Abstract

Simulations with the Community Atmosphere Model version 5 (CAM5) are used to analyze the sensitivity of the large-scale circulation to changes in parameterizations of orographic surface drag and vertical diffusion. Many GCMs and NWP models use enhanced turbulent mixing in stable conditions to improve simulations, while CAM5 cuts off all turbulence at high stabilities and instead employs a strong orographic surface stress parameterization, known as turbulent mountain stress (TMS). TMS completely dominates the surface stress over land and reduces the near-surface wind speeds compared to simulations without TMS. It is found that TMS is generally beneficial for the large-scale circulation as it improves zonal wind speeds, Arctic sea level pressure and zonal anomalies of the 500-hPa stream function, compared to ERA-Interim. It also alleviates atmospheric blocking frequency biases in the Northern Hemisphere. Using a scheme that instead allows for a modest increase of turbulent diffusion at higher stabilities only in the planetary boundary layer (PBL) appears to in some aspects have a similar, although much smaller, beneficial effect as TMS. Enhanced mixing throughout the atmospheric column, however, degrades the CAM5 simulation. Evaluating the simulations in comparison with detailed measurements at two locations reveals that TMS is detrimental for the PBL at the flat grassland ARM Southern Great Plains site, giving too strong wind turning and too deep PBLs. At the Sodankylä forest site, the effect of TMS is smaller due to the larger local vegetation roughness. At both sites, all simulations substantially overestimate the boundary layer ageostrophic flow.

Highlights

  • The drag on the atmospheric flow is of great importance for the circulation and climate in numerical weather prediction (NWP) and global climate models (GCMs)

  • The first Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment (GEWEX) Atmospheric Boundary Layer Study (GABLS1, Cuxart et al 2006), showed that the turbulence closures employed in operational models are more diffusive in stably stratified conditions than what is seen in large-eddy simulations (LES) and in observations

  • The climate in the simulations is similar in control simulation (CTRL) and NoTMS when it comes to the radiative fluxes at the top of the atmosphere

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The drag on the atmospheric flow is of great importance for the circulation and climate in numerical weather prediction (NWP) and global climate models (GCMs). There is a lack of understanding of some of the relevant atmospheric processes and it is still unclear how observations from point measurements should be translated into parameterized grid-box averages of turbulence and drag The issue of both representing the largescale circulation and the near-surface climate accurately and doing so for the right reasons has long been recognized as a challenge for GCMs and numerical weather prediction (NWP) models (Sandu et al 2013; Holtslag et al 2013). It can be claimed that the mixing in stable conditions needs to be enhanced in order to account for processes that contribute to the vertical mixing but are not represented in the models Examples of such processes are unresolved surface heterogeneity, differential heating, certain sources of gravity waves and mesoscale variability. TMS is only applied where the height of subgrid orography >100 m No The speeds of the source winds for the gravity wave parameterization are halved Yes TMS is always on and does not depend on Ri

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call