Comparison of ECMWF Winter-Season Cloud Fraction with Radar-Derived Values

Robin J. Hogan Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom

Search for other papers by Robin J. Hogan in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Christian Jakob European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, Reading, United Kingdom

Search for other papers by Christian Jakob in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Anthony J. Illingworth Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom

Search for other papers by Anthony J. Illingworth in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Abstract

Of great importance for the simulation of climate using general circulation models is their ability to represent accurately the vertical distribution of fractional cloud amount. In this paper, a technique to derive cloud fraction as a function of height using ground-based radar and lidar is described. The relatively unattenuated radar detects clouds and precipitation throughout the whole depth of the troposphere, whereas the lidar is able to locate cloud base accurately in the presence of rain or drizzle. From a direct comparison of 3 months of cloud fraction observed at Chilbolton, England, with the values held at the nearest grid box of the European Centre for Medium-Range Forecasts (ECMWF) model it is found that, on average, the model tends to underpredict cloud fraction below 7 km and considerably overpredict it above. The difference below 7 km can in large part be explained by the fact that the model treats snow and ice cloud separately, with snow not contributing to cloud fraction. Modifying the model cloud fraction to include the contribution from snow (already present in the form of fluxes between levels) results in much better agreement in mean cloud fraction, frequency of occurrence, and amount when present between 1 and 7 km. This, together with the fact that both the lidar and the radar echoes tend to be stronger in the regions of ice clouds that the model regards as snow, indicates that snow should not be treated as radiatively inert by the model radiation scheme. Above 7 km, the difference between the model and the observations is partly due to some of the high clouds in the model being associated with very low values of ice water content that one would not expect the radar to detect. However, removal of these from the model still leaves an apparent overestimate of cloud fraction by up to a factor of 2. A tendency in the lowest kilometer for the model to simulate cloud features up to 3 h before they are observed is also found. Overall, this study demonstrates the considerable potential of active instruments for validating the representation of clouds in models.

Corresponding author address: Robin J. Hogan, Dept. of Meteorology, Earley Gate, P.O. Box 243, Reading RG6 6BB, United Kingdom.

r.j.hogan@reading.ac.uk

Abstract

Of great importance for the simulation of climate using general circulation models is their ability to represent accurately the vertical distribution of fractional cloud amount. In this paper, a technique to derive cloud fraction as a function of height using ground-based radar and lidar is described. The relatively unattenuated radar detects clouds and precipitation throughout the whole depth of the troposphere, whereas the lidar is able to locate cloud base accurately in the presence of rain or drizzle. From a direct comparison of 3 months of cloud fraction observed at Chilbolton, England, with the values held at the nearest grid box of the European Centre for Medium-Range Forecasts (ECMWF) model it is found that, on average, the model tends to underpredict cloud fraction below 7 km and considerably overpredict it above. The difference below 7 km can in large part be explained by the fact that the model treats snow and ice cloud separately, with snow not contributing to cloud fraction. Modifying the model cloud fraction to include the contribution from snow (already present in the form of fluxes between levels) results in much better agreement in mean cloud fraction, frequency of occurrence, and amount when present between 1 and 7 km. This, together with the fact that both the lidar and the radar echoes tend to be stronger in the regions of ice clouds that the model regards as snow, indicates that snow should not be treated as radiatively inert by the model radiation scheme. Above 7 km, the difference between the model and the observations is partly due to some of the high clouds in the model being associated with very low values of ice water content that one would not expect the radar to detect. However, removal of these from the model still leaves an apparent overestimate of cloud fraction by up to a factor of 2. A tendency in the lowest kilometer for the model to simulate cloud features up to 3 h before they are observed is also found. Overall, this study demonstrates the considerable potential of active instruments for validating the representation of clouds in models.

Corresponding author address: Robin J. Hogan, Dept. of Meteorology, Earley Gate, P.O. Box 243, Reading RG6 6BB, United Kingdom.

r.j.hogan@reading.ac.uk

Save
  • Arking, A., 1991: The radiative effects of clouds and their impact on climate. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,72, 795–813.

  • Brown, P. R. A., A. J. Illingworth, A. J. Heymsfield, G. M. McFarquhar, K. A. Browning, and M. Gosset, 1995: The role of spaceborne millimeter-wave radar in the global monitoring of ice-cloud. J. Appl. Meteor.,34, 2346–2366.

  • Goddard, J. W. F., J. Tan, and M. Thurai, 1994: Technique for calibration of meteorological radars using differential phase. Electron. Lett.,30, 166–167.

  • Hogan, R. J., and A. J. Illingworth, 1999a: Analysis of radar and lidar returns from clouds: Implications for the proposed Earth Radiation Mission. CLARE’98 Final Workshop, Noordwijk, Netherlands, ESA/ESTEC, 75–80.

  • Hogan, R. J., and A. J. Illingworth, 1999b: The potential of spaceborne dual-wavelength radar to make global measurements of cirrus clouds. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol.,16, 518–531.

  • Hogan, R. J., and A. J. Illingworth, 2000: Deriving cloud overlap statistics from radar. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,126, 2903–2909.

  • Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 1995: IPCC Second Assessment Report—Climate Change 1995. UNEP/WMO, 572 pp.

  • Jakob, C., 1999: Cloud cover in the ECMWF reanalysis. J. Climate,12, 947–959.

  • Karlsson, K. G., 1996: Validation of modelled cloudiness using satellite-estimated cloud climatologies. Tellus,48A, 767–785.

  • Lhermitte, R. M., 1987: A 94-GHz Doppler radar for cloud observations. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol.,4, 36–48.

  • Mace, G. G., C. Jakob, and K. P. Moran, 1998: Validation of hydrometeor occurrence predicted by the ECMWF using millimeter wave radar data. Geophys. Res. Lett.,25, 1645–1648.

  • Morcrette, J.-J., 1991: Evaluation of model-generated cloudiness: Satellite-observed and model-generated diurnal variability of brightness temperature. Mon. Wea. Rev.,119, 1205–1224.

  • Morcrette, J.-J., and C. Jakob, 2000: The response of the ECMWF model to changes in cloud overlap assumption. Mon. Wea. Rev.,128, 1707–1732.

  • Ou, S.-C., and K.-N. Liou, 1995: Ice microphysics and climate temperature feedback. Atmos. Res.,35, 127–138.

  • Randall, D. A., Harshvardhan, D. A. Dazlich, and T. G. Corsetti, 1989: Interactions among radiation, convection, and large-scale dynamics in a general circulation model. J. Atmos. Sci.,46, 1943–1970.

  • Slingo, A., and J. M. Slingo, 1988: The response of a general circulation model to cloud longwave radiative forcing. I: Introduction and initial experiments. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,114, 1027–1062.

  • Slingo, J. M., 1987: The development and verification of a cloud prediction scheme for the ECMWF model. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,115, 899–927.

  • Smith, R. N. B., 1990: A scheme for predicting layer clouds and their water content in a general circulation model. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,116, 435–460.

  • Tiedtke, M., 1993: Representation of clouds in large-scale models. Mon. Wea. Rev.,121, 3040–3061.

  • Wilson, D. R., and S. P. Ballard, 1999: A microphysically based precipitation scheme for the U.K. Meteorological Office Unified Model. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,125, 1607–1636.

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 328 60 0
PDF Downloads 135 26 2