skip to main content

DOE PAGESDOE PAGES

This content will become publicly available on June 4, 2019

Title: Evaluation of Planetary Boundary Layer Simulation in GFDL Atmospheric General Circulation Models

Here, this study describes the performance of two Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) atmospheric general circulation models (AGCMs) in simulating the climatologies of planetary boundary layer (PBL) parameters, with a particular focus on the diurnal cycles. The two models differ solely in the PBL parameterization: one uses a prescribed K-profile parameterization (KPP) scheme with an entrainment parameterization, and the other employs a turbulence kinetic energy (TKE) scheme. The models are evaluated through comparison with the reanalysis ensemble, which is generated from European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) twentieth-century reanalysis (ERA-20C), ERA-Interim, NCEP CFSR, and NASA MERRA, and the following systematic biases are identified. The models exhibit widespread cold biases in the high latitudes, and the biases are smaller when the KPP scheme is used. The diurnal cycle amplitudes are underestimated in most dry regions, and the model with the TKE scheme simulates larger amplitudes. For the near-surface winds, the models underestimate both the daily means and the diurnal amplitudes; the differences between the models are relatively small compared to the biases. The role of the PBL schemes in simulating the PBL parameters is investigated through the analysis of vertical profiles. The Sahara, which is suitable for focusing on themore » role of vertical mixing in dry PBLs, is selected for a detailed analysis. It reveals that compared to the KPP scheme, the heat transport is weaker with the TKE scheme in both convective and stable PBLs as a result of weaker vertical mixing, resulting in larger diurnal amplitudes. Lack of nonlocal momentum transport from the nocturnal low-level jets to the surfaces appears to explain the underestimation of the near-surface winds in the models.« less
Authors:
ORCiD logo [1] ;  [2] ;  [2] ;  [3] ;  [1] ;  [1]
  1. Univ. Corp. for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO (United States); NOAA/Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Lab., Princeton, NJ (United States)
  2. NOAA/Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Lab., Princeton, NJ (United States)
  3. Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (LLNL), Livermore, CA (United States)
Publication Date:
Report Number(s):
LLNL-JRNL-732182
Journal ID: ISSN 0894-8755; 883628
Grant/Contract Number:
AC52-07NA27344
Type:
Accepted Manuscript
Journal Name:
Journal of Climate
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Volume: 31; Journal Issue: 13; Journal ID: ISSN 0894-8755
Publisher:
American Meteorological Society
Research Org:
Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (LLNL), Livermore, CA (United States)
Sponsoring Org:
USDOE National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
58 GEOSCIENCES; Subgrid-scale processes; Turbulence; Boundary layer; General circulation models; Model evaluation/performance; Parameterization
OSTI Identifier:
1463017
Alternate Identifier(s):
OSTI ID: 1440278

Shin, Hyeyum Hailey, Ming, Yi, Zhao, Ming, Golaz, Jean -Christophe, Xiang, Baoqiang, and Guo, Huan. Evaluation of Planetary Boundary Layer Simulation in GFDL Atmospheric General Circulation Models. United States: N. p., Web. doi:10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0543.1.
Shin, Hyeyum Hailey, Ming, Yi, Zhao, Ming, Golaz, Jean -Christophe, Xiang, Baoqiang, & Guo, Huan. Evaluation of Planetary Boundary Layer Simulation in GFDL Atmospheric General Circulation Models. United States. doi:10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0543.1.
Shin, Hyeyum Hailey, Ming, Yi, Zhao, Ming, Golaz, Jean -Christophe, Xiang, Baoqiang, and Guo, Huan. 2018. "Evaluation of Planetary Boundary Layer Simulation in GFDL Atmospheric General Circulation Models". United States. doi:10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0543.1.
@article{osti_1463017,
title = {Evaluation of Planetary Boundary Layer Simulation in GFDL Atmospheric General Circulation Models},
author = {Shin, Hyeyum Hailey and Ming, Yi and Zhao, Ming and Golaz, Jean -Christophe and Xiang, Baoqiang and Guo, Huan},
abstractNote = {Here, this study describes the performance of two Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) atmospheric general circulation models (AGCMs) in simulating the climatologies of planetary boundary layer (PBL) parameters, with a particular focus on the diurnal cycles. The two models differ solely in the PBL parameterization: one uses a prescribed K-profile parameterization (KPP) scheme with an entrainment parameterization, and the other employs a turbulence kinetic energy (TKE) scheme. The models are evaluated through comparison with the reanalysis ensemble, which is generated from European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) twentieth-century reanalysis (ERA-20C), ERA-Interim, NCEP CFSR, and NASA MERRA, and the following systematic biases are identified. The models exhibit widespread cold biases in the high latitudes, and the biases are smaller when the KPP scheme is used. The diurnal cycle amplitudes are underestimated in most dry regions, and the model with the TKE scheme simulates larger amplitudes. For the near-surface winds, the models underestimate both the daily means and the diurnal amplitudes; the differences between the models are relatively small compared to the biases. The role of the PBL schemes in simulating the PBL parameters is investigated through the analysis of vertical profiles. The Sahara, which is suitable for focusing on the role of vertical mixing in dry PBLs, is selected for a detailed analysis. It reveals that compared to the KPP scheme, the heat transport is weaker with the TKE scheme in both convective and stable PBLs as a result of weaker vertical mixing, resulting in larger diurnal amplitudes. Lack of nonlocal momentum transport from the nocturnal low-level jets to the surfaces appears to explain the underestimation of the near-surface winds in the models.},
doi = {10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0543.1},
journal = {Journal of Climate},
number = 13,
volume = 31,
place = {United States},
year = {2018},
month = {6}
}