Assumed Probability Density Functions for Shallow and Deep Convection

Abstract

The assumed joint probability density function (PDF) between vertical velocity and conserved temperature and total water scalars has been suggested to be a relatively computationally inexpensive and unified subgrid-scale (SGS) parameterization for boundary layer clouds and turbulent moments. This paper analyzes the performance of five families of PDFs using large-eddy simulations of deep convection, shallow convection, and a transition from stratocumulus to trade wind cumulus. Three of the PDF families are based on the double Gaussian form and the remaining two are the single Gaussian and a Double Delta Function (analogous to a mass flux model). The assumed PDF method is tested for grid sizes as small as 0.4 km to as large as 204.8 km. In addition, studies are performed for PDF sensitivity to errors in the input moments and for how well the PDFs diagnose some higher-order moments. In general, the double Gaussian PDFs more accurately represent SGS cloud structure and turbulence moments in the boundary layer compared to the single Gaussian and Double Delta Function PDFs for the range of grid sizes tested. This is especially true for small SGS cloud fractions. While the most complex PDF, Lewellen-Yoh, better represents shallow convective cloud properties (cloud fraction and liquid water mixing ratio) compared to the less complex Analytic Double Gaussian 1 PDF, there appears to be no advantage in implementing Lewellen-Yoh for deep convection. However, the Analytic Double Gaussian 1 PDF better represents the liquid water flux, is less sensitive to errors in the input moments, and diagnoses higher order moments more accurately. Between the Lewellen-Yoh and Analytic Double Gaussian 1 PDFs, it appears that neither family is distinctly better at representing cloudy layers. However, due to the reduced computational cost and fairly robust results, it appears that the Analytic Double Gaussian 1 PDF could be an ideal family for SGS cloud and turbulence representation in coarse-grid CRMs, mesoscale models, and GCMs if the required input moments can be predicted or diagnosed accurately.

