1. Impact of the Top PBL entrainment on the Shallow Convections : the AMMA and the GEWEX Pacific Cross-section Intercomparisons / GPCI. P. Marquet, Météo-France. CNRM / GMGEC / EAC CNRM Toulouse ( 3 july 2006 )

2. Introduction / Motivations (1) A) The standard (V3-V4) of ARPEGE / Climate physics, based on :  a diagnostic turbulent scheme : TKE-2.0 / Mellor-Yamada (1982) + the moist PDF of Bougeault (1982) + (?) Shallow convection  a diagnostic micro-physics (RR = Smith + Cond/Evap = Kessler)  a (mainly) Deep convection (Bougeault, 1985)  Max(N_conv ; N_strat) and Max(qv_conv ; qv_strat) -> FMR rad.

3. Introduction / Motivations (2) B) There are 2 updated physics : NEW1 & NEW2  The aim : to improve the representation of [ Cb / Cu / Sc ] in GCM  Why / Which they are ? : more details in the next slides… But people want to know which parts are “ really importants” :  If possible, search for applications of selected parts of the (new) Climate physics package (in ARPEGE-NWP, in Meso-NH, …) ?  This method has already been used to built NEW2 (EUROCS) : more details in the next slides…

4. Introduction / Motivations (3) C) The aim of the presentation :  A focus on the impact of a selected process : the Top-PBL En- trainment (TKE scheme) the Shallow (Deep ?) convection ? Applications for 4 selected examples (ARPEGE cy24 & cy25) :  SCM EUROCS-Cu case  GCM / Pacific Cross-section Inter-compar. (EUROCS & GEWEX)  GCM / African Cross-section Inter-compar. (AMMA)  SCM GEWEX RICO-composite

5. Validation of N_low (N_conv. < Flux_condens. ANEBN) Strato Cu <- STD (DJF+JJA) N_low / ISCCP Strato Cu <- NEW Lopez + CV_GY + TKE-CBR + Ent_PBL Obtained by chance ? Or through a strategy ?

6. The Advanced Physics : NEW1  By J. F. Gueremy -> a wish to develop a new convection scheme  Old developments : first outside the Climate team, then inside  Based on CAPE and w* : first the Deep, then tuning the Shallow  A strong need for : a prognostic micro-physics (Smith+Kessler)  A need for : an improvement of the Mellor-Yamada (standard) diagnostic TKE + the first tests of the Top-PBL entrainment

7. The Advanced Physics : NEW2  (I have blended it) -> a wish to use a prognostic TKE scheme  Old developments : from the thesis of C. Bossuet (1998, in the Climate team <- P. Lacarrere) ; then advices from J. L. Redelsperger / EUROCS) … the spirit of C.B.R. “TURB1D” ?  A strong need for : a prognostic micro-physics (GMAP, …, Lopez, 2002)  A strong need for : a Shallow convection (Bechtold, …, then Gueremy) + with a Deep ? + first tests of the Top-PBL ent.

8. The Advanced Physics : STANDARD / NEW1 / NEW2 STANDARD / V3-V4 NEW1 NEW2 IPCC / Diagnostic Inter Diag+Prog Prognostic TURBDIAG. Mellor-YamadaDIAG. M&YPROGN. / C.B.R.  e /  t = 0  e /  t = 0  e /  t = P – D moist PDF / Bougeaultmoist PDF / moist PDF / Bougeault Bougeault / Bechtold Micro-PhysDIAG.PROGN.PROGN. Smith/KesslerSmith/KesslerLopez q_liq / q_ice q_liq / q_iceq_cloud / q_rain Shallowin 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 Entrainment Grenier Grenier

9. The NEW2 turbulent scheme : TKE-CBR TKE-C.B.R. (2000) + B.L. (1989) + Bougeault (1982) & Bechtold (1995) ; with : EPCI+APCI GCM SCM

10. Micro-physics : pdf TKE-C.B.R. (2000) + B.L. (1989) + Bougeault (1982) & Bechtold (1995) Variance of q_cloud : PDF

11. The PDF  Observations ? Talk of Teixera at CNRM (jan-2006) Aircraft obs. of variable Q Stratocumulus Gaussian pdf Cumulus Skewed pdf Cumulus and Stratocumulus Double Gaussian Larson et al. 2001 Sc Cu

12. Vertical Diffusion of the Betts variables :  _l and q _t Entrainment in ARPEGE-Climat Tenekes (1973) (CEPMMT)

13. Tenekes (1973) (CEPMMT) Diff.Vert.  _l et q _t Entrainment in ARPEGE-Climat Grenier (ARPEGE)

14. SCM / EUROCS_ARM_Cu (Lenderink) Cloud Cover ARP-NEW2 / L19 + Top PBL ent. LES-KNMI ARP-NEW2 / L19 ARP-STD / L19

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

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

17. SCM / EUROCS_ARM_Cu (Lenderink) R.H. ARP-NEW2 / L19 + Top PBL ent. LES-KNMI ARP-NEW2 / L19 ARP-STD / L19

18. Sc/St Cu Cb Equator 1st Cross Section 2nd Cross Section U.S.A GPCI = Gewex Pacific Cross-section Intercomparison GCM runs Arpege / V4.5 : 2 years : 1998 and 2003 10 days of spin-up in June (lost) + JJA every 3 h NEW1 : TKE-GY +  -phys-GY + CVGY + LPBLE / or not NEW2 : TKE-CBR + LOPEZ + CVGY + LPBLE / or not

19. Sc/St Cu Cb Equator 1st Cross Section 2nd Cross Section U.S.A (a) I.W.V. (b) L.W.P. (c) C. C. EPCI = Eurocs Pacific Cross-section Intercomparison

