Editorial Type:
Article
Article Type:
Research Article

Sensitivity of Simulated Climate to Two Atmospheric Models: Interpretation of Differences between Dry Models and Moist Models

He Zhang ICCES, Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China

Search for other papers by He Zhang in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Minghua Zhang ICCES, Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China, and School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York

Search for other papers by Minghua Zhang in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
, and
Qing-cun Zeng ICCES, Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China

Search for other papers by Qing-cun Zeng in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
Print Publication:
01 May 2013
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-11-00367.1
Page(s):
1558–1576
Restricted access

Abstract

The dynamical core of the Institute of Atmospheric Physics of the Chinese Academy of Sciences Atmospheric General Circulation Model (IAP AGCM) and the Eulerian spectral transform dynamical core of the Community Atmosphere Model, version 3.1 (CAM3.1), developed at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) are used to study the sensitivity of simulated climate. The authors report that when the dynamical cores are used with the same CAM3.1 physical parameterizations of comparable resolutions, the model with the IAP dynamical core simulated a colder troposphere than that from the CAM3.1 core, reducing the CAM3.1 warm bias in the tropical and midlatitude troposphere. However, when the two dynamical cores are used in the idealized Held–Suarez tests without moisture physics, the IAP AGCM core simulated a warmer troposphere than that in CAM3.1. The causes of the differences in the full models and in the dry models are then investigated.

The authors show that the IAP dynamical core simulated weaker eddies in both the full physics and the dry models than those in the CAM due to different numerical approximations. In the dry IAP model, the weaker eddies cause smaller heat loss from poleward dynamical transport and thus warmer troposphere in the tropics and midlatitudes. When moist physics is included, however, weaker eddies also lead to weaker transport of water vapor and reduction of high clouds in the IAP model, which then causes a colder troposphere due to reduced greenhouse warming of these clouds. These results show how interactive physical processes can change the effect of a dynamical core on climate simulations between two models.

Corresponding author address: Minghua Zhang, SoMAS, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY 11794-5000. E-mail: mzhang@notes.cc.sunysb.edu

Abstract

The dynamical core of the Institute of Atmospheric Physics of the Chinese Academy of Sciences Atmospheric General Circulation Model (IAP AGCM) and the Eulerian spectral transform dynamical core of the Community Atmosphere Model, version 3.1 (CAM3.1), developed at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) are used to study the sensitivity of simulated climate. The authors report that when the dynamical cores are used with the same CAM3.1 physical parameterizations of comparable resolutions, the model with the IAP dynamical core simulated a colder troposphere than that from the CAM3.1 core, reducing the CAM3.1 warm bias in the tropical and midlatitude troposphere. However, when the two dynamical cores are used in the idealized Held–Suarez tests without moisture physics, the IAP AGCM core simulated a warmer troposphere than that in CAM3.1. The causes of the differences in the full models and in the dry models are then investigated.

The authors show that the IAP dynamical core simulated weaker eddies in both the full physics and the dry models than those in the CAM due to different numerical approximations. In the dry IAP model, the weaker eddies cause smaller heat loss from poleward dynamical transport and thus warmer troposphere in the tropics and midlatitudes. When moist physics is included, however, weaker eddies also lead to weaker transport of water vapor and reduction of high clouds in the IAP model, which then causes a colder troposphere due to reduced greenhouse warming of these clouds. These results show how interactive physical processes can change the effect of a dynamical core on climate simulations between two models.

Corresponding author address: Minghua Zhang, SoMAS, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY 11794-5000. E-mail: mzhang@notes.cc.sunysb.edu
Save
Cover Monthly Weather Review
Monthly Weather Review

  • Andrews, D. G., J. R. Holton, and C. B. Leovy, 1987: Middle Atmosphere Dynamics. Academic Press, 489 pp.

  • Arakawa, A., and V. B. Lamb, 1977: Computational design of the basic dynamical process of the UCLA general circulation model. Methods in Computational Physics, J. Chang, Ed., Vol. 17, Academic Press, 173–265.

  • Baba, Y., K. Takahashi, T. Sugimura, and K. Goto, 2010: Dynamical core of an atmospheric general circulation model on a Yin–Yang grid. Mon. Wea. Rev., 138, 3988–4005.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Bi, X., 1993: IAP 9L AGCM and climate simulation (in Chinese). Ph.D. dissertation, Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 210 pp.

  • Boer, G. J., and B. Denis, 1997: Numerical convergence of the dynamics of a GCM. Climate Dyn., 13, 359–374.

  • Boer, G. J., and Coauthors, 1992: Some results from an intercomparison of the climates simulated by 14 atmospheric general circulation models. J. Geophys. Res., 97 (D12), 12 771–12 786.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Charney, J. G., 1971: Geostrophic turbulence. J. Atmos. Sci., 28, 1087–1095.

  • Chen, H., Z. Lin, and G. Zhou, 2004: Experimental dynamical prediction of spring dust storm events in China (in Chinese). Climatic Environ. Res., 9, 182–190.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Collins, W. D., and Coauthors, 2004: Description of the NCAR Community Atmosphere Model (CAM3.0). NCAR Tech. Note NCAR/TN-464+STR, 214 pp.

  • Decker, M., M. A. Brunke, Z. Wang, K. Sakaguchi, X. Zeng, and M. G. Bosilovich, 2012: Evaluation of the reanalysis products from GSFC, NCEP, and ECMWF using flux tower observations. J. Climate, 25, 1916–1944.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Dee, D. P., and Coauthors, 2011: The ERA-Interim Reanalysis: Configuration and performance of the data assimilation system. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 137, 553–597.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Donner, L. J., and Coauthors, 2011: The dynamical core, physical parameterizations, and basic simulation characteristics of the atmospheric component AM3 of the GFDL Global Coupled Model CM3. J. Climate, 24, 3484–3519.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Ghan, S. J., J. W. Lingaas, M. E. Schlesinger, R. L. Mobley, and W. L. Gates, 1982: A documentation of the OSU two-level atmospheric general circulation model. Oregon State University Climatic Research Institute Rep. Issue 35, 395 pp.

