# ECMWF Training Course Peter Bechtold and Christian Jakob

## Presentation on theme: "ECMWF Training Course Peter Bechtold and Christian Jakob"— Presentation transcript:

ECMWF Training Course Peter Bechtold and Christian Jakob
02 May 2000 Numerical Weather Prediction Parameterization of diabatic processes Convection III The ECMWF convection scheme Peter Bechtold and Christian Jakob Moist Processes

A bulk mass flux scheme: What needs to be considered
Link to cloud parameterization Entrainment/Detrainment Type of convection shallow/deep Cloud base mass flux - Closure Downdraughts Generation and fallout of precipitation Where does convection occur

Basic Features Bulk mass-flux scheme
Entraining/detraining plume cloud model 3 types of convection: deep, shallow and mid-level - mutually exclusive saturated downdraughts simple microphysics scheme closure dependent on type of convection deep: CAPE adjustment shallow: PBL equilibrium strong link to cloud parameterization - convection provides source for cloud condensate

Large-scale budget equations: M=ρw; Mu>0; Md<0
Heat (dry static energy): Prec. evaporation in downdraughts Freezing of condensate in updraughts condensation in updraughts Melting of precipitation Mass-flux transport in up- and downdraughts Prec. evaporation below cloud base Humidity:

Large-scale budget equations
Momentum: Cloud condensate: Cloud fraction: (supposing fraction 1-a of environment is cloud free)

Large-scale budget equations
Nota: These tendency equations have been written in flux form which by definition is conservative. It can be solved either explicitly (just apply vertical discretisation) or implicitly (see later). Other forms of this equation can be obtained by explicitly using the derivatives (given on Page 10), so that entrainment/detrainment terms appear. The following form is particular suitable if one wants to solve the mass flux equations with a Semi-Lagrangian scheme; note that this equation is valid for all variables T, q, u, v, and that all source terms (apart from melting of precipitation term) have cancelled out

Occurrence of convection: make a first-guess parcel ascent
Updraft Source Layer Test for shallow convection: add T and q perturbation based on turbulence theory to surface parcel. Do ascent with w-equation and strong entrainment, check for LCL, continue ascent until w<0. If w(LCL)>0 and P(CTL)-P(LCL)<200 hPa : shallow convection ETL CTL 2) Now test for deep convection with similar procedure. Start close to surface, form a 30hPa mixed-layer, lift to LCL, do cloud ascent with small entrainment+water fallout. Deep convection when P(LCL)-P(CTL)>200 hPa. If not …. test subsequent mixed-layer, lift to LCL etc. … and so on until 700 hPa 3) If neither shallow nor deep convection is found a third type of convection – “midlevel” – is activated, originating from any model level above 500 m if large-scale ascent and RH>80%. LCL

Cloud model equations – updraughts E and D are positive by definition
Mass (Continuity) Heat Humidity Liquid Water/Ice Momentum Kinetic Energy (vertical velocity) – use height coordinates

Downdraughts 1. Find level of free sinking (LFS) highest model level for which an equal saturated mixture of cloud and environmental air becomes negatively buoyant 2. Closure 3. Entrainment/Detrainment turbulent and organized part similar to updraughts (but simpler)

Cloud model equations – downdraughts E and D are defined positive
Mass Heat Humidity Momentum

Entrainment/Detrainment (1)
ε and δ are generally given in units (m-1) since (Simpson 1971) defined entrainment in plume with radius R as ε=0.2/R ; for convective clouds R is of order m for deep and R= m for shallow Constants Scaling function to mimick a cloud ensemble NB: This is a simple 1-RH or saturation deficit formulation for the organised entrainment, but any other formulation using buoyancy or also works

Entrainment/Detrainment (2)
Organized detrainment: Only when negative buoyancy (K decreases with height), compute mass flux at level z+Δz with following relation: with and

Precipitation Liquid+solid precipitation fluxes:
Where Prain and Psnow are the fluxes of precip in form of rain and snow at pressure level p. Grain and Gsnow are the conversion rates from cloud water into rain and cloud ice into snow. The evaporation of precip in the downdraughts edown, and below cloud base esubcld, has been split further into water and ice components. Melt denotes melting of snow. Generation of precipitation in updraughts Simple representation of Bergeron process included in c0 and lcrit

Precipitation Fallout of precipitation from updraughts
Evaporation of precipitation 1. Precipitation evaporates to keep downdraughts saturated 2. Precipitation evaporates below cloud base

Closure - Deep convection
Convection counteracts destabilization of the atmosphere by large-scale processes and radiation - Stability measure used: CAPE assume that convection reduces CAPE to 0 over a given timescale, i.e., Originally proposed by Fritsch and Chappel, 1980, JAS Implemented at ECMWF in December 1997 by Gregory (Gregory et al., 2000, QJRMS), using a constant time-scale that varies only as function of model resolution (720s T799, 1h T159) The time-scale is a very important quantity and has been changed in Nov to be equivalent to the convective turnover time-scale which is defined by the cloud thickness divided by the cloud average vertical velocity, and further scaled by a factor depending linearly on horizontal model resolution (it is typically of order 1.3 for T799 and 2.6 for T159) The quantity required by the parameterization is the cloud base mass-flux. How can we get this?

