Microphysics Schemes W.-K. Tao S. Lang , J. Chern, T. Matsui, X. Li, - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Microphysics Schemes

W.-K. Tao

• S. Lang, J. Chern, T. Matsui, X. Li, T. Iguchi, D. Wu

NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

1/30 + 1

Goddard Cloud Library http://cloud.gsfc.nasa.gov/ All microphysical schemes have their own set of unique assumptions and capabilities. It is critical therefore to sample and evaluate model performance over a comprehensive range of cloud and precipitation systems. There is “no measurements” on cloud and microphysical processes! There is no “perfect” microphysical scheme (parameterization!)

2

Tao and Moncrieff (2009)

Issues for Microphysics Schemes

What are the main characteristics and differences / similarities of these microphysics schemes? One-moment, two-moment, three-moment, spectral bin microphysics Assumed or pre-determined parameters and transfer processes between cloud species What is the sensitivity of model resolution on the performance of the microphysics schemes? (1, 2, 3.5, or 7 km) What are the main methods to evaluate the performance of these microphysics schemes? Ground, Aircraft and Satellite observations What are the main issues for inter-comparison studies on different microphysics schemes? What are the main uncertainties of microphysics (processes) schemes?

3

4

120 Papers Ice Microphysics Developments

Tao, W.-K., D. Wu, S. Lang, J. Chern, C. Peters-Lidard, A. Fridlind, and T. Matsui, 2016: High-resolution NU-WRF model simulations of MC3E, deep convective-precipitation systems: Comparisons between Goddard microphysics schemes and observations, J. Geophys. Res., 121, 1278-1306. doi:10.1002/2015JD023986.

5

Bin microphysical scheme explicitly resolves hydrometeor size distributions using

43 mass double size bins. There is no need to assume any pre-defined particle size

• distributions. Eight different species, i.e., the aerosols serving as CCN, liquid drops,

three types of pristine ice crystals (column, plate, and dendrite), snow aggregates, graupel, as well as hail are included. Riming fractions explicitly for aggregates and graupel, and melting fractions are tracked for all ice-phase are solved species.

6

Fifteen 1-M or 2-M 3-Ice schemes Two 3-M schemes Three 4-Ice schemes One P3 scheme

Improving Bulk Microphysics in GCE Using Bin Spectral Scheme (Li, Tao et al., JAS, 2009)

• bservation

Bulk Scheme (original)

Bin Scheme is used to correct the overestimation

• f rain evaporation in bulk scheme and the

density and fall speed of graupel in bulk scheme

Bulk Scheme (Red Evap)

Radar Observation Bin Scheme Simulation

By assuming exp. rain DSD, bulk scheme artificially increases #s

• f small drops

bin

7

• bservations

simulation improvements

Improving spectral bin scheme using TRMM satellite

Bin model improvements:

• 1. Reduce temperature

dependent ice particles collection efficiencies;

• 2. Adjust graupel

production terms when snow aggregates or ice crystals collect cloud droplets.

Ice particle collection efficiency

Li, X., W.-K. Tao, T. Matsui, C. Liu and H. Masunaga, 2010: Improving spectral bin microphysical scheme using TRMM satellite observations. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc. 136, 382–399.

8

Ground-based Radar Space-based Radar Microwave (TB)

WRF-SBM and Polarimetric Radar Observations in MC3E

Dolan, B., T. Matsui, A. A. Matthews, S. A. Rutledge, W. Xu, W.-K. Tao, T. Iguchi, V. Chandrasekar , 2016: Multi-sensor Radar Observations and Size-Resolving Cloud Modeling Analysis of the 25 April 2011 MC3E Convective Case, (to be submitted to MWR)

• 1. Hydrometeor

distributions from WRF- SBM simulations were evaluated for the first time against the CSU Polarimetric HID retrievals.

• 2. WRF-SBM closely

generated 9 different hydrometeor species vs the polariemtric retrievals including heavily rimed particles.

• 3. Distributions are highly

sensitive to the ice- formulating nuclei.

