Forcing Fields Derived from Arctic Surface Biases in CAM3 Richard Grojahn and Linlin Pan Dept. of LAWR, Univ. of California, Davis With assistance from.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Section 2: The Planetary Boundary Layer
Advertisements

Atmospheric response to North Pacific SST The role of model resolution and synoptic SST variability Guidi Zhou, Mojib Latif, Wonsun Park*, Richard Greatbatch.
Eddy-Zonal Flow Feedback in the Southern and Northern Hemispheres A Review of Two Papers by D. J. Lorenz and D. L. Hartmann Stephanie Sydorko AT750.
Hurricanes and climate ATOC 4720 class22. Hurricanes Hurricanes intense rotational storm that develop in regions of very warm SST (typhoons in western.
John J. Cassano, Matthew Higgins, Alice DuVivier University of Colorado Wieslaw Maslowski, William Gutowski, Dennis Lettenmaier, Andrew Roberts.
Published in 2007 Cited 15 times Keywords: North Pacific, PDO-related air forcing, Eddy permitting model, Model heat/SST budget analysis.
Consistency of recently observed trends over the Baltic Sea basin with climate change projections 7th Study Conference on BALTEX June 2013, Sweden.
Interannual Variability in Summer Hydroclimate over North America in CAM2.0 and NSIPP AMIP Simulations By Alfredo Ruiz–Barradas 1, and Sumant Nigam University.
LHS are the linear terms. First 2 terms on the RHS are nonlinear terms in the bias. The group THF are transient heat advection bias. Q^ is the bias in.
Response of the Atmosphere to Climate Variability in the Tropical Atlantic By Alfredo Ruiz–Barradas 1, James A. Carton, and Sumant Nigam University of.
MET 61 1 MET 61 Introduction to Meteorology MET 61 Introduction to Meteorology - Lecture 12 Midlatitude Cyclones Dr. Eugene Cordero San Jose State University.
A comparison of North Atlantic storms in HiGEM, HadGEM and ERA-40 Jennifer Catto – University of Reading Supervisors: Len Shaffrey Warwick Norton Acknowledgement:
Strong Polar Anticyclone Activity over the Northern Hemisphere and an Examination of the Alaskan Anticyclone Justin E. Jones, Lance F. Bosart, and Daniel.
Linearly Stable Localized Atmospheric Features Inserted Into Nonlinear Cyclogenesis Richard Grotjahn, Daniel Hodyss, and Sheri Immel Atmospheric Science.
Baroclinic Instability in the Denmark Strait Overflow and how it applies the material learned in this GFD course Emily Harrison James Mueller December.
Generalized Surface Circulation
Sources of CAM Arctic Surface Climate Bias Deduced from the Vorticity and Temperature Equations -- DJF Richard Grotjahn and Linlin Pan Dept. of LAWR, Univ.
The first 2 terms on the RHS are nonlinear terms in the bias. The group labeled THF are transient heat advection bias. Q^ is the bias in diabatic heating.
LHS are the linear terms. First 2 terms on the RHS are nonlinear terms in the bias. The group THF are transient heat advection bias. Q^ is the bias in.
Arctic Surface DJF Biases in CAM3 Viewed As Forcing Fields Richard Grojahn and Linlin Pan Dept. of LAWR, Univ. of California, Davis With assistance from.
Pacific vs. Indian Ocean warming: How does it matter for global and regional climate change? Joseph J. Barsugli Sang-Ik Shin Prashant D. Sardeshmukh NOAA-CIRES.
Wind Driven Circulation I: Planetary boundary Layer near the sea surface.
Define Current decreases exponentially with depth. At the same time, its direction changes clockwise with depth (The Ekman spiral). we have,. and At the.
Monin-Obukhoff Similarity Theory
Jae-Heung Park, Soon-Il An. 1.Introduction 2.Data 3.Result 4. Discussion 5. Summary.
Surface wind stress Approaching sea surface, the geostrophic balance is broken, even for large scales. The major reason is the influences of the winds.
ATS/ESS 452: Synoptic Meteorology Friday 09/26/2014 Continue Review Material Geopotential Thickness Thermal Wind.
AOSS 401, Fall 2006 Lecture 19 October 26, 2007 Richard B. Rood (Room 2525, SRB) Derek Posselt (Room 2517D, SRB)
General Circulation of the Atmosphere Lisa Goddard 19 September 2006.
Define Current decreases exponentially with depth and. At the same time, its direction changes clockwise with depth (The Ekman spiral). we have,. and At.
Fronts and Frontogenesis
Speaker/ Pei-Ning Kirsten Feng Advisor/ Yu-Heng Tseng
