1. Impact of new ARPEGE physics on RICO case (19-sept-2006) GCSS-GPCI / BLCL-RICO 18-21 sept 2006 P. Marquet, CNRM. Toulouse. Météo-France. + ARPEGE CLIMATE & N.W.P. team + Meso-Scale CNRM team + ENM (School of Met.) + CERFACS + IPSL-LMD …

2. Introduction First aim of the study :  Run the French Météo-France (CNRM) ARPEGE-CLIMAT SCM for the new RICO_composite (L80 and L31) …  Send the results for the inter-comparison : done / Pier … + 4 Impact studies :  Test STANDARD versus NEW physics (Turb, Conv,  -Phys) ?  Test of ( L80 /  t = 5 mn ) versus ( L31 /  t = 15 mn ) ?  Impact of the explicit Top PBL entrainment ?  Impact of the (Dry)-thermals ?

3. The Climate ARPEGE physics : STANDARD / NEW1 / NEW2 STANDARD / V3-V4NEW1 / Mixed NEW2 / IPCC / full-Diagnostic Diag+Prog full-Prognostic TURBDIAG. Mellor-YamadaDIAG. M&YPROGN. / C.B.R.  e /  t = 0  e /  t = 0  e /  t = P + Dif – Dis moist PDF / Bougeaultmoist PDF / moist PDF / Bougeault Bougeault / Bechtold Micro-PhysDIAG. PROGN. PROGN. Smith/KesslerSmith/Kessler Bulk - Lopez q_liq / q_ice q_liq / q_ice q_cloud / q_rain Shallow part in TURB, but why ?Mass-Flux Mass-Flux Convection + Mass-Flux Bougeault ?CAPE / Gueremy CAPE / Gueremy DeepMass-Flux / BougeaultMass-FluxMass-Flux ConvectionConvergence of HUCAPE / Gueremy CAPE / Gueremy Top-PBLNO YES YES EntrainmentGrenier & Breth. Grenier & Breth.

4. Validation of N_low : GCM (T63-L31) Strato Cu <- STD (DJF+JJA) N_low - ISCCP Strato Cu <- NEW Lopez + CV_GY + TKE-CBR + Ent_PBL

5. The NEW2 turbulent scheme : TKE-CBR TKE-C.B.R. (2000) + B.L. (1989) for Mixing Length + F2 & 3 / Bougeault (1982) & Bechtold (1995) ; EUROCS : GCM EPCI+GPCI+ACI SCM

6. Micro-physics : pdf TKE-C.B.R. (2000) + B.L. (1989) + F2 & 3 / Bougeault (1982) & Bechtold (1995) Variance of q_cloud : PDF Sc Cu

7. An Explicit Top-PBL Entrainment Grenier (ARPEGE) Vertical Diffusion of the Betts variables :  _l and q _t ( A 1 = 0.16 ) ( A 2 = 0.0 )

8. SCM / EUROCS_ARM_Cu (Lenderink) q_cloud ARP-NEW2 / L19 + Top PBL ent. LES-KNMI ARP-NEW2 / L19 ARP-STD / L19

9. SCM / EUROCS_ARM_Cu (Lenderink) THETA (L19) ARP-NEW2 + Top PBL ent. LES-KNMI ARP-NEW2 ARP-STD

10. Ayotte  24SC / L96 Hourdin, Couvreux, Menut, J.A.S., 2002.

11. And for RICO ? Impact studies :  Test STANDARD versus NEW physics : STD versus NEW2  L80 /  t = 5 mn ; L31 /  t = 15 mn  Impact of the explicit Top PBL entrainment : NEW2_noent  Impact of the (Dry)-thermals : NEW2_noDTh

12. RICO L80 / THETA_l NEW2_noent NEW2_noDTh STDNEW2 STD instable ; NEW2 better, But with a drift z>2km ? a –0.5 K bias in the PBL ? a very small impact of « entr. » a large impact of Dry Thermals

13. RICO L31 / THETA_l NEW2_noent NEW2_noDTh STDNEW2 STD noisy ; NEW2 better, with a smaller drift z>2km ! ? a –0.5 K bias in the PBL ? a greater impact of « entr. » and larger impact of Dry Thermals

14. RICO L80 / Zonal Wind STD NEW2NEW2_noent NEW2_noDTh STD noisy ; NEW2 better, But why these oscillations ? A small impact of « ent » A greater impact of Dry Thermals

15. RICO L80 / Cloud Cover NEW2_noent NEW2_noDTh STD NEW2 STD very noisy !! NEW2 better, Cloud Base and Maxi OK, Drift of Cloud top theta ? A small impact of « ent » A large impact of Dry Thermals What about the values of C.C. ??

16. L80 L31 LES KNMI RICO / Cloud Cover Average 24h - 30h STD very noisy up to 3.5 km !! NEW2 better L80 : from 0.5 to 2.5 km : OK ; the good shape L31 : too deep cloud 0.2 to 4 km !! L31 : Large impact of Top PBL entr. ! What about the values of C.C. ??

17. RICO / Cloud Content Average 24h - 30h L80 L31 LES KNMI SAME as for CLOUD-COVER… Except that values compare to LES… STD very noisy up to 3.5 km !! NEW2 better L80 : from 0.5 to 2.5 km : OK ; the good shape L31 : too deep cloud 0.2 to 4 km !! L31 : Large impact of Top PBL entr. !

18. L80 LES KNMI RICO / Average 24h - 30h W/m2 K*(m/s) W/m2 L31 NEW2 L80 realistic… except close to the surface !!

19. NEW2 LH (W/m2)L80 NEW2 L80Cloud Cover NEW2 L80Precip. mm/day NEW2 L80LWP

20. L80 LES BOMEX RICO / TKE Average 24h - 30h W/m2 m2/s2 W/m2 L31

21. Conclusions Mainly, questions ! …  Apart from the (internal) validation of the ARPEGE physics…  Why this drift above 2.5 km ? smaller with L31 /  t =15 mn : w ?  Are the oscillations for (u,v) Wind observed by others ?  How to compare Precip & C.C. to LES or Obs. ? => Radiation !  A real interest for this RICO case ! “Composite” -> “Long_Run” ? RICO  GPCI & AMMA-CI (next talk)… Continue EUROCS’ method…  A deep impact of top-PBL/TURB  shallow convection  Small for EUROCS- Cu / large for RICO… Precip ?

22. RICO L31 / Cloud Cover NEW2_noent NEW2_noDTh STD NEW2 STD very noisy up to 4 km !! NEW2 better, But worse than L31 (clud base ?) A large impact of « ent » And larger impact of Dry Thermals

23. L80 L31 LES KNMI RICO / Average 24h - 30h W/m2 (g/kg)*(m/s)

24. L80 LES KNMI RICO / Average 24h - 30h W/m2 K*(m/s) W/m2 L31

25. RICO SH (W/m2) STDNEW2 STDNEW2 L80 L31 L80

26. STD NEW2 STDNEW2 RICO LH (W/m2) L80 L31 L80

27. RICO Cloud Cover STD NEW2 L31 STD NEW2 L80

28. RICO Precip. STD NEW2 STD NEW2 L31 L80 L31

29. RICO LWP STD NEW2 L31 STD NEW2 L80