Difficulties in the Subgrid-Scale Redistribution of Moisture of a Global Cloud-Resolving Model
More than one decade has passed since the first global cloud-resolving simulation was achieved under an aquaplanet condition in 2005. While such high-resolution global simulations have been beneficial not only to advance our knowledge of organized cloud systems but also to give various hints on improvements of traditional global models that depend on a kind of cumulus parameterization, explicit computations of cloud microphysics cannot necessarily ensure realistic representations of clouds and climate. A direct coupling between fluid dynamics and cloud processes is a strong point of the global cloud-resolving approach, but there still remain various rooms of uncertainties. Here, we briefly summarize successful and unsuccessful results of global or near-global simulations with explicit cloud microphysics and discuss a difficulty in the subgrid-scale redistribution of moisture.
KeywordsGlobal cloud-resolving model Subgrid-scale processes Moisture
- Grabowski, W.W. 1998. Toward cloud resolving modeling of large-scale tropical circulations: A simple cloud microphysics parameterization. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences 55: 3283–3298. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1998)055%3c3283:TCRMOL%3e2.0.CO;2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Grabowski, W.W. 2001. Coupling cloud processes with the large-scale dynamics using the cloud-resolving convection parameterization (CRCP). Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences 58: 978–997. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2001)058%3c0978:CCPWTL%3e2.0.CO;2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Holloway, C.E., S.J. Woolnough, and G.M.S. Lister. 2013. The effects of explicit versus parameterized convection on the MJO in a large-domain high-resolution tropical case study. Part I: Characterization of large-scale organization and propagation*. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences 70: 1342–1369. https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-12-0227.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Inoue, T., M. Satoh, Y. Hagihara, H. Miura, and J. Schmetz. 2010. Comparison of high-level clouds represented in a global cloud system–resolving model with CALIPSO/CloudSat and geostationary satellite observations. Journal of Geophysical Research 115: D00H22. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009jd012371.
- Klingaman, N.P., X. Jiang, P.K. Xavier, J. Petch, D. Waliser, and S.J. Woolnough. 2015. Vertical structure and physical processes of the Madden-Julian oscillation: Synthesis and summary. Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres 120: 4671–4689. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Miura, H., T. Miyakawa, T. Nasuno, and M. Satoh. 2012. Simulations of the MJO events during the field campaign of 2011–12 by a global cloud-resolving model NICAM, Abstract A13O-03 presented at 2012 Fall Meeting, AGU, San Francisco, California, 3–7 Dec.Google Scholar
- Miura, H., M. Satoh, H. Tomita, A.T. Noda, T. Nasuno, S. Iga, T. Suematsu, and T. Nasuno. 2015. An ensemble hindcast of the Madden-Julian oscillation during the CINDY2011/DYNAMO field campaign and influence of seasonal variation of sea surface temperature. Journal of the Meteorological Society of Japan Series II 93A: 115–137. https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.2015-055.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Miyakawa, T., and Coauthors. 2014. Madden–Julian oscillation prediction skill of a new-generation global model demonstrated using a supercomputer. Nature Communications 5: 3769. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms4769.
- Reynolds, R.W., N.A. Rayner, T.M. Smith, D.C. Stokes, and W. Wang. 2002. An improved in situ and satellite SST analysis for climate. Journal of Climate 15: 1609–1625. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(2002)015%3c1609:AIISAS%3e2.0.CO;2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Saito, K., T. Keenan, G. Holland, and K. Puri, 2001: Numerical simulation of the diurnal evolution of tropical Island convection over the maritime continent. Monthly Weather Review 129, 378–400. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493 129<037 8:NSOTDE>2.0.CO;2.
- Skamarock, W.C., and Coauthors. 2008. A description of the Advanced Research WRF version 3. NCAR Tech. Note NCAR/TN-475 + STR, 125 pp.Google Scholar
- Tomita, H., H. Miura, S. Iga, T. Nasuno, and M. Satoh. 2005. A global cloud-resolving simulation: Preliminary results from an aqua planet experiment. Geophysical Reseach Letters 32: 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GL022459.
- Tsushima, Y., S. Iga, H. Tomita, M. Satoh, A.T. Noda, and M.J. Webb. 2014. High cloud increase in a perturbed SST experiment with a global nonhydrostatic model including explicit convective processes. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems 6: 571–585. https://doi.org/10.1002/2013MS000301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Watanabe, S., T. Hajima, K. Sudo, T. Nagashima, T. Takemura, H. Okajima, T. Nozawa, H. Kawase, M. Abe, T. Yokohata, T. Ise, H. Sato, E. Kato, K. Takata, S. Emori, and M. Kawamiya. 2011. MIROC-ESM 2010: Model description and basic results of CMIP5-20c3m experiments. Geoscientific Model Development 4: 845–872. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-845-2011.
- Xu, K., R.T. Cederwall, L.J. Donner, W.W. Grabowski, F. Guichard, D.E. Johnson, M. Khairoutdinov, S.K. Krueger, J. C. Petch, D. A. Randall, C. J. Seman, W. Tao, D. Wang, S. Cheng Xie, J.J. Yio, and M. Zhang. 2002. An intercomparison of cloud‐resolving models with the atmospheric radiation measurement summer 1997 intensive observation period data. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society 128: 593–624. https://doi.org/10.1256/003590002321042117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar