Editorial Type:
Article
Article Type:
Research Article

A New Boundary Layer Mixing Scheme. Part I: Scheme Description and Single-Column Model Tests

A. P. Lock The Met. Office, Bracknell, United Kingdom

Search for other papers by A. P. Lock in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
A. R. Brown The Met. Office, Bracknell, United Kingdom

Search for other papers by A. R. Brown in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
M. R. Bush The Met. Office, Bracknell, United Kingdom

Search for other papers by M. R. Bush in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
G. M. Martin The Met. Office, Bracknell, United Kingdom

Search for other papers by G. M. Martin in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
, and
R. N. B. Smith The Met. Office, Bracknell, United Kingdom

Search for other papers by R. N. B. Smith in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
Print Publication:
01 Sep 2000
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(2000)128<3187:ANBLMS>2.0.CO;2
Page(s):
3187–3199
Restricted access

Abstract

A new boundary layer turbulent mixing scheme has been developed for use in the UKMO weather forecasting and climate prediction models. This includes a representation of nonlocal mixing (driven by both surface fluxes and cloud-top processes) in unstable layers, either coupled to or decoupled from the surface, and an explicit entrainment parameterization. The scheme is formulated in moist conserved variables so that it can treat both dry and cloudy layers. Details of the scheme and examples of its performance in single-column model tests are presented.

Corresponding author address: Dr. A. P. Lock, The Met. Office, Rm. 172, London Road, Bracknell, Berkshire RG12 2SZ, United Kingdom.

Email: aplock@meto.gov.uk

Abstract

A new boundary layer turbulent mixing scheme has been developed for use in the UKMO weather forecasting and climate prediction models. This includes a representation of nonlocal mixing (driven by both surface fluxes and cloud-top processes) in unstable layers, either coupled to or decoupled from the surface, and an explicit entrainment parameterization. The scheme is formulated in moist conserved variables so that it can treat both dry and cloudy layers. Details of the scheme and examples of its performance in single-column model tests are presented.

Corresponding author address: Dr. A. P. Lock, The Met. Office, Rm. 172, London Road, Bracknell, Berkshire RG12 2SZ, United Kingdom.

Email: aplock@meto.gov.uk

Save
Cover Monthly Weather Review
Monthly Weather Review

  • Albrecht, B. A., D. A. Randall, and S. Nicholls, 1988: Observations of marine stratocumulus during FIRE. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,69, 618–626.

  • Ayotte, K. W., and Coauthors, 1996: An evaluation of neutral and convective planetary boundary-layer parameterizations relative to large eddy simulations. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,79, 131–175.

  • Beljaars, A. C. M., 1991: Numerical schemes for parametrizations. Proc. Seminar on Numerical Methods in Atmospheric Models, Vol. II, Reading, United Kingdom, ECMWF, 1–42.

  • ——, and A. K. Betts, 1992: Validation of the boundary layer representation in the ECMWF model. Proc. Seminar on Validation of Models over Europe, Vol. II, Reading, United Kingdom, ECMWF, 159–195.

  • Betts, A. K., 1986: A new convective adjustment scheme. Part I: Observational and theoretical basis. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,112, 677–691.

  • Bretherton, C. S., S. K. Krueger, M. C. Wyant, P. Bechtold, E. van Meijgaard, B. Stevens, and J. Teixeira, 1999: A GCSS boundary-layer cloud model intercomparison study of the first ASTEX Lagrangian experiment. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,93, 341–380.

  • Brown, A. R., 1996: Evaluation of parameterization schemes for the convective boundary layer using large-eddy simulation results. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,81, 167–200.

  • ——, 1999: The sensitivity of large-eddy simulations of shallow cumulus convection to resolution and subgrid model. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,125, 469–482.

  • Cuijpers, J. W. M., and A. A. M. Holtslag, 1998: Impact of skewness and nonlocal effects on scalar and buoyancy fluxes in convective boundary layers. J. Atmos. Sci.,55, 151–162.