ENSO impact to atmospheric circulation system for summer Motoaki Takekawa Tokyo Climate Center, Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) 1.
Henry Fuelberg Pete Saunders Pendleton, Oregon Research Region Map Types and Lightning Frequencies.
1. Atmospheric Circulation. Thermosphere Mesosphere Stratosphere Troposphere 300 km 50 km 40 km 10 km 400 km altitude Exosphere is the Earth’s  110 km.
Sophie RICCI CALTECH/JPL Post-doc Advisor : Ichiro Fukumori The diabatic errors in the formulation of the data assimilation Kalman Filter/Smoother system.
Long-Term Changes in Northern and Southern Annular Modes Part I: Observations Christopher L. Castro AT 750.
Climate Model Simulations of Extreme Cold-Air Outbreaks (CAOs) Steve Vavrus Center for Climatic Research University of Wisconsin-Madison John Walsh International.
Current Weather Introduction to Air-Sea interactions Ekman Transport Sub-tropical and sub-polar gyres Upwelling and downwelling Return Exam I For Next.
AOSS 401, Fall 2007 Lecture 23 November 05, 2007 Richard B. Rood (Room 2525, SRB) Derek Posselt (Room 2517D, SRB)
2010/ 11/ 16 Speaker/ Pei-Ning Kirsten Feng Advisor/ Yu-Heng Tseng
Ekman pumping Integrating the continuity equation through the layer:. Assume and let, we have is transport into or out of the bottom of the Ekman layer.
AOSS 401, Fall 2007 Lecture 21 October 31, 2007 Richard B. Rood (Room 2525, SRB) Derek Posselt (Room 2517D, SRB)
Diurnal Water and Energy Cycles over the Continental United States from three Reanalyses Alex Ruane John Roads Scripps Institution of Oceanography / UCSD.
The first 2 terms on the RHS are nonlinear terms in the bias. The group labeled THF are transient heat advection bias. Q^ is the bias in diabatic heating.
Climate Variability and Basin Scale Forcing over the North Atlantic Jim Hurrell Climate and Global Dynamics Division National Center for Atmospheric Research.
Lecture 11 Picking up pieces from previous lectures + – result of surface force balance – scales of motion – mesoscale systems: sea breeze, land breeze.
AOSS 401, Fall 2006 Lecture 18 October 24, 2007 Richard B. Rood (Room 2525, SRB) Derek Posselt (Room 2517D, SRB)
Advances in Fundamental Climate Dynamics John M. Wallace et al.
Remote Features Linked to the South Pacific Subtropical High (hereafter called the “SP high”) Richard Grotjahn Atmospheric Science Program, Dept. of LAWR,
On the effect of the Greenland Scotland Ridge on the dense water formation in the Nordic Seas Dorotea Iovino NoClim/ProClim meeting 4-6 September 2006.
Observed influence of North Pacific SST anomalies on the atmospheric circulation Claude Frankignoul and Nathalie Sennéchael LOCEAN/IPSL, Université Pierre.
Jennifer Catto Supervisors: Len Shaffrey and Kevin Hodges Extra-tropical cyclones and Storm Tracks.
Matthew J. Hoffman CEAFM/Burgers Symposium May 8, 2009 Johns Hopkins University Courtesy NOAA/AVHRR Courtesy NASA Earth Observatory.
15 Annual AOMIP Meeting. WHOI, 1- 4 November 2011 Numerical modeling of the Atlantic Water distribution in the upper Arctic Ocean: Sensitivity studies.
Seasonal Variations of MOC in the South Atlantic from Observations and Numerical Models Shenfu Dong CIMAS, University of Miami, and NOAA/AOML Coauthors:
Sources of CAM Arctic Surface Climate Bias Deduced from the Vorticity and Temperature Equations -- DJF Richard Grotjahn and Linlin Pan Dept. of LAWR, Univ.
Makoto INOUE and Masaaki TAKAHASHI (CCSR, Univ. of Tokyo)
Wind-driven halocline variability in the western Arctic Ocean
Define and we have • At the sea surface (z=0), the surface current flows at 45o to the right of the wind direction Depends on constant Az => • Current.
The Emergence of Surface-Based Arctic Amplification
Pogoreltsev A., Ugrjumov A..
Define and we have • At the sea surface (z=0), the surface current flows at 45o to the right of the wind direction Depends on constant Az => • Current.
Define and we have • At the sea surface (z=0), the surface current flows at 45o to the right of the wind direction Depends on constant Az => • Current.
The β-spiral Determining absolute velocity from density field
Mark A. Bourassa and Qi Shi
ATMS790: Graduate Seminar, Yuta Tomii
Dynamics of Annular Modes
Dynamics of Annular Modes
Attribution and impacts of upper ocean biases in CCSM3 W. G
Presentation transcript:

