using high-res simulations to optimise edmf cloud ... · using high-res simulations to optimise...

1
Using high-res simulations to optimise EDMF cloud-parameterization schemes Andrew Williams 1 , Yair Cohen 2 and Tapio Schneider 2,3 1. University of Oxford, UK 2. California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, US 3. Jet Propulsion Lab, Pasadena, CA, US EDMF parameterization Unified representation of turbulence and convection in one SGS model by decomposing the grid box of a global climate model into two area fractions: Figure 1: The problem of convective parameterization in global models, with a EDMF decomposition of the flow and a bi-modal distribution as typically found in LES cloud simulations (Fig. 3). The EDMF assumption The EDMF model combines turbulence and convection in a single SGS model, neglecting the contribution from updraft variance (see Eq. 1). Requiring the first term in Eq. 1 to be negligible translates to an upper bound on individual updraft variance, given by Eq. 2. Figure 2: Illustrating the effect of the EDMF assumption on the distribution obtained by the parameterization. EDMF equations Variance of scalar field φ in EDMF scheme - decomposed into updraft/environment components: φ > grid variable = a φ φ u Neglected (EDMF assumption) +(1 - a) φ φ e + a(1 - a)( φ u - φ e ) 2 (1) The maximum variance of individual updrafts can be determined by applying the EDMF assumption to Eq. 1. = φ φ u individual = (1 - a) φ φ e + a(1 - a)( φ u - φ e ) 2 number of updrafts (2) Research question How many individual updrafts - each modelled as Gaussians with a standard deviation σ 2 = φ φ , Eq.2) - is optimal in recreating the updraft distribu- tion from a high-resolution Large-Eddy Simulation (LES)? Figure 3: Schematic research methodology. Methods Using passive tracers we identified coherent updrafts in high resolution LES simulation of convection. We used the PyCLES model (Python Cloud LES: Pressel et al., 2015), which is an atmospheric large eddy simulation model able to simulate boundary layer turbulence, shallow and deep convection. The scikit-learn Python package was used to perform Kernel Density Estimation (KDE) in order to fit a number of individual updrafts to the updraft distribution diagnosed from LES. The Kolmolgorov-Smirnov error between the constructed updraft distribution and the updraft distribution from LES was minimized to obtain the optimal number of updrafts N optimal . This was done for different convective cases and domain sizes (i.e. GCM resolutions). Results Figure 4: K-S error as a function of the number of updrafts used in the fitting. Results for RICO, half-domain. * Convective case Domain size N optimal Rico * Half 5 Rico Norm 7 Rico Double 9 Bomex Half 3 Bomex Norm 7 Bomex Double 9 Figure 5: Table of N optimal for various convective cases and domain sizes (relative to some default domain, ‘Norm’). RICO: Rain In Cumulus over the Ocean. BOMEX: Non-precipitating shallow cumulus over ocean. Conclusion We found that in all cases tested there exists an N optimal which minimizes the Kolmolgorov-Smirnov error between LES and KDE distributions. N optimal was found to vary strongly with domain size (i.e. GCM resolution), but weakly between the two convective cases tested (with/without precipitation). See Table 5. The dependence on domain size is reasonable, as LES simulations show updraft variance increasing with domain size, thus more individual updrafts are required to capture this. The lack of dependence of N optimal on convective case is not yet understood and requires further investigation. Further research could extend these results by testing the effect of multiple updrafts in an operational EDMF scheme. References [1] Schneider, T. et al. (2017): Climate goals and computing the future of clouds. Nature Climate Change, 7. [2] Tan, Z.et al. (2018): An extended eddy-diffusivity mass-flux scheme for unified representation of subgrid-scale turbulence and convection. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 10, 770-800. [3] Pressel, K. et al. (2015): Large-eddy simulation in an anelastic framework with closed water and entropy balances. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 7, 1425-1456. Acknowledgements Thanks is due to the Caltech Summer Undergraduate Research Fellowship (SURF) for supporting this work financially and to Yair Cohen and Tapio Schneider for their advice and guidance throughout the project.