  • de Roode, S., and P. G. Duynkerke, 1997: Observed Lagrangian transition of stratocumulus into cumulus during ASTEX: Mean state and turbulence structure. J. Atmos. Sci.,54, 2157–2173.

  • Driedonks, A. G. M., 1982: Models and observations of the growth of the atmospheric boundary layer. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,23, 283–306.

  • Edwards, J., and A. Slingo, 1996: Studies with a flexible new radiation code. I: Choosing a configuration for a large-scale model. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,122, 689–720.

  • Gregory, D., and P. R. Rowntree, 1990: A mass flux scheme with representation of cloud ensemble characteristics and stability-dependent closure. Mon. Wea. Rev.,118, 1483–1506.

  • Hignett, P., 1991: Observations of diurnal variation in a cloud-capped marine boundary layer. J. Atmos. Sci.,48, 1474–1482.

  • Holtslag, A. A. M., and B. A. Boville, 1993: Local versus nonlocal boundary-layer diffusion in a global climate model. J. Climate,6, 1825–1842.

  • Lock, A. P., 1998: The parametrization of entrainment in cloudy boundary layers. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,124, 2729–2753.

  • ——, 1999: A parametrization of turbulent mixing in convective cloud-capped boundary layers derived from large-eddy simulations. Preprints, 13th Symp. on Boundary Layers and Turbulence, Dallas, TX, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 589–592.

  • Louis, J.-F., 1979: A parametric model of vertical eddy fluxes in the atmosphere. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,17, 187–202.

  • Mahrt, L., 1976: Mixed layer moisture structure. Mon. Wea. Rev.,104, 1403–1407.

  • Martin, G. M., D. W. Johnson, D. P. Rogers, P. R. Jonas, P. Minnis, and D. A. Hegg, 1995: Observations of the interaction between cumulus and stratocumulus in the marine boundary layer during ASTEX. J. Atmos. Sci.,52, 2902–2922.

  • ——, M. R. Bush, A. R. Brown, A. P. Lock, and R. N. B. Smith, 2000: A new boundary layer mixing scheme. Part II: Tests in climate and mesoscale models. Mon. Wea. Rev., 3200–3217.

  • Moeng, C.-H., P. P. Sullivan, and B. Stevens, 1999: Including radiative effects in an entrainment-rate formula for buoyancy driven PBLs. J. Atmos. Sci.,56, 1031–1049.

  • Senior, C. A., and J. F. B. Mitchell, 1993: Carbon dioxide and climate:Impact of cloud parameterization. J. Climate,6, 393–418.

  • Siebesma, A. P., and J. W. M. Cuijpers, 1995: Evaluation of parametric assumptions for shallow cumulus convection. J. Atmos. Sci.,52, 650–666.

  • Siems, S. T., C. S. Bretherton, M. B. Baker, S. Shy, and R. E. Breidenthal, 1990: Buoyancy reversal and cloud-top entrainment instability. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,116, 705–739.

  • 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.

  • Stage, S. A., and J. A. Businger, 1981: A model for entrainment into a cloud-topped marine boundary layer. Part I: Model description and application to a cold-air outbreak episode. J. Atmos. Sci.,38, 2213–2229.

  • Troen, I. W., and L. Mahrt, 1986: A simple model of the atmospheric boundary layer; sensitivity to surface evaporation. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,37, 129–148.

  • Turton, J. D., and S. Nicholls, 1987: A study of the diurnal variation of stratocumulus using a multiple mixed layer model. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,113, 969–1009.

  • van Meijgaard, E., and A. P. van Ulden, 1998: A first-order mixing-condensation scheme for nocturnal stratocumulus. Atmos. Res.,45, 253–273.

  • Vogelezang, D. H. P., and A. A. M. Holtslag, 1996: Evaluation and model impacts of alternative boundary-layer height formulations. Bound.-Layer Meteor.,81, 245–269.

  • Zilitinkevich, S. S., 1975: Comments on “A model for the dynamics of the inversion above a convective boundary layer.” J. Atmos. Sci.,32, 991–992.

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 1496 483 41
PDF Downloads 1206 341 19