A New Framework to Compare Mass-Flux Schemes Within the AROME Numerical Weather Prediction Model

Abstract

In the Application of Research to Operations at Mesoscale (AROME) numerical weather forecast model used in operations at Meteo-France, five mass-flux schemes are available to parametrize shallow convection at kilometre resolution. All but one are based on the eddy-diffusivity–mass-flux approach, and differ in entrainment/detrainment, the updraft vertical velocity equation and the closure assumption. The fifth is based on a more classical mass-flux approach. Screen-level scores obtained with these schemes show few discrepancies and are not sufficient to highlight behaviour differences. Here, we describe and use a new experimental framework, able to compare and discriminate among different schemes. For a year, daily forecast experiments were conducted over small domains centred on the five French metropolitan radio-sounding locations. Cloud base, planetary boundary-layer height and normalized vertical profiles of specific humidity, potential temperature, wind speed and cloud condensate were compared with observations, and with each other. The framework allowed the behaviour of the different schemes in and above the boundary layer to be characterized. In particular, the impact of the entrainment/detrainment formulation, closure assumption and cloud scheme were clearly visible. Differences mainly concerned the transport intensity thus allowing schemes to be separated into two groups, with stronger or weaker updrafts. In the AROME model (with all interactions and the possible existence of compensating errors), evaluation diagnostics gave the advantage to the first group.