  • Giraldo, F. X., and M. Restelli, 2008: A study of spectral element and discontinuous Galerkin methods for the Navier–Stokes equations in nonhydrostatic mesoscale atmospheric modeling: Equation sets and test cases. J. Comput. Phys., 227, 3849–3877.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Held, I. M., and M. J. Suarez, 1994: A proposal for the intercomparison of the dynamical cores of atmospheric general circulation models. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 75, 1825–1830.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Jablonowski, C., and D. L. Williamson, 2006: Baroclinic wave test case for dynamical cores of GCMs. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 132, 2943–2976.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Kalnay, E., and Coauthors, 1996: The NCEP/NCAR 40-Year Reanalysis Project. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 77, 437–471.

  • Liang, X., 1996: Description of a nine-level grid point atmospheric general circulation model. Adv. Atmos. Sci., 13, 269–298.

  • Lin, Z., and Q. Zeng, 1997: Simulation of East Asian summer monsoon by using an improved AGCM. Adv. Atmos. Sci., 14, 513–526.

  • Neale, R. B., and B. J. Hoskins, 2000: A standard test for AGCMs including their physical parameterizations: I: The proposal. Atmos. Sci. Lett., 1, 101–107.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Phillips, N. A., 1957: A coordinate system having some special advantages for numerical forecasting. J. Meteor., 14, 184–185.

  • Polvani, L. M., R. K. Scott, and S. J. Thomas, 2004: Numerically converged solutions of the global primitive equations for testing the dynamical core of atmospheric GCMs. Mon. Wea. Rev., 132, 2539–2552.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Rayner, N. A., and Coauthors, 2003: Global analyses of sea surface temperature, sea ice, and night marine air temperature since the late nineteenth century. J. Geophys. Res., 108, 4407, doi:10.1029/2002JD002670.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Reynolds, R. W., N. A. Rayner, T. M. Smith, D. C. Stokes, and W. Wang, 2002: An improved in situ and satellite SST analysis for climate. J. Climate, 15, 1609–1625.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Ringler, T. D., D. Jacobsen, M. Gunzburger, L. Ju, M. Duda, and W. Skamarock, 2011: Exploring a multiresolution modeling approach within the shallow-water equations. Mon. Wea. Rev., 139, 3348–3368.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Taylor, M. A., J. Edwards, and A. St-Cyr, 2008: Petascale atmosphere models for the Community Climate System Model: New developments and evaluation of scalable dynamical cores. J. Phys.: Conf. Ser., 125, 012023, doi:10.1088/1742-6596/125/1/012023.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Tomita, H., and M. Satoh, 2004: A new dynamical framework of nonhydrostatic global model using the icosahedral grid. Fluid Dyn. Res., 34, 357–400.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Umscheid, L., and M. Sankar-Rao, 1971: Further tests of a grid system for global numerical prediction. Mon. Wea. Rev., 99, 686–690.

  • Wan, H., M. A. Giorgetta, and L. Bonaventura, 2008: Ensemble Held-Suarez test with a spectral transform model: Variability, sensitivity, and convergence. Mon. Wea. Rev., 136, 1075–1092.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Washington, W. M., and A. Kasahara, 1970: A January simulation experiment with the two-layer version of the NCAR global circulation model. Mon. Wea. Rev., 98, 559–580.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Williamson, D. L., 2002: Time-split versus process-split coupling of parameterizations and dynamical core. Mon. Wea. Rev., 130, 2024–2041.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Williamson, D. L., 2007: The evolution of dynamical core for global atmospheric models. J. Meteor. Soc. Japan, 85B, 241–269.

  • Williamson, D. L., 2008: Equivalent finite volume and Eulerian spectral transform horizontal resolutions established from aqua-planet simulations. Tellus, 60A, 839–847.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Williamson, D. L., and P. J. Rasch, 1989: Two-dimensional semi-Lagrangian transport with shape-preserving interpolation. Mon. Wea. Rev., 117, 102–129.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Xue, F., X. Bi, and Y. Lin, 2001: Modelling the global monsoon system by IAP 9L AGCM. Adv. Atmos. Sci., 18, 404–412.

  • Zeng, Q., and Coauthors, 1989: Documentation of IAP two-level atmospheric general circulation model. Department of Energy Tech. Rep. DOE/ER/60314-H1 TR044, 383 pp.

  • Zeng, Q., and Coauthors, 1997: Seasonal and extraseasonal predictions of summer monsoon precipitation by GCMs. Adv. Atmos. Sci., 14, 163–176.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Zhang, H., 2009: Development of IAP atmospheric general circulation model version 4.0 and its climate simulations (in Chinese). Ph.D. dissertation, Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 194 pp.

  • Zhang, H., Z. Lin, and Q. Zeng, 2009: The computational scheme and the test for dynamical framework of IAP AGCM-4 (in Chinese). Chinese J. Atmos. Sci., 33, 1267–1285.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Zuo, R., 2003: Development of new generation grid point atmospheric general circulation model with high resolution (in Chinese). Ph.D. dissertation, China People’s Liberation Army University of Science and Technology, 328 pp.

  • Zuo, R., and Coauthors, 2004: Designing and climatic numerical modeling of 21-level AGCM (IAP AGCM-III). Part I: Dynamical framework (in Chinese). Chinese J. Atmos. Sci., 28, 659–674.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 719 409 22
PDF Downloads 238 49 11