9

S-band echo top height simulated by 3 different Models Same Microphysics Scheme (Morrison) – Li et al. (2017) WRF GCE SAM

10

S-band echo top height simulated by three different Models Same microphysics scheme (Morrison) – Li et al. (2017) WRF GCE SAM

11

SAM

S-band echo top height simulated by GCE with different microphysics (Morrison vs Goddard 3ICE) Morrison Goddard

12

Contoured Frequency Altitude Diagrams (CFADs)

WSM6 WDM6 - 7 Thompson Morrison (Hail) 3ICE (Graupel) Morrison (Graupel) 4ICE Observation

13 Wu/Tao et al. (2015)

4ICE simulated CFAD agrees very well with observations Morrison 3ICE-Hail simulated CFAD agrees better with observations than the 3ICE-Graupel schemes (Goddard, Morrison, and WSM6)

IMERG 4ICE Morrison WSM6

2015-12-03 00:00 UTC 2015-12-03 15:00 UTC

4ICE Morrison WSM6

14

What are the uncertainties of cloud/microphysical processes? The vertical profiles of the cloud/precipitation properties in convective and stratiform regions, mixed phase (melting, riming, ice processes), life cycle Need to have the following measurements of cloud properties

• 3D vertical velocity structures;
• High temporal resolution aerosol/CCN measurements;
• Vertical (ice, liquid) hydrometeor particles (droplet spectrum,

condensation, size, density) measurements;

• Comprehensive polarmetric radar measurements (i.e., S/C-

band ground-based for convective cores and air/space borne

• r vertically pointing X/K-band for anvil/stratiform

characteristics)

No measurement : Microphysics Processes!

15

Major characteristics of Goddard 4-ICE scheme and three two-moment schemes (RAMS, JP Chen and Morrison). The similarities and differences between these schemes are shown.

Implemented in GCE and MMF GCE: 4-ICE Scheme RAMS 2-M Morrison 2-M JP Chen 2-M

16

2-M 4ICE Scheme

CaPPM

17/30

Larger letter -> more important Numerical number -> where is occurred

Tropical MCS

Tao, W.-K., J. Simpson, S. Lang, M. McCumber, R. Adler and R. Penc, 1990: An algorithm to estimate the heating budget from vertical hydrometeor profiles. J. Appl. Meteor., 29, 1232-1244.

Identify the important microphysics processes in the CRM Also used for improve GCM performance (next 2 slices)

TRMM and GPM Latent Heating

Wei-Kuo TAO

• Y. N. Takayabu, S. Lang, S. Shige, and D. Wu

What are the TRMM LH products? What are the TRMM LH applications? How can TRMM LH be validated? What are GPM LH products? (Sept 2017)

18

Tao, W.-K., Y. N. Takayabu, S. E. Lang, W. Olson, S. Shige, A. Hou, G. M. Skofronick-Jackson, X. Jiang, K.-M. Lau, T. Krishnamurti, D. Waliser, C. Zhang, R. Johnson, R. Houze, P. Ciesielski, M. Grecu, S. Hagos, R. Kakar, N. Nakamura, S. Braun, and A. Bhardwaj, 2016: TRMM Latent Heating Retrieval: Applications and Comparisons with Field Campaigns and Large-Scale Analyses, Amer. Meteor. Soc. Meteorological Monographs - Multi-scale Convection-Coupled Systems in the Tropics, 56, Chapter 2, doi: 10.1175/AMSMONOGRAPHS-D-15-0013.1

TRMM Diabatic Heating Special Collection (J. Climate, 2009, 2010)

CRM Simulated Q1 Budget

LH QR Edd y Q1

Sounding Estimated Q1 Budget (Yanai et al. 1973)

Purple: Simulated Q1 Green: Observed Q1

LH: Latent Heat - phase change of water

Eddy - heat transport by cloud dynamics

QR: Radiation

Rainfall + Sensible heat fluxes

19

• Role of convection in tropical intraseasonal variability and quasi-stationary

circulation/ITCZ/MJO

• Improvement/Validation of Cumulus parameterization in GCMs/Climate Models

Similarities and Differences between SLH and CSH Algorithm

Convective – Stratiform Separation Method GCE vs PR Look-Up Table GCE simulated cases Domain (256-512 km) vs sub-domain (64 km) averaged Horizontal and vertical eddy fluxes Radiation