Closure - Deep convection
Assume:

Closure - Deep convection
i.e., ignore detrainment where Mn-1 are the mass fluxes from a previous first guess updraft/downdraft computation

Closure - Shallow convection
Based on PBL equilibrium : what goes in must go out - including downdraughts With and

Closure - Midlevel convection
Roots of clouds originate outside PBL assume midlevel convection exists if there is large-scale ascent, RH>80% and there is a convectively unstable layer Closure:

Vertical Discretisation
ECMWF Training Course 02 May 2000 Vertical Discretisation Fluxes on half-levels, state variable and tendencies on full levels (Mul)k-1/2 (Mulu)k-1/2 k k+1/2 k-1/2 Dulu cu Eul (Mul)k+1/2 (Mulu)k+1/2 GP,u Moist Processes

Numerics: solving Tendency = advection equation explicit solution
ECMWF Training Course 02 May 2000 Numerics: solving Tendency = advection equation explicit solution if ψ = T,q Use vertical discretisation with fluxes on half levels (k+1/2), and tendencies on full levels k, so that In order to obtain a better and more stable “upstream” solution (“compensating subsidence”, use shifted half-level values to obtain: Moist Processes

ECMWF Training Course 02 May 2000 Numerics: implicit advection if ψ = T,q Use temporal discretisation with on RHS taken at future time and not at current time For “upstream” discretisation as before one obtains: => Only bi-diagonal linear system, and tendency is obtained as Moist Processes

ECMWF Training Course 02 May 2000 Numerics: Semi Lagrangien advection if ψ = T,q Advection velocity Moist Processes

Convective source terms - Cloud fraction
ECMWF Training Course 02 May 2000 Convective source terms - Cloud fraction Define GCM gridbox if cloud fills box in the vertical Now derive ** Moist Processes

Convective source terms - Cloud fraction
ECMWF Training Course 02 May 2000 Convective source terms - Cloud fraction Mass-flux concept for transport of cloud mass Updraughts are always cloudy Environment air: a parts are cloudy Is there any cloud mass produced in the grid box ? Mu - only transport in the vertical Du - only transport of cloud mass from updraught to environment Moist Processes

Convective source terms - Cloud fraction
ECMWF Training Course 02 May 2000 Convective source terms - Cloud fraction Eu - transports environment air into updraughts (1-a) parts of this air are not cloudy, but will be converted into cloudy air inside the updraught, hence Introduce source and transport term into **, use convection scheme, do a little algebra. Moist Processes

Tracer transport experiments (1) Single-column simulations: Stability
ECMWF Training Course Tracer transport experiments (1) Single-column simulations: Stability 02 May 2000 Surface precipitation; continental convection during ARM Moist Processes

ECMWF Training Course 02 May 2000 Tracer transport experiments (1) Stability in implicit and explicit advection instabilities Implicit solution is stable. If mass fluxes increases, mass flux scheme behaves like a diffusion scheme: well-mixed tracer in short time Moist Processes

Tracer transport experiments (2) Single-column against CRM
ECMWF Training Course Tracer transport experiments (2) Single-column against CRM 02 May 2000 Surface precipitation; tropical oceanic convection during TOGA-COARE Moist Processes

ECMWF Training Course Tracer transport experiments (2) IFS Single-column and global model against CRM 02 May 2000 Boundary-layer Tracer Boundary-layer tracer is quickly transported up to tropopause Forced SCM and CRM simulations compare reasonably well In GCM tropopause higher, normal, as forcing in other runs had errors in upper troposphere Moist Processes

ECMWF Training Course Tracer transport experiments (2) IFS Single-column and global model against CRM 02 May 2000 Mid-tropospheric Tracer Mid-tropospheric tracer is transported upward by convective draughts, but also slowly subsides due to cumulus induced environmental subsidence IFS SCM (convection parameterization) diffuses tracer somewhat more than CRM Moist Processes

IFS small aqua planet configuration: to see how far we can go with parametrised vs explicit global convection Example Vis5D: explicit simulation of deep convective system at T159 (with R/40 ~ Δx<3 km) Without parametrised convection the IFS results are quite sensitive to the numerics and to the tuning of the microphysics. Want to exploit convection globally in the 1-16 km resolution range using T159 (125 km) and T1279 (16 km) truncation with R/10-> dx=125 – 1.5 km range We are currently testing the non-hydrostatic version on a small aqua planet, here is an example of a thunderstorm using truncation T159 with 1/40 of the earth radius, so an effective resolution of 3 km. And we will use this technique to study the behavior and transition of our convection (scheme) in the grey zone, ie between 10 and 1 km resolution