References Arakawa, A. (2004), The cumulus parameterization problem: Past, present, and future, J. Climate, 13, 2493–2525, doi:10.1175/1520-0442(2004)017<2493-RATCPP>2.0. Arakawa, A., and W.H. Schubert (1974), Interaction of a cumulus cloud ensemble with the large-scale environment, Part I, J. Atmos. Sci., 31, 674–701, doi:10.1175/15200469(1974)031<0674-IOACCE>2.0. Bechtold, P., C. Fravalo, and J.P. Pinty (1992), A model of marine boundary-layer cloudiness for mesoscale applications, J. Atmos. Sci., 49, 1723–1744, doi:10.1175/1520-0469(1992)049<1723-AMOMBL>2.0. Bougeault, P. (1981a), Modeling the trade-wind cumulus boundary layer. Part I: Testing the ensemble cloud relations against numerical data, J. Atmos. Sci., 38, 2414–2428, doi:10.1175/1520-0469(1981)038<2414MTTWCB>2.0. Bougeault, P. (1981b), Modeling the trade-wind cumulus boundary layer. Part II:A higher-order one-dimensional model, J. Atmos. Sci., 38, 2429–2439, doi:10.1175/15200469(1981)038<2429-MTTWCB>2.0. Bretherton, C.S. (1993), Understanding Albrecht's model of trade cumulus cloud fields, J. Atmos. Sci., 50, 2264–2283, doi:10.1175/1520-0469(1993)050<2264UAMOTC>2.0. Golaz, J.C., V.E. Larson, and W.R. Cotton (2002a), A pdf based model for boundary layer clouds part I: Method and model description, J. Atmos. Sci., 59, 3540–3551, doi:10.1175/1520-0469(2002)059<3540-APBMFB>2.0. Golaz, J.C., V.E. Larson, and W.R. Cotton (2002b), A pdf based model for boundary layer clouds part II: Model results, J. Atmos. Sci., 59, 3552–3571, doi:10.1175/15200469(2002)059<3552-APBMFB>2.0. Grabowski, W. and P. Smolarkiewicz (1999), CRCP:A cloud resolving convection parameterization for modeling the tropical convective atmosphere, Physic. D., 133, 171–178, doi:10.1016/S0167-2789(99)00104-9. Holland, J. and E. Rasmusson (1973), Measurement of atmospheric mass, energy and momentum budgets over a 500 kilometer square of tropical ocean, Mon. Wea. Rev., 101, 44–55, doi:10.1175/1520-0493(1973)101<0044:MOTAME.2.3.CO;2. Khairoutdinov, M. F. and D. A. Randall (2003), Cloud resolving modeling of the ARM summer 1997 IOP: Model formulations, results, uncertainties, and sensitivities, J. Atmos. Sci., 60, 607–625, doi:10.1175/15200469(2003)060<0607-CRMOTA>2.0. Khairoutdinov, M. F. and D. A. Randall (2006), High-resolution simulation of shallow-to-deep convection transition over land, J. Atmos. Sci., 63, 3421–3436, doi:10.1175/JAS3810. Khairoutdinov, M. F., D. A. Randall, and C. Dermott (2005), Simulations of the atmospheric general circulation using a cloud-resolving model as a superparameterization of physical processes, J. Atmos. Sci., 62, 2136–2154, doi:10.1175/JAS3453. Khairoutdinov, M. F., S. K. Krueger, C.-H. Moeng, P. Bogenschutz, and D. A. Randall (2009), Large-eddy simulation of maritime deep tropical convection, J. Adv. Model. Earth. Syst., Vol. 1, Art. # 15, 13 pp., doi:10.3894/JAMES.2009.1.15. Klein, S. A., D. L. Hartmann, and J. R. Norris (1995), On the relationships among low clouds structure, sea surface temperature, and atmospheric circulation in the summertime northeast Pacific, J. Climate, 8, 1140–1155, doi:10.1175/1520-0442(1995)008<1140-OTRALC>2.0. Krueger, S. K. (1988), Numerical simulation of tropical cumulus clouds and their interaction with the subcloud layer, J. Atmos. Sci, 45, 2221–2250, doi:10.1175/15200469(1988)045<2221-NSOTCC>2.0. Krueger, S. K., G. McLean, and Q. Fu (1995), Numerical simulation of the stratus-to-cumulus transition in the subtropical boundary layer. Part I: Boundary-layer structure, J. Atmos. Sci., 52, 2839–2850, doi:10.1175/15200469(1995)052<2839-NSOTST>2.0. Lappen, C. and D. A. Randall (2001), Toward a unified parameterization of the boundary layer and moist convection. Part I: A new type of mass flux model, J. Atmos.Sci., 58, 2021–2036, doi:10.1175/1520-0469(2001)058<2021TAUPOT>2.0. Larson, V. E., J. C. Golaz, and W. R. Cotton (2002), Small-scale and mesoscale variability in cloud boundary layers: Joint probability density functions, J. Atmos. Sci., 59, 3519–3539, doi:10.1175/1520-0469(2002)059<3519SSAMVI>2.0. Lewellen, W. S. and S. Yoh (1993), Binormal model of ensemble partial cloudiness, J. Atmos. Sci., 50, 1228–1237, doi:10.1175/1520-0469(1993)050<1228-BMOEPC>2.0. Luhar, A., M. Hibberd, and P. Hurley (1996), Comparison of closure schemes used to specify the velocity PDF in langrangian stochastic dispersion models for convective conditions, Atmos. Environ., 30, 1407–1418, doi:10.1016/1352-2310(95)00464-5. Moeng, C.-H., M. A. LeMone, M. F. Khairoutdinov, S. K. Krueger, P. Bogenschutz, and D. A. Randall (2009), The tropical marine boundary layer under a deep convection system: a large-eddy simulation study, J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst., Vol. 1, Art. #16, 13 pp., doi:10.3894/JAMES.2009.1.16. Randall, D. A. (1980), Conditional instability of the first kind, upside-down, J. Atmos. Sci., 37, 125–130, doi:10.1175/1520-0469(1980)037<0125:CIOTFK>2.0.CO;2. Randall, D. A., M. Khairoutdinov, A. Arakawa, and W. Grabowski (2003), Breaking the cloud-parameterization deadlock, J. Atmos. Sci., 84, 1547–1564, doi:10.1175/BAMS-84-11-1547. Redelsperger, J. L. and G. Sommeria (1986), Three-dimensional simulation of a convective storm: Sensitivity studies on subgrid parameterization and spatial resolution, J. Atmos. Sci., 43, 2619–2635, doi:10.1175/15200469(1986)043<2619-TDSOAC>2.0. Siebesma, A. Pier, C. S. Bretherton, A. Brown, A. Chlond, J. Cuxart, P. G. Duynkerke, H. Jiang, M. Khairoutdinov, D. Lewellen, C.-H. Moeng, E. Sanchez, B. Stevens, and D. E. Stevens (2003), A large eddy simulation intercomparison study of shallow cumulus convection, J. Atmos. Sci., 60, 1201–1219, doi:10.1175/1520-0469(2003)60<1201ALESIS>2.0. Slingo, A. (1990), Sensitivity of the Earth's radiation budget to changes in low clouds, Nature, 343, 49–51, doi:10.1038/343049a0. Taylor, Karl E. (2001), Summarizing multiple aspects of model performance in a single diagram, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 7183–7192, doi:10.1029/2000JD900719. Tiedtke, M. (1988), Parameterization of cumulus convection in large-scale models, Physically-Based Modeling and Simulation of Climate and Climate Change, M. Schlesingerr, Ed., D. Reidel, 375–431.