Upload: others

Post on 18-Aug-2020

6 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Using high-res simulations to optimise EDMF cloud ... · Using high-res simulations to optimise EDMF cloud-parameterization schemes AndrewWilliams1,YairCohen2 andTapioSchneider2,3

Using high-res simulations to optimise EDMF cloud-parameterization schemesAndrew Williams1, Yair Cohen2 and Tapio Schneider2,3

1. University of Oxford, UK 2. California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, US 3. Jet Propulsion Lab, Pasadena, CA, US

EDMF parameterization

•Unified representation of turbulence andconvection in one SGS model by decomposing thegrid box of a global climate model into two areafractions:

Figure 1: The problem of convective parameterization in globalmodels, with a EDMF decomposition of the flow and a bi-modaldistribution as typically found in LES cloud simulations (Fig. 3).

The EDMF assumption

•The EDMF model combines turbulence andconvection in a single SGS model, neglecting thecontribution from updraft variance (see Eq. 1).

•Requiring the first term in Eq. 1 to be negligibletranslates to an upper bound on individualupdraft variance, given by Eq. 2.

Figure 2: Illustrating the effect of the EDMF assumption on thedistribution obtained by the parameterization.

EDMF equations

Variance of scalar field φ in EDMF scheme - decomposed into updraft/environment components:

< φ′φ′ >︸ ︷︷ ︸grid variable

= aφ′φ′u︸ ︷︷ ︸Neglected

(EDMF assumption)

+(1− a)φ′φ′e + a(1− a)(φu − φe)2 (1)

The maximum variance of individual updrafts can be determined by applying the EDMF assumption toEq. 1.

=⇒ φ′φ′uindividual = (1− a)φ′φ′e + a(1− a)(φu − φe)2

number of updrafts(2)

Research question

How many individual updrafts - each modelled asGaussians with a standard deviation σ2 = φ′φ′,Eq.2) - is optimal in recreating the updraft distribu-tion from a high-resolution Large-Eddy Simulation(LES)?

Figure 3: Schematic research methodology.

Methods

•Using passive tracers we identified coherentupdrafts in high resolution LES simulation ofconvection. We used the PyCLES model (PythonCloud LES: Pressel et al., 2015), which is anatmospheric large eddy simulation model able tosimulate boundary layer turbulence, shallow anddeep convection.

•The scikit-learn Python package was used toperform Kernel Density Estimation (KDE) inorder to fit a number of individual updrafts to theupdraft distribution diagnosed from LES.

•The Kolmolgorov-Smirnov error between theconstructed updraft distribution and the updraftdistribution from LES was minimized to obtainthe optimal number of updrafts Noptimal. Thiswas done for different convective cases anddomain sizes (i.e. GCM resolutions).

Results

Figure 4: K-S error as a function of the number of updrafts usedin the fitting. Results for RICO, half-domain. *

Convective case Domain size Noptimal

Rico * Half 5Rico Norm 7Rico Double 9

Bomex Half 3Bomex Norm 7Bomex Double 9

Figure 5: Table of Noptimal for various convective cases anddomain sizes (relative to some default domain, ‘Norm’). RICO:Rain In Cumulus over the Ocean. BOMEX: Non-precipitatingshallow cumulus over ocean.

Conclusion

•We found that in all cases tested there exists anNoptimal which minimizes theKolmolgorov-Smirnov error between LES andKDE distributions.

•Noptimal was found to vary strongly with domainsize (i.e. GCM resolution), but weakly betweenthe two convective cases tested (with/withoutprecipitation). See Table 5.

•The dependence on domain size is reasonable, asLES simulations show updraft variance increasingwith domain size, thus more individual updraftsare required to capture this.

•The lack of dependence of Noptimal on convectivecase is not yet understood and requires furtherinvestigation.

•Further research could extend these results bytesting the effect of multiple updrafts in anoperational EDMF scheme.

References

[1] Schneider, T. et al. (2017): Climate goals and computingthe future of clouds. Nature Climate Change, 7.

[2] Tan, Z.et al. (2018): An extended eddy-diffusivitymass-flux scheme for unified representation of subgrid-scaleturbulence and convection. Journal of Advances inModeling Earth Systems, 10, 770-800.

[3] Pressel, K. et al. (2015): Large-eddy simulation in ananelastic framework with closed water and entropybalances. Journal of Advances in Modeling EarthSystems, 7, 1425-1456.

Acknowledgements

Thanks is due to the Caltech Summer Undergraduate ResearchFellowship (SURF) for supporting this work financially and toYair Cohen and Tapio Schneider for their advice and guidancethroughout the project.