Forcing Fields Derived from Arctic Surface Biases in CAM3 Richard Grojahn and Linlin Pan Dept. of LAWR, Univ. of California, Davis With assistance from Grant Branstator and Joe Tribbia

Introduction Biases in wintertime Arctic surface fields have resisted model improvements and are similar in CCM, CAM, and CCSM runs. Sea level pressure (SLP) is: too low in the Beaufort Sea too high (or less low depending on the model and version) in the Barents Sea. too low in N. Atlantic, Baltic, W. Russia SLP bias is also strongly linked to topography, especially Greenland

Is the bias an NAO or AO? Superficial similarity, but probably not. The model’s fundamental SLP EOF has only a small projection onto the SLP bias. bias Leading EOF Bias with leading eof removed

Some Hypotheses –Frequency and Intensity of mid-latitude frontal cyclones: The stationary wave model solutions forced by transient eddy fluxes and associated diabatic heating extends into the Arctic region. Compared to observations, recent versions of NCAR models tend to have too many and too intense frontal cyclones. –Surface drag: Surface roughness and boundary layer drag over Alaska and Eastern Siberia may be too small (no difference between flat plain and mountainous regions) allowing too much low-level flow between Arctic and northern Pacific. –Topography: Similar to surface drag in that interaction with the Pacific may be too easy. In this case, ‘small’ mountain ranges in Eastern Siberia and Alaska (such as the Brooks range) are poorly resolved including their envelope height. –Resolution on the spherical surface: Model (grid) may be tuned for middle latitudes and tropics, higher resolution in Arctic may cause misrepresentation of SLP (and other variables) over Arctic region.

Linear Model to Study Bias Linear model (Branstator, 1990) to calculate forcing sufficient to generate parts of the bias field. Model variables: T, ζ, Div, Q (ln of sfc pres.) Model used two ways: –Input bias field and find forcing. Can input subset of bias –Input forcing and find solution. Can use subsets of the forcing. Similar general features are found in the bias if NCEP/NCAR Renalysis 1 or ERA-40 data are used. Bias used is balanced R12 with 10 levels to be shown Q=ln(Ps)

Bias in linear model Linear model balanced bias construction –Temperature bias is the model NCEP/NCAR reanalysis 1 difference. –Vorticity bias is derived from geostrophic winds calculated from the bias in geopotential. –Divergence bias is calculated from geostrophic winds and Ekman pumping associated with the vorticity bias (the latter mainly influences the boundary layer). –Log of surface pressure (Q=ln(Ps)) bias is derived from SLP after filtering to the topographic resolution of the linear model. SLP and Ps have similar dominant features except the results from using SLP are more smooth. Divergence Temperature Q=ln(Ps) Vorticity

