphysics scheme based on ARM observations from the Azores</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Read &amp; Publish Collection</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Zheng, X. ; Klein, S. A. ; Ma, H.‐Y. ; Bogenschutz, P. ; Gettelman, A. ; Larson, V. E.</creator><creatorcontrib>Zheng, X. ; Klein, S. A. ; Ma, H.‐Y. ; Bogenschutz, P. ; Gettelman, A. ; Larson, V. E. ; Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (LLNL), Livermore, CA (United States)</creatorcontrib><description>To assess marine boundary layer (MBL) cloud simulations in three versions of the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM), three sets of short‐term global hindcasts are performed and compared to Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Program (ARM) observations on Graciosa Island in the Azores from June 2009 to December 2010. The three versions consist of CAM5.3 with default schemes (CAM5.3), CAM5.3 with Cloud Layers Unified By Binormals (CLUBB‐MG1), and CAM5.3 with CLUBB and updated microphysics scheme (CLUBB‐MG2). Our results show that relative to CAM5.3 default schemes, simulations with CLUBB better represent MBL cloud base height, the height of the major cloud layer, and the daily cloud cover variability. CLUBB also better simulates the relationship of cloud fraction to cloud liquid water path (LWP) most likely due to CLUBB's consistent treatment of these variables through a probability distribution function (PDF) approach. Subcloud evaporation of precipitation is substantially enhanced in simulations with CLUBB‐MG2 and is more realistic based on the limited observational estimate. Despite these improvements, all model versions underestimate MBL cloud cover. CLUBB‐MG2 reduces biases in in‐cloud LWP (clouds are not too bright) but there are still too few of MBL clouds due to an underestimate in the frequency of overcast scenes. Thus, combining CLUBB with MG2 scheme better simulates MBL cloud processes, but because biases remain in MBL cloud cover CLUBB‐MG2 does not improve the simulation of the surface shortwave cloud radiative effect (CRESW). Key Points Three versions of CAM short‐term hindcasts are performed and compared to ARM observations from the Azores CAM5 with CLUBB and MG2 scheme (CLUBB‐MG2) better simulates MBL cloud processes CLUBB‐MG2 does not improve the surface SW CRE mainly due to its MBL cloud cover biases</description><identifier>ISSN: 2169-897X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2169-8996</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/2016JD025274</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>ARM observations ; Atmospheres ; Atmospheric models ; Atmospheric radiation ; Atmospheric radiation measurements ; Azores ; Boundary layer ; Boundary layers ; Cloud cover ; Cloud Layers Unified by Binormals ; Clouds ; Computer simulation ; Distribution functions ; Downward long wave radiation ; ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES ; Evaporation ; Geophysics ; Height ; marine boundary layer clouds ; Meteorology ; Microphysics ; Precipitation ; Probability distribution ; Probability distribution functions ; Probability theory ; Radiation measurement ; Simulation ; the Community Atmosphere Model ; Water</subject><ispartof>Journal of geophysical research. Atmospheres, 2016-07, Vol.121 (14), p.8472-8492</ispartof><rights>2016. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4662-f33ed2b222c5746cdf49ade5928a656f9d83363d21de3b803a9ae992da6126b43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4662-f33ed2b222c5746cdf49ade5928a656f9d83363d21de3b803a9ae992da6126b43</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,27923,27924</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1342072$$D View this record in Osti.gov$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Zheng, X.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Klein, S. A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ma, H.‐Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bogenschutz, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gettelman, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Larson, V. E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (LLNL), Livermore, CA (United States)</creatorcontrib><title>Assessment of marine boundary layer cloud simulations in the CAM with CLUBB and updated microphysics scheme based on ARM observations from the Azores</title><title>Journal of geophysical research. Atmospheres</title><description>To assess marine boundary layer (MBL) cloud simulations in three versions of the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM), three sets of short‐term global hindcasts are performed and compared to Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Program (ARM) observations on Graciosa Island in the Azores from June 2009 to December 2010. The three versions consist of CAM5.3 with default schemes (CAM5.3), CAM5.3 with Cloud Layers Unified By Binormals (CLUBB‐MG1), and CAM5.3 with CLUBB and updated microphysics scheme (CLUBB‐MG2). Our results show that relative to CAM5.3 default schemes, simulations with CLUBB better represent MBL cloud base height, the height of the major cloud