Microphysics of Clouds with the Relaxed Arakawa–Schubert Scheme (McRAS). Part II: Implementation and Performance in GEOS II GCM

Y. C. Sud Climate and Radiation Branch, Laboratory for Atmospheres, NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland

Search for other papers by Y. C. Sud in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
and
G. K. Walker Climate and Radiation Branch, Laboratory for Atmospheres, NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland

Search for other papers by G. K. Walker in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Abstract

A prognostic cloud scheme named the Microphysics of Clouds with the Relaxed Arakawa–Schubert Scheme (McRAS) and the Simple Biosphere Model have been implemented in a version of the Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS) II GCM at a 4° latitude × 5° longitude × 20 sigma-layer resolution. The McRAS GCM was integrated for 50 months. The integration was initialized with the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts analysis of observations for 1 January 1987 and was forced with the observed sea surface temperatures and sea-ice distribution; on land, the permanent ice and vegetation properties (biomes and soils) were climatological, while the soil moisture and snow cover were prognostic. The simulation shows that the McRAS GCM yields realistic structures of in-cloud water and ice, and cloud-radiative forcing (CRF) even though the cloudiness has some discernible systematic errors. The simulated intertropical convergence zone (ITCZ) has a realistic time mean structure and seasonal cycle. The simulated CRF is sensitive to vertical distribution of cloud water, which can be affected hugely with the choice of minimum in-cloud water for the onset of autoconversion or critical cloud water amount that regulates the autoconversion itself. The generation of prognostic cloud water is accompanied by reduced global precipitation and interactive CRF. These feedbacks have a profound effect on the ITCZ. Even though somewhat weaker than observed, the McRAS GCM simulation produces robust 30–60-day oscillations in the 200-hPa velocity potential. Comparisons of CRFs and precipitation produced in a parallel simulation with the GEOS II GCM are included.

Several seasonal simulations were performed with the McRAS–GEOS II GCM for the summer (June–July–August) and winter (December–January–February) periods to determine how the simulated clouds and CRFs would be affected by (i) advection of clouds, (ii) cloud-top entrainment instability, (iii) cloud water inhomogeneity correction, and (iv) cloud production and dissipation in different cloud processes. The results show that each of these processes contributes to the simulated cloud fraction and CRF. Because inclusion of these processes helps to improve the simulated CRF, it is inferred that they would be useful to include in other cloud microphysics schemes as well.

Two ensembles of four summer (July–August–September) simulations, one each for 1987 and 1988, were produced with the earlier 17-layer GEOS I GCM with McRAS. The differences show that the model simulates realistic and statistically significant precipitation differences over India, Central America, and tropical Africa. These findings were also confirmed in the new 20-layer GEOS II GCM with McRAS in the 1987 minus 1988 differences.

* Current affiliation: General Sciences Corporation, Laurel, Maryland.

Corresponding author address: Dr. Yogesh C. Sud, Climate and Radiation Branch, Laboratory for Atmospheres, NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771.

Abstract

A prognostic cloud scheme named the Microphysics of Clouds with the Relaxed Arakawa–Schubert Scheme (McRAS) and the Simple Biosphere Model have been implemented in a version of the Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS) II GCM at a 4° latitude × 5° longitude × 20 sigma-layer resolution. The McRAS GCM was integrated for 50 months. The integration was initialized with the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts analysis of observations for 1 January 1987 and was forced with the observed sea surface temperatures and sea-ice distribution; on land, the permanent ice and vegetation properties (biomes and soils) were climatological, while the soil moisture and snow cover were prognostic. The simulation shows that the McRAS GCM yields realistic structures of in-cloud water and ice, and cloud-radiative forcing (CRF) even though the cloudiness has some discernible systematic errors. The simulated intertropical convergence zone (ITCZ) has a realistic time mean structure and seasonal cycle. The simulated CRF is sensitive to vertical distribution of cloud water, which can be affected hugely with the choice of minimum in-cloud water for the onset of autoconversion or critical cloud water amount that regulates the autoconversion itself. The generation of prognostic cloud water is accompanied by reduced global precipitation and interactive CRF. These feedbacks have a profound effect on the ITCZ. Even though somewhat weaker than observed, the McRAS GCM simulation produces robust 30–60-day oscillations in the 200-hPa velocity potential. Comparisons of CRFs and precipitation produced in a parallel simulation with the GEOS II GCM are included.