Global Forcing in Linear Model Forcing fields deduced from the bias have obvious dipole structures in Q, vorticity, and temperature forcing fields that straddle high topography. Dipole associated with the Tibetan plateau removed by removing forcing south of 30 o N. Divergence Temperature Q=ln(Ps) Vorticity

Forcing North of 30 N Forcing fields deduced from the bias have obvious dipole structures in Q, vorticity, and temperature forcing fields that straddle high topography. Dipole associated with the Tibetan plateau removed by removing forcing south of 30 o N. Divergence Temperature Q=ln(Ps) Vorticity

Solution for forcing North of 30 N Ignoring forcing south of 30N still has solutions similar to the bias in Arctic Divergence forcing here is solely from geostrophic wind Divergence Temperature Q=ln(Ps) Vorticity

Solution (Ekman) for forcing N of 30 N Adding Ekman pumping diminishes importance of the divergence forcing. Divergence forcing here is from Ekman pumping with geostrophic wind alters divergence and near surface vorticity solutions, but has little effect upon T or Q (SLP). T and Q solutions not sensitive to the diffusion coefficient. Vorticity sensitive at low levels. K=5 m 2 s -1 shown. Divergence Temperature Q=ln(Ps) Vorticity

Subregions of forcing field A subregion of the total forcing field is selected in a region of interest linked to specific features in the Arctic bias –North Atlantic region of dipole bias: low SLP over North Sea to Eastern Europe, high SLP over Barents Sea –Beaufort region: low SLP over Beaufort Sea The solution is compared with the model bias

North Atlantic Local Forcing Forcing fields in 90W – 50E, 50N – pole. (value reduced to zero over last 15 o ) Divergence Temperature Q=ln(Ps) Vorticity

North Atlantic Local Forcing Solution Forcing fields in 90W – 50E, 50N – pole. (value reduced to zero over last 15 o ) Bias-like solutions Divergence Temperature Q=ln(Ps) Vorticity

Beaufort Local Forcing Forcing fields in 100E – 120W, 50N – pole. (value reduced to zero over last 15 o ) Divergence Temperature Q=ln(Ps) Vorticity

Beaurfort Local Forcing Solution Forcing fields in 100E – 120W, 50N – pole. (value reduced to zero over last 15 o ) Bias-like solutions Divergence Temperature Q=ln(Ps) Vorticity

Subregions of bias A subregion of the total bias is selected in a region of interest linked to specific features in the Arctic bias –North Atlantic region of dipole bias: low SLP over North Sea to Eastern Europe, high SLP over Barents Sea –Beaufort region: low SLP over Beaufort Sea Forcing for that subregion of bias found Solution for that forcing found and compared with model bias

North Atlantic Subregion

North Atlantic Local Bias Forcing fields in 100W – 80E, 30N – pole. (value reduced to zero over last 15 o ) Divergence Temperature Q=ln(Ps) Vorticity

Forcing from North Atlantic Local Bias Forcing based on bias in subregion from 100W – 80E, 30N – pole. (value reduced to zero over last 15 o ) Divergence Temperature Q=ln(Ps) Vorticity

North Atlantic Local Bias Solution Bias fields in subregion from 100W – 80E, 30N – pole. (value reduced to zero over last 15 o ) Bias-like solutions recapture the dipolar SLP structure. Divergence Temperature Q=ln(Ps) Vorticity

North Atlantic Local Bias Forcing Bias subregion from 100W – 80E, 30N – pole  forcing  solution Forcing fields: –Equivalent barotropic in vorticity, –Baroclinic (N-S and E-W) in temperature Q=ln(Ps) Vorticity 15W Temperature Divergence

North Atlantic Local Bias Solution Bias subregion from 100W – 80E, 30N – pole  forcing  solution Bias-like solutions: –Equivalent barotropic in vorticity, –Baroclinic in temperature Divergence Temperature Q=ln(Ps) Vorticity 15W

