4.4 Article

Sensitivity of a Cloud-Resolving Model to Bulk and Explicit Bin Microphysical Schemes. Part I: Comparisons

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES
Volume 66, Issue 1, Pages 3-21

Publisher

AMER METEOROLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1175/2008JAS2646.1

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NASA
  2. NASA TRMM Mission
  3. NASA GSFC

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A two-dimensional cloud-resolving model is used to study the sensitivities of two microphysical schemes, a bulk scheme and an explicit spectral bin scheme, in simulating a midlatitude summertime squall line [Preliminary Regional Experiment for Storm-Scale Operational and Research Meteorology (PRE-STORM), 10-11 June 1985]. In this first part of a two-part paper, the developing and mature stages of simulated storms are compared in detail. Some variables observed during the field campaign are also presented for validation. It is found that both schemes agree well with each other, and also with published observations and retrievals, in terms of storm structures and evolution, average storm flow patterns, pressure and temperature perturbations, and total heating profiles. The bin scheme is able to produce a much more extensive and homogeneous stratiform region, which compares better with observations. However, instantaneous fields and high temporal resolution analyses show distinct characteristics in the two simulations. During the mature stage, the bulk simulation produces a multicell storm with convective cells embedded in its stratiform region. Its leading convection also shows a distinct life cycle (strong evolution). In contrast, the bin simulation produces a unicell storm with little temporal variation in its leading cell regeneration (weak evolution). More detailed, high-resolution observations are needed to validate and, perhaps, generalize these model results. Interactions between the cloud microphysics and storm dynamics that produce the sensitivities described here are discussed in detail in Part II of this paper.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available