layer, and the daily cloud cover variability. CLUBB also better simulates the relationship of cloud fraction to cloud liquid water path (LWP) most likely due to CLUBB's consistent treatment of these variables through a probability distribution function (PDF) approach. Subcloud evaporation of precipitation is substantially enhanced in simulations with CLUBB‐MG2 and is more realistic based on the limited observational estimate. Despite these improvements, all model versions underestimate MBL cloud cover. CLUBB‐MG2 reduces biases in in‐cloud LWP (clouds are not too bright) but there are still too few of MBL clouds due to an underestimate in the frequency of overcast scenes. Thus, combining CLUBB with MG2 scheme better simulates MBL cloud processes, but because biases remain in MBL cloud cover CLUBB‐MG2 does not improve the simulation of the surface shortwave cloud radiative effect (CRESW). Key Points Three versions of CAM short‐term hindcasts are performed and compared to ARM observations from the Azores CAM5 with CLUBB and MG2 scheme (CLUBB‐MG2) better simulates MBL cloud processes CLUBB‐MG2 does not improve the surface SW CRE mainly due to its MBL cloud cover biases</description><subject>ARM observations</subject><subject>Atmospheres</subject><subject>Atmospheric models</subject><subject>Atmospheric radiation</subject><subject>Atmospheric radiation measurements</subject><subject>Azores</subject><subject>Boundary layer</subject><subject>Boundary layers</subject><subject>Cloud cover</subject><subject>Cloud Layers Unified by Binormals</subject><subject>Clouds</subject><subject>Computer simulation</subject><subject>Distribution functions</subject><subject>Downward long wave radiation</subject><subject>ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES</subject><subject>Evaporation</subject><subject>Geophysics</subject><subject>Height</subject><subject>marine boundary layer clouds</subject><subject>Meteorology</subject><subject>Microphysics</subject><subject>Precipitation</subject><subject>Probability distribution</subject><subject>Probability distribution functions</subject><subject>Probability theory</subject><subject>Radiation measurement</subject><subject>Simulation</subject><subject>the Community Atmosphere Model</subject><subject>Water</subject><issn>2169-897X</issn><issn>2169-8996</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqN0s9rFDEUB_BBFCy1N_-AoBcPriYvk8zMcbrVatkiFAvehkzyhk2ZSda8Gcv6f_T_bXSLiIdiLgnkwxfej6J4Kfg7wTm8By70xRkHBVX5pDgCoZtV3TT66Z939e15cUJ0w_OpuSxVeVTctURINGGYWRzYZJIPyPq4BGfSno1mj4nZMS6OkZ-W0cw-BmI-sHmLbN1esls_b9l6c316ykxwbNk5M6Njk7cp7rZ78pYY2S1OOdZQ_omBtVeXLPaE6cdD3pDi9Dux_RkT0ovi2WBGwpOH-7i4_vjh6_rTavPl_PO63axsqTWsBinRQQ8AVlWltm4oG-NQNVAbrfTQuFpKLR0Ih7LPJZvGYNOAM1qA7kt5XLw65EaafUfWz2i3NoaAdu6ELIFXkNGbA9ql-H1BmrvJk8VxNAHjQp2opdLAFYj_oEJVeVhKZfr6H3oTlxRytR3wUotchCgfUzlLNKC51lm9PajccqKEQ7dLPo9y3wne_VqO7u_lyFwe-K0fcf-o7S7Or86UFBzkPYFYuO0</recordid><startdate>20160727</startdate><enddate>20160727</enddate><creator>Zheng, X.</creator><creator>Klein, S. A.</creator><creator>Ma, H.‐Y.</creator><creator>Bogenschutz, P.</creator><creator>Gettelman, A.</creator><creator>Larson, V. E.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>American Geophysical Union</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>OIOZB</scope><scope>OTOTI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160727</creationdate><title>Assessment of marine boundary layer cloud simulations in the CAM with CLUBB and updated microphysics scheme based on ARM observations from the Azores</title><author>Zheng, X. ; Klein, S. A. ; Ma, H.‐Y. ; Bogenschutz, P. ; Gettelman, A. ; Larson, V. E.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4662-f33ed2b222c5746cdf49ade5928a656f9d83363d21de3b803a9ae992da6126b43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>ARM observations</topic><topic>Atmospheres</topic><topic>Atmospheric models</topic><topic>Atmospheric radiation</topic><topic>Atmospheric radiation measurements</topic><topic>Azores</topic><topic>Boundary layer</topic><topic>Boundary layers</topic><topic>Cloud cover</topic><topic>Cloud Layers Unified by Binormals</topic><topic>Clouds</topic><topic>Computer simulation</topic><topic>Distribution functions</topic><topic>Downward long wave radiation</topic><topic>ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES</topic><topic>Evaporation</topic><topic>Geophysics</topic><topic>Height</topic><topic>marine boundary layer clouds</topic><topic>Meteorology</topic><topic>Microphysics</topic><topic>Precipitation</topic><topic>Probability distribution</topic><topic>Probability distribution functions</topic><topic>Probability theory</topic><topic>Radiation measurement</topic><topic>Simulation</topic><topic>the Community Atmosphere Model</topic><topic>Water</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Zheng, X.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Klein, S. A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ma, H.