雲解像モデル、SSM/I、観測船レーダのデータを用いて求めたTOGA COARE対流システムの潜熱放出の鉛直分布とそのリトリーバル

Abstract

Latent heating profiles associated with three (TOGA COARE) Tropical Ocean and Global Atmosphere Coupled Ocean Atmosphere Response Experiment active convective episodes (December 10-17 1992; December 19-27 1992; and February 9-13 1993) are examined using the Goddard Cumulus Ensemble (GCE) Model and retrieved by using the Goddard Convective and Stratiform Heating (CSH) algorithm . The following sources of rainfall information are input into the CSH algorithm: Special Sensor Microwave Imager (SSM/1), Radar and the GCE model. Diagnostically determined latent heating profiles calculated using 6 hourly soundings are used for validation. The GCE model simulated rainfall and latent heating profiles are in excellent agreement with those estimated by soundings. In addition, the typical convective and stratiform heating structures (or shapes) are well captured by the GCE model. Radar measured rainfall is smaller than that both estimated by the GCE model and SSM/I in all three different COARE IFA periods. SSM/I derived rainfall is more than the GCE model simulated for the December 19-27 and February 9-13 periods, but is in excellent agreement with the GCE model for the December 10-17 period. The GCE model estimated stratiform amount is about 50% for December 19-27, 42% for December 11-17 and 56% for the February 9-13 case. These results are consistent with large-scale analyses. The accurate estimates of stratiform amount is needed for good latent heating retrieval. A higher (lower) percentage of stratiform rain can imply a maximum heating rate at a higher (lower) altitude. The GCE model always simulates more stratiform rain (10 to 20%) than the radar for all three convective episodes. SSM/I derived stratiform amount is about 37% for December 19-27, 48% for December 11-17 and 41% for the February 9-13 case. Temporal variability of CSH algorithm retrieved latent heating profiles using either GCE model simulated or radar estimated rainfall and stratiform amount is in good agreement with that diagnostically determined for all three periods. However, less rainfall and a smaller stratiform percentage estimated by radar resulted in a weaker (underestimated) latent heating profile and a lower maximum latent heating level compared to those determined diagnostically. Rainfall information from SSM/I can not retrieve individual convective events due to poor temporal sampling. Nevertheless, this study suggests that a good 4r, rainfall retrieval from SSM/I for a convective event always leads to a good latent heating retrieval. Sensitivity testing has been performed and the results indicate that the SSM/I derived time averaged stratiform amount may be underestimated for December 19-27. Time averaged heating profiles derived from SSM/I, however, are not in bad agreement with those derived by soundings for the December 10-17 convective period. The heating retrievals may be more accurate for longer time scales provided there is no bias in the sampling.