1 / 52

Cloud microphysics modeling: the state of the art

Cloud microphysics modeling: the state of the art. Wojciech W. Grabowski Mesoscale and Microscale Meteorology Laboratory NCAR, Boulder, Colorado, USA. An introduction to cloud microphysics modeling. Wojciech W. Grabowski Mesoscale and Microscale Meteorology Laboratory

tjudith
Download Presentation

Cloud microphysics modeling: the state of the art

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Cloud microphysics modeling: the state of the art Wojciech W. Grabowski Mesoscale and Microscale Meteorology Laboratory NCAR, Boulder, Colorado, USA

  2. An introduction to cloud microphysics modeling Wojciech W. Grabowski Mesoscale and Microscale Meteorology Laboratory NCAR, Boulder, Colorado, USA

  3. parameterization problem: parameterized microphysics in (under)resolved clouds parameterization2 problem: parameterized microphysics in parameterized clouds microphysics at its native scale Cloud microphysics across scales

  4. interfacial instabilities turbulent cloud calm (low-turbulence) environment cloud base (activation of cloud droplets) airflow

  5. Bjorn Stevens, RICO

  6. Eulerian versus Lagrangian methodology (continuous medium versus particle-based) Explicit treatment of aerosol effects versus mimicking impacts of aerosols Warm (no-ice) versus ice-bearing clouds Precise and complex versus approximate and easy to apply Understanding the physics versus numerical implementation

  7. Eulerian versus Lagrangian methodology (continuous medium versus particle-based) Explicit treatment of aerosol effects versus mimicking impacts of aerosols Warm (no-ice) versus ice-bearing clouds Precise and complex versus approximate and easy to apply Understanding the physics versus numerical implementation

  8. Explicit treatment of aerosol effects (particle-based) versus mimicking impacts of aerosols (continuous medium)

  9. Eulerian versus Lagrangian methodology (continuous medium versus particle-based) Explicit treatment of aerosol effects versus mimicking impacts of aerosols Warm (no-ice) versus ice-bearing clouds Precise and complex versus approximate and easy to apply Understanding the physics versus numerical implementation

  10. Water vapor is a minor constituent: mass loading is typically smaller than 1%; thermodynamic properties (e.g., specific heats etc.) only slightly modified; Suspended small particles (cloud droplets, cloud ice): mass loading is typically smaller than a few tenths of 1%, particles are much smaller than the smallest scale of the flow; multiphase approach is not required, but sometimes used with simplifications (e.g., DNS with suspended droplets, Lagrangian Cloud Model); Precipitation (raindrops, snowflakes, graupel, hail): mass loading can reach a few %, particles are larger than the smallest scale the flow; simplified multiphase approach needed only for very-small-scale modeling.

  11. Eulerian versus Lagrangian methodology (continuous medium versus particle-based) Explicit treatment of aerosol effects versus mimicking impacts of aerosols Warm (no-ice) versus ice-bearing clouds Precise and complex versus approximate and easy to apply Understanding the physics versus numerical implementation

  12. Droplet size exaggerated compared to the mean distance!

  13. temperature water vapor gradients of the temperature and water vapor near the droplet (established on a time scale of ~millisecond) go to ~10 droplet radii…

  14. T, qv

  15. M for macroscopic… Vaillancourt et al. JAS 2001

  16. Vaillancourt et al. JAS 2001

  17. Δr~1μm, Δt~10-8s Vaillancourt et al. JAS 2001

  18. Vaillancourt et al. JAS 2001

  19. …perhaps expected considering that the volume affected by the gradients is small compared to the entire volume, about 0.1%... Vaillancourt et al. JAS 2001

  20. Lagrangian versus Eulerian governing equations Ψ(x+uΔt, y+vΔt, z+wΔt, t+Δt) Lagrangian: Ψ(x,y,z,t) Eulerian: compressible Ψ(x, y, z, t) Ψ(x, y, z, t+Δt) anelastic

  21. EULERIAN MODELING OF THE CONDENSED PHASE

  22. Continuous medium approach: apply density as the main field variable (density of water vapor, density of cloud water, density of rainwater, etc…) In practice, mixing ratios are typically used. Mixing ratio is the ratio between the density (of water vapor, cloud water…) and the dry air density.

  23. Mixing ratio versus specific humidity…

  24. And we also need equation for the temperature. If only phase changes are included, then potential temperature equation is:

  25. Modeling of cloud microphysics:solving a system of PDEs (advection/diffusion type) coupled through source terms…

  26. A very simple (but useful) model: rising adiabatic parcel… … by solving these equations. Take a parcel from the surface and move it up…

  27. qv qc Look not only on the patterns (i.e., processes), but also on specific numbers (e.g., temperature change, mixing ratios, etc).

  28. Invariant variables: total water, liquid water potential temperature, equivalent potential temperature. Note: equivalent potential temperature is closely related to moist static energy, cpT + gz + Lqv…

  29. Adding rain or drizzle:

  30. What determines the concentration of cloud droplets? To answer this, one needs to understand formation of cloud droplets, that is, the activation of cloud condensation nuclei (CCN). This typically happens near the cloud base, when the rising air parcel approaches saturation.

  31. Computational example: Nucleation and growth of cloud droplets in a parcel of air rising with vertical velocity of 1 m/s; 60 bins used; 1D flux-form advection applied in the radius space; Difference between continental/polluted and maritime/pristine aerosols f=f(r,z) or f=f(r,t)

  32. 1. 1. maritime a=100 cm-3 continental a=1000 cm-3 N = a Sb b=0.5 0. 0. 600. 600. 0. 0. 20. 20. 0. 0. 0. 500. 0. 500.

  33. 2. 2. maritime continental 0. 0. 150. 150. 0. 0. 0. 0. 500. 500.

  34. 2. 2. ! maritime continental 0. 0. 150. 150. 0. 0.

  35. Growth of water droplets by gravitational collision-coalescence: Collision efficiency: Grazing trajectory Droplet inertia is the key; without it, there will be no collisions. This is why collision efficiency for droplets smaller than 10 μm is very small.

  36. Double-moment warm-rain microphysics: a compromise between bulk and bin microphysics cloud water: qc , Nc drizzle/rain water: qr , Nr - Nucleation of cloud droplets: link to CCN characteristics Drizzle/rain development: link to mean droplet size e.g., Morrison and Grabowski JAS 2007, 2008

  37. LAGRANGIAN MODELING OF THE CONDENSED PHASE

  38. Lagrangian treatment of the condensed phase:

  39. Eulerian dynamics, energy and water vapor transport: Lagrangian physics of “super-particles” a single “super-particle” represents a number of the same airborne particles (aerosol, droplet, ice crystal, etc.) with given attributes Coupling mid – mass of the super-particle Mid – concentration of super-particles ΔV – volume of the gridbox Andrejczuk et al. 2008, 2010

  40. 9 hr CCN of 190 cm-3 3 hr CCN of 1295 cm-3 Andrejczuk et al. 2010

More Related