‐Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bogenschutz, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gettelman, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Larson, V. E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (LLNL), Livermore, CA (United States)</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy &amp; Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>OSTI.GOV - Hybrid</collection><collection>OSTI.GOV</collection><jtitle>Journal of geophysical research. Atmospheres</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Zheng, X.</au><au>Klein, S. A.</au><au>Ma, H.‐Y.</au><au>Bogenschutz, P.</au><au>Gettelman, A.</au><au>Larson, V. E.</au><aucorp>Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (LLNL), Livermore, CA (United States)</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Assessment of marine boundary layer cloud simulations in the CAM with CLUBB and updated microphysics scheme based on ARM observations from the Azores</atitle><jtitle>Journal of geophysical research. Atmospheres</jtitle><date>2016-07-27</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>121</volume><issue>14</issue><spage>8472</spage><epage>8492</epage><pages>8472-8492</pages><issn>2169-897X</issn><eissn>2169-8996</eissn><abstract>To assess marine boundary layer (MBL) cloud simulations in three versions of the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM), three sets of short‐term global hindcasts are performed and compared to Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Program (ARM) observations on Graciosa Island in the Azores from June 2009 to December 2010. The three versions consist of CAM5.3 with default schemes (CAM5.3), CAM5.3 with Cloud Layers Unified By Binormals (CLUBB‐MG1), and CAM5.3 with CLUBB and updated microphysics scheme (CLUBB‐MG2). Our results show that relative to CAM5.3 default schemes, simulations with CLUBB better represent MBL cloud base height, the height of the major cloud layer, and the daily cloud cover variability. CLUBB also better simulates the relationship of cloud fraction to cloud liquid water path (LWP) most likely due to CLUBB's consistent treatment of these variables through a probability distribution function (PDF) approach. Subcloud evaporation of precipitation is substantially enhanced in simulations with CLUBB‐MG2 and is more realistic based on the limited observational estimate. Despite these improvements, all model versions underestimate MBL cloud cover. CLUBB‐MG2 reduces biases in in‐cloud LWP (clouds are not too bright) but there are still too few of MBL clouds due to an underestimate in the frequency of overcast scenes. Thus, combining CLUBB with MG2 scheme better simulates MBL cloud processes, but because biases remain in MBL cloud cover CLUBB‐MG2 does not improve the simulation of the surface shortwave cloud radiative effect (CRESW). Key Points Three versions of CAM short‐term hindcasts are performed and compared to ARM observations from the Azores CAM5 with CLUBB and MG2 scheme (CLUBB‐MG2) better simulates MBL cloud processes CLUBB‐MG2 does not improve the surface SW CRE mainly due to its MBL cloud cover biases</abstract><cop>Washington</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1002/2016JD025274</doi><tpages>21</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2169-897X
ispartof Journal of geophysical research. Atmospheres, 2016-07, Vol.121 (14), p.8472-8492
issn 2169-897X
2169-8996
language eng
recordid cdi_osti_scitechconnect_1342072
source Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects ARM observations
Atmospheres
Atmospheric models
Atmospheric radiation
Atmospheric radiation measurements
Azores
Boundary layer
Boundary layers
Cloud cover
Cloud Layers Unified by Binormals
Clouds
Computer simulation
Distribution functions
Downward long wave radiation
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Evaporation
Geophysics
Height
marine boundary layer clouds
Meteorology
Microphysics
Precipitation
Probability distribution
Probability distribution functions
Probability theory
Radiation measurement
Simulation
the Community Atmosphere Model
Water
title Assessment of marine boundary layer cloud simulations in the CAM with CLUBB and updated microphysics scheme based on ARM observations from the Azores
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-10T16%3A50%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_osti_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Assessment%20of%20marine%20boundary%20layer%20cloud%20simulations%20in%20the%20CAM%20with%20CLUBB%20and%20updated%20microphysics%20scheme%20based%20on%20ARM%20observations%20from%20the%20Azores&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20geophysical%20research.%20Atmospheres&rft.au=Zheng,%20X.&rft.aucorp=Lawrence%20Livermore%20National%20Lab.%20(LLNL),%20Livermore,%20CA%20(United%20States)&rft.date=2016-07-27&rft.volume=121&rft.issue=14&rft.spage=8472&rft.epage=8492&rft.pages=8472-8492&rft.issn=2169-897X&rft.eissn=2169-8996&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/2016JD025274&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_osti_%3E1815700255%3C/proquest_osti_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4662-f33ed2b222c5746cdf49ade5928a656f9d83363d21de3b803a9ae992da6126b43%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1811926066&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true