20. ArpegeMPI ECMWF JMAMetORACMO HIRLAM KF HIRLAM ST ERA (3-6h) Cloud Cover

21. EPCI = Eurocs Pacific Cross-section Intercomparison Cloud Cover ARPEGE-V3 ANA-ECMWF Met-Office

22. GPCI = Gewex Pacific Cross-section Intercomparison ANA-ECMWF ARP-NEW2 + LPBLE ARP-NEW2 ARP-STD Cloud Cover

23. GPCI = Gewex Pacific Cross-section Intercomparison ARP-NEW2 + LPBLE ARP-NEW2 ANA-ECMWF Cloud Cover Much more realistic results with NEW2 + LPBLE ! 1000 800 900

24. GPCI = Gewex Pacific Cross-section Intercomparison ARP-NEW2 ARP-STD OMEGA (Pa/s) Much more realistic results with NEW2 ! ARP-NEW2 + LPBLE

25. GPCI = Gewex Pacific Cross-section Intercomparison K6 = ARP-NEW2 V4 = ARP-STD L.W.P. NEW2 much better than STD V4 ! K4 = ARP-NEW2 + LPBLE L.W.P. NEW2 with LPBLE even better !

26. GPCI = Gewex Pacific Cross-section Intercomparison K6 = ARP-NEW2 V4 = ARP-STD Cloud Cover Less >0 biases with NEW2 K4 = ARP-NEW2 + LPBLE C. C. Less <0 biases with NEW2 + LBLPE

27. GPCI = Gewex Pacific Cross-section Intercomparison K6 = ARP-NEW2 V4 = ARP-STD No more >0 biases with NEW2… K4 = ARP-NEW2 + LPBLE I.W.V. (b).W.P. May be a <0 ? Better with LPBLE

28. AMMA = African Monsoon Multidisciplinary Analysis CROSS : 20S-40N average over : 10W-10E MAP-2D : the points located within: 10S-30N 35W-30E

29. Cross-Section AMMA GCM runs Arpege / V4.5 : CNRM/EAC + ENM/UFR 2 years : 2000 (dry) and 2003 (moist) + one year (lost) of spin-up (1999 et 2002) NEW1 : TKE-GY +  -phys-GY + CVGY + LPBLE / or not NEW2 : TKE-CBR + LOPEZ + CVGY + LPBLE / or not SST : Reynolds OI-v2 (daily interpolations) Altitude + Surf : a standard ARPEGE state (not ERA40) Aerosols : FMR(15) + Tegen < GMAP < CEPMMT Output :  t=3h / NetCdF (similar to EPCI/GPCI)

30. 3D Simulations + transect : impact of the Top PBL l’entrainment. “NEW2” Prognostic Physics : TKE-CBR + Lopez + CVs-GY (1) Better simulations of SC/Cu over the Golf of Guynea if LPBLE=.TRUE. ? More low level clouds, at least… but ? LPBLE = F LPBLE = T

31. 3D Simulations + transect : impact of the Top PBL l’entrainment. “NEW2” Prognostic Physics : TKE-CBR + Lopez + CVs-GY (2) More realistic indeed with LPBLE=TRUE ! “Omega” : 2000-06 Re-analysis NMC : LPBLE = T LPBLE = F

32. SCM / RICO_composite (KNMI) Rain In Cumulus over the Ocean experiment * A 3 days SCM simulation of Precipitating Shallow Convection (Antigua & Barbuda) * With constant forcings : like for BOMEX. * A high resolution L80 (dt=300s) + a GCM-like (L31) (dt=900s) <<<<

33. SCM / RICO_composite (KNMI) Precipitations ARP-NEW2 / L31 + Top PBL ent. Which one is (more) realistic ? ARP-NEW2 / L31 ARP-STD / L31 Observations = 0.3 mm/days Small Impact of NEW2 & LPBLE = TRUE ?

34. SCM / RICO_composite (KNMI) Cloud Cover ARP-NEW2 / L31 + Top PBL ent. Which one is realistic ? ARP-NEW2 / L31 ARP-STD / L31 Small Impact of NEW2 & LPBLE = TRUE ? 2 % 5 % 10 %

35. SCM / RICO_composite (KNMI) Sensible Heat Flux ARP-NEW2 / L31 + Top PBL ent. Which one is realistic ? ARP-NEW2 / L31 ARP-STD / L31 Small impact of NEW2 & LPBLE = TRUE ?

36. SCM / RICO_composite (KNMI) Latent Heat Flux ARP-NEW2 / L31 + Top PBL ent. Which one is realistic ? ARP-NEW2 / L31 ARP-STD / L31 Small impact of NEW2 & LPBLE = TRUE ?

37. SCM / RICO_composite (KNMI) L31 / dt=900 s  L80 / dt=300 s Cloud Cover Theta Precip. SH LH LWP ARP-NEW2 / + Top PBL ent.

38. Conclusions The GCM / GCM+C.I. / SCM simulations show that :  the turbulent scheme and the Top-PBL-entr. seems to influence in a large part the Shallow convection : to solve a problem of a too large vertical spacing at the Top-PBL ?  over the tropical oceans, the Top-PBL-entr. seems to be important to get the right Cu and Sc vertical profiles, and for some good reasons : !! Bound. Layer Clouds  TURB !!  the LWP also seems to be more realistic with NEW2 as a whole, with LPBLE=TRUE. (New ideas for LPBLE + AJUCV…)

40. Total energy (Cp*T+g*z) Is conserved (up to 0,15% ) Solve the problem of over-adiabats ENM/UFR / AMA-2006 A “Pb” simulated by SCM : TOGA- COARE & EUROCS-Cb

41. Tenekes (1973) (CEPMMT) A. Lock (UKMO) Grenier (ARPEGE) Vert. Diff.  _l et q _t Entrainment in ARPEGE-Climat