Beaufort Subregion

Beaufort Local Bias Forcing fields in 100E – 125W, 50N – pole. (value reduced to zero over last 15 o ) Divergence Temperature Q=ln(Ps) Vorticity

Forcing from Beaufort Local Bias Forcing based on bias in subregion from 100E – 125W, 50N – pole. (value reduced to zero over last 15 o ) Divergence Temperature Q=ln(Ps) Vorticity

Beaufort Local Bias Solution Bias fields in subregion from 100E – 125W, 50N – pole. (value reduced to zero over last 15 o ) Bias-like solutions recapture the dipolar SLP structure. Divergence Temperature Q=ln(Ps) Vorticity

Beaufort Local Bias Forcing Bias subregion from 100W – 80E, 30N – pole  forcing  solution Forcing fields: (pattern ‘opposite’ to N. Atlantic cross sections) –Baroclinic (N-S and E-W) in vorticity, –Barotropic in temperature Q=ln(Ps) Vorticity 75N 160E Temperature Divergence

Beaufort Local Bias Solution Bias subregion from 100W – 80E, 30N – pole  forcing  solution Forcing fields: (pattern ‘opposite’ to N. Atlantic cross sections) –Equivalent barotropic in vorticity, –Stratosphere in temperature – model too warm Q=ln(Ps) Vorticity 75N 160E Temperature Divergence

.nc files of bias, forcing, & solution Files are available for anyone to look at in netcdf format for easy use of ncl, IDV, ferret, etc. Link is:

Summary & Tentative Conclusions Linear model used to investigate forcing and CAM model bias The linear model reproduces structure and magnitudes of the 3 main near-Arctic features of interest in the bias field: 1.Low SLP over N Europe 2.High SLP over Barents Sea 3.Low SLP over Beaufort Sea Forcing fields suggest first two are linked. Regional subsets were tested: –Subset of global forcing from global bias  solution similar to bias –Subset of bias  forcing  solution similar to bias feature –Forcing for these two situations is somewhat different. –Solutions from latter much better than from former –Dipole in forcing associated with monopole in solution (or input bias) Bias not related to NAO/AO North Atlantic (from input subset of bias): –Forcing: baroclinic T, eq barotropic Vort. Bias: baroclinc in T, eq. barotropic Vort Beaufort (from input subset of bias): –Forcing: eq. barotropic T, baroclinic Vort. Bias: stratosphere in T, eq. barotropic Vort Future work: Building 64bit machine now to allow higher horizontal resolution. The key question: what phenomena (or misrepresented phenomena) cause these forcing patterns?

End Thanks!

Storage Below

Introduction Biases in wintertime Arctic surface fields have resisted model improvements and are similar in CCM, CAM, and CCSM runs. Sea level pressure (SLP) is too low in the Beaufort and North Seas and too high (or less low depending on the model and version) in the Barents Sea. SLP bias is also strongly linked to topography, especially Greenland.

Introduction Linear model (Branstator, 1990) to calculate forcing sufficient to generate parts of the bias field. Model variables: T, ζ, Div, Q (ln of sfc pres.) Model used two ways: –Input bias field and find forcing. Can input subset of bias –Input forcing and find solution. Can use subsets of the forcing. Bias used is balanced Similar general features are found in the bias if NCEP/NCAR Renalysis 1 or ERA-40 data are used. R12 with 10 levels to be shown Vorticity σ=0.95 Divergence σ=0.95 Temperature σ=0.95 Q=ln(Ps)

North Atlantic Local Bias Forcing Bias subregion from 100W – 80E, 30N – pole  forcing  solution Forcing fields: –Equivalent barotropic in vorticity, –Baroclinic (N-S & E-W) in temperature Q=ln(Ps) Vorticity 15W Temperature Divergence

North Atlantic Local Bias Solution Bias subregion from 100W – 80E, 30N – pole  forcing  solution Bias-like solutions: –Equivalent barotropic in vorticity, –Baroclinic in temperature Divergence Temperature Q=ln(Ps) Vorticity 15W