Several seasonal simulations were performed with the McRAS–GEOS II GCM for the summer (June–July–August) and winter (December–January–February) periods to determine how the simulated clouds and CRFs would be affected by (i) advection of clouds, (ii) cloud-top entrainment instability, (iii) cloud water inhomogeneity correction, and (iv) cloud production and dissipation in different cloud processes. The results show that each of these processes contributes to the simulated cloud fraction and CRF. Because inclusion of these processes helps to improve the simulated CRF, it is inferred that they would be useful to include in other cloud microphysics schemes as well.

Two ensembles of four summer (July–August–September) simulations, one each for 1987 and 1988, were produced with the earlier 17-layer GEOS I GCM with McRAS. The differences show that the model simulates realistic and statistically significant precipitation differences over India, Central America, and tropical Africa. These findings were also confirmed in the new 20-layer GEOS II GCM with McRAS in the 1987 minus 1988 differences.

* Current affiliation: General Sciences Corporation, Laurel, Maryland.

Corresponding author address: Dr. Yogesh C. Sud, Climate and Radiation Branch, Laboratory for Atmospheres, NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771.

Save
  • Arakawa, A., and W. H. Schubert, 1974: Interaction of cumulus cloud ensemble with the large-scale environment, Part I. J. Atmos. Sci.,31, 674–701.

  • Barkstrom, B. R., 1984: The Earth Radiation Budget Experiment (ERBE). Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,65, 1170–1185.

  • Cahalan, R., 1994: Bounded cascade clouds: Albedo and effective thickness. Non-linear Process. Geophys.,1, 156–167.

  • Cheng, M.-D., and A. Arakawa, 1997: Inclusion of rainwater budget and convective downdrafts in the Arakawa–Schubert cumulus parameterization. J. Atmos. Sci.,54, 1359–1378.

  • Chou, M.-D., and M. J. Suarez, 1994: An efficient thermal infrared radiation parameterization for use in general circulation models. NASA Tech. Memo. 104606, Vol. 3, 85 pp. [Available from NASA Center for Aerospace Information, 800 Elkridge Landing Rd., Linthieum Heights, MD 21090-2934.].

  • ——, ——, C.-H. Ho, M.-H. Yan, and K.-T. Lee, 1998. Parameterization for cloud overlapping and shortwave single-scattering properties for use in general circulation and cloud ensemble models. J. Climate,11, 202–214.

  • ——, K.-T. Lee, and S.-C. Tsay, 1999: Parameterization of cloud longwave scattering for use in atmospheric models. J. Climate,12, 159–169.

  • Del Genio, A. D., N.-S. Yao, W. Kovari, and K. K.-W. Lo, 1996: A prognostic cloud water parameterization for general circulation models. J. Climate,9, 270–304.

  • Emanuel, K. A., J. D. Neelin, and C. S. Bretherton, 1994: On large scale circulation in convective atmospheres. Quart J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,120, 1111–1143.

  • Ferraro, R., F. Weng, N. Grody, and A. Basist, 1996: An eight-year (1987–1994) time series of rainfall, clouds, water vapor, snow cover, and sea ice derived from SSM/I measurements. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,77, 891–905.

  • Fowler, L. D., and D. A. Randall, 1996a: Liquid and cloud ice microphysics in the CSU GCM. Part II: Impact of cloudiness, the earth’s radiation budget, and general circulation of the atmosphere. J. Climate,9, 530–560.