20

TRMM Standard LH Products

21

Pixel research Gridded (0.5o) Orbital standard Monthly Gridded (0.5o) standard

LH

GPM L80

Array, 2011

DYNAMO

Northern Array Southern Array

CSH (PR): 6.56 mm/day, 43% stratiform TRMM 3B42: 6.6 mm/day Q2 budget: 5.5 mm/day CSH (PR): 8.43 mm/day. 45% stratiform TRMM 3B42: 6.3 mm/day Gauge network: 7.2 mm/day

• D. Johnson and P. Ciesielski

AMMA NAME

22

SLH derived LH also agree with sounding estimated for DYNAMO

• R

Lx P Ptop

S LP x p Q Q g

base

+ = ∆ ∆ −

∫ ∫

) ( 1

1

CSH Performance (Lang et al 2017)

Po is surface rainfall So is surface sensitive flux TRMM Derived Rainfall

7-km LH 2-km LH

23

SLH L2/L3 V04 Evaluations (TRMM/GPM)

Horizontal distributions of three-month mean Q1R

[K/day]

TRMM PR V7A GPM DPR ITE057 7km 2km Good agreements in horizontal distributions between PR-SLH and DPR- SLH are found in the TRMM region

02/23/2016 JPST

24

25

CSH and SLH team will use the same cases for GPM!

4ICE: Cloud ice, snow, graupel and hail

03/16/2014 18:00 UTC 02/17/2015 03:00 UTC 02/21/2015 18:00 UTC NEXRAD NEXRAD NEXRAD NU-WRF NU-WRF NU-WRF

Winter Storm (3) Cases

NEXRAD

NU-WRF

26

• Model simulations (dx=1

km, 60 vertical layers)

• Derive variables

corresponding to GPM combined product

– Freezing level height – Storm top height – 3D reflectivity

• Anvil region
• Height of maximum dBZ
• Composited dBZ
• Construct bins (e.g. every 2

km in altitude)

• Create heating table for

categorized regions

Goddard GPM LH LUTs

27

Evaluation: Consistency Check

28

Maximum LH

[20140316 22:00 UTC]

NU-WRF GPM with threshold

Threshold: GPM reflectivity > 13 dBZ

CSH NU-WRF with threshold

29

NU-WRF GPM without threshold GPM CSH <->

30/30

W18_6_2_GD W18_6_2_KF W18_6_2_BMJ W18_6_GD W30_10_GD W18_GD W30_GD W30_KF

• 05. 16. 00Z

For high resolution runs (18,6 and 2 km): Different parameterization schemes seem no impact on diurnal variation (intensity and timing) For low resolution runs (30 and 18 km): Weaker precipitation and do not predict the afternoon rainfall well For medium resolution run (18, 6 or 30,10 km): Similar to those high resolution runs

+1

WRF Microphysics Schemes (>20 schemes  3ICE) (Which one/ones are better than the others?)

Kessler scheme (Warm rain only) Purdue - Lin et al. scheme WSM 3-class simple ice scheme WSM 5-class scheme Ferrier (new Eta) microphysics WSM 6-class graupel scheme Goddard GCE scheme* (Tao ea al. 2003; Lang et al. 2007) Milbrandt-Yau 2-moment (4ICE) scheme Morrison 2-moment scheme SBU-YLin, 5-class scheme WSM double moment, 5-class scheme WSM double moment, 6-class scheme Thompson scheme in V3.0 Thompson graupel scheme (2-moment scheme in V3.1)

4

*4 options: Warm rain only, 2ICE, 3ICE-graupel, 3ICE-hail

10 20 30 40 50

54 different regions in total:

• Freezing level height [0, 2000, 4000, 6000]
• Storm top height [0, 4000, 8000, 12000]
• Height of maximum dBZ [0, 2000, 4000, 8000]
• Anvil/non-anvil

Category Map

Map Reflectivity