  • ——, and ——, 1996b: Liquid and cloud ice microphysics in the CSU GCM. Part III: Sensitivity to modeling assumptions. J. Climate,9, 561–586.

  • ——, ——, and S. A. Rutledge, 1996: Liquid and cloud ice microphysics in the CSU GCM. Part I: Model description and simulated microphysical processes. J. Climate,9, 489–529.

  • Gates, W. L., 1992: AMIP: The Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,73, 1962–1970.

  • Greenwald, T. J., G. L. Stephens, and D. L. Jackson, 1993: A physical retrieval of cloud liquid water over global oceans using Special Sensor Microwave/Imager (SSM/I) observations. J. Geophys. Res.,98, 18 471–18 488.

  • Harshvardhan, D. A. Randall, and T. G. Corsetti, 1987: A fast radiation parameterization for general circulation models. J. Geophys. Res.,92, 1009–1016.

  • Helfand, H. M., and J. C. Lebraga, 1988: Design of a nonsingular level 2.5 second-order closure model for prediction of atmospheric turbulence. J. Atmos. Sci.,45, 113–132.

  • Hide, R., J. O. Dickey, S. L. Marcus, R. D. Rosen, and D. A. Salstein, 1997: Atmospheric angular momentum fluctuations during 1979–1988 simulated by global circulation models. J. Geophys. Res., (D), 102, 16 423–16 438.

  • Houghton, J. T., L. G. Meria Filho, B. A. Callander, N. Harris, A. Kattenberg, and K. Maskell, 1995: The Science of Climate Change: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, 572 pp.

  • Huffman, G. J., and Coauthors, 1997: The global precipitation climatology project (GPCP) combined precipitation datasets. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,78, 5–20.

  • Kiehl, J. T., and V. Ramanathan, 1990: Comparison of cloud forcing derived from Earth Radiation Budget Experiment with that simulated by NCAR Community Climate Model. J. Geophys. Res.,95, 11 679–11 698.

  • Krishnan, R., and M. J. Fennessy, 1997: GCM simulation of the intraseasonal variability in the Indian summer monsoon. Center for Ocean–Land–Atmosphere Studies, Rep. 40, 54 pp. [Available from COLAS, 4041 Powder Mill Road, Suite 302, Calverton, MD 20705-3106.].

  • Lau, K.-M., and S. Yang, 1996: Seasonal variation, abrupt transition, and intraseasonal variability associated with the Asian summer monsoon in the GLA GCM. J. Climate,9, 965–985.

  • ——, Y. C. Sud, and J.-H. Kim, 1996: Intercomparison of hydrologic processes in GCMs. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,77, 2209–2227.

  • Lord, S. J., W. C. Chao, and A. Arakawa, 1982: Interaction of a cumulus cloud ensemble with the large-scale environment. Part IV: The discrete model. J. Atmos Sci.,39, 104–113.

  • Miller, R. L., and A. D. Del Genio, 1994: Tropical cloud feedback and natural variability of climate. J. Climate,7, 1388–1402.

  • Moorthi, S., and M. J. Suarez, 1992: Relaxed Arakawa–Schubert: A parameterization of moist convection for general circulation models. Mon. Wea. Rev.,120, 978–1002.

  • 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: Interaction among radiation, convection, and large-scale dynamics in a general circulation model. J. Atmos. Sci.,46, 1943–1970.

  • Rasch, P., and J. E. Kristajansson, 1998: A comparison of the CCM3 model climate using diagnosed and predicted condensate parameterizations. J. Climate,11, 1587–1614.

  • Rood, R., cited 1999: Algorithm theoretical basis document for Goddard Earth Observing System Data Assimilation System (GEOS DAS) with a focus on version 2. [Available online at http://dao.gsfc.nasa.gov/subpages/atbd.html.].

  • Rossow, W. B., and R. A. Schiffer, 1991: ISCCP cloud data products. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,72, 2–20.

  • ——, and L. C. Gardner, 1993: Cloud detection using satellite measurements of infrared and visible radiances for ISSCP. J. Climate,6, 1403–1420.

  • Santer, B. D., K. E. Taylor, and L. C. Corsetti, 1995: Statistical evaluation of AMIP model performance. Proc. First International AMIP Scientific Conf., Monterey, CA, World Climate Research, 13–18. [WMO/TD 732.].

  • Schlesinger, M. E., and J.-H. Oh, 1993: A cloud-evaporation parameterization for general circulation models. Mon. Wea. Rev.,121, 1239–1248.

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

  • Slingo, J., 1987: The development and verification of a cloud prediction scheme for the ECMWF model. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,113, 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.

  • Spencer, R. W., 1993: Global oceanic precipitation from MSU during 1979–91 and comparison to other climatologies. J. Climate,6, 1301–1326.

  • Sperber, K. R., J. M. Slingo, P. M. Inness, and W. K.-M. Lau, 1996:On the maintenance and initiation of the intraseasonal oscillation in the NCEP/NCAR reanalysis and the GLA and UKMO AMIP simulations. Rep. 36, 60 pp. [Available from PCMDI, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, P. O. Box 808, L-264, Livermore, CA 94550.].

  • Sud, Y. C., and A. Molod, 1988: The roles of dry convection, cloud-radiation feedback processes and the influence of recent improvements in the parameterization of convection in the GLA GCM. Mon. Wea. Rev.,116, 2366–2387.

  • ——, and G. K. Walker, 1993: A rain evaporation and downdraft parameterization to complement a cumulus updraft scheme and its evaluation using GATE data. Mon. Wea. Rev.,121, 3019–3039.

  • ——, and G. K. Walker, 1999: Microphysics of clouds with the Relaxed Arakawa–Schubert Scheme (McRAS). Part I: Design and evaluation with GATE Phase III data. J. Atmos. Sci.,56, 3196–3220.

  • ——, W. C. Chao, and G. K. Walker, 1991: Contributions to the implementation of Arakawa–Schubert cumulus parameterization in the GLA GCM. J. Atmos. Sci.,48, 1573–1586.

  • Sundqvist, H., 1988: Parameterization of condensation and associated clouds in models for weather prediction and general circulation simulation. Physically Based Modelling and Simulation of Climate and Climatic Change, M. E. Schlesinger, Ed., D. Riedel, 433–461.

  • ——, 1993: Inclusion of ice-phase of hydrometeors in cloud parameterization of large-scale and meso-scale models. Contrib. Atmos. Phys.,66, 137–147.

  • Takacs, L. L., A. Molod, and T. Weng, 1994: Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS) general circulation model (GCM) version 1. NASA Tech. Memo. 104606, Vol. 1, 97 pp. [Available from NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771.].

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

  • Waliser, D. E., K.-M. Lau, and J.-H. Kim, 1999: The influence of coupled sea surface temperatures on the Madden–Julian Oscillation: A model perturbation experiment. J. Atmos. Sci.,56, 333–358.

  • Wang, W., and M. E. Schlesinger, 1999: The dependence on convection parameterization of the tropical intraseasonal oscillation simulated by the 11-layer UIUC atmospheric GCM. J. Climate,12, 1423–1457.

  • Weng, F., and N. Grody, 1994: Retrievals of cloud liquid water using Special Sensor Microwave/Imager (SSM/I). J. Geophys. Res.,99, 25 535–25 551.

  • Xue, Y. K., P. J. Sellers, J. L. Kinter III, and J. Shukla, 1991: A simplified biosphere model for global climate studies. J. Climate,4, 345–364.

  • Zhao, Q., and F. H. Carr, 1997: A prognostic cloud scheme for operational NWP models. Mon. Wea Rev.,125, 1931–1953.

  • Zhou, J., Y. C. Sud, and K.-M. Lau, 1996: Impact of orographically induced gravity wavedrag in the GLA GCM. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,122, 903–927.

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 698 399 140
PDF Downloads 159 34 2