Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Deng, M.

Publications and source records attributed to Deng, M..

Using Satellite and ARM Observations to Evaluate Cold Air Outbreak Cloud Transitions in E3SM Global Storm‐Resolving Simulations

Abstract This study examines marine boundary layer cloud regime transition during a cold air outbreak (CAO) over the Norwegian Sea, simulated by a global storm‐resolving model (GSRM) known as the Simple Cloud‐Resolving Energy Exascale Earth System Model Atmosphere Model (SCREAM). By selecting observational references based on a combination of large‐scale conditions rather than strict time‐matched comparisons, this study finds that SCREAM qualitatively captures the CAO cloud transition, including boundary layer growth, cloud mesoscale structure, and phase partitioning. SCREAM also accurately locates the greatest ice and liquid in the mesoscale updrafts, however, underestimates supercooled liquid water in cumulus clouds. The model evaluation approach adopted by this study takes advantages of the existing computational‐expensive global simulations of GSRM and the available observations to understand model performance and can be applied to assessments of other cloud regimes in different regions. Such practice provides valuable guidance on the future effort to correct and improve biased model behaviors.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Tracking Aerosol Convection Interactions Experiment (TRACER) Field Campaign Report

Convective clouds serve a critical role in the Earth’s energy and water cycles through their transport of heat, moisture, momentum, and chemical species through the troposphere driving the global circulation (e.g., Hartmann et al. 1984, Del Genio et al. 2012, Su et al. 2014). On more local scales, convective clouds impact the atmospheric heating profile through diabatic heating effects, removal of water from the atmospheric column through precipitation, and conditioning of the local environment impacting further development of clouds (e.g., Sullivan and Voigt 2021). These critical roles underscore the importance of realistic representation of convective processes across scales of models from large-eddy simulation (LES), to convection-permitting models (CPM; e.g., Kendon et al. 2020, Marinescu et al. 2021), to numerical weather prediction (NWP) models used for operational weather forecasting, to Earth system models used to predict climate sensitivity (Sanderson et al. 2011, Sherwood et al. 2014, Tomassini et al. 2014, Zhao et al. 2016, Cronin et al. 2017). A key component of improving model representation of convective clouds is better quantification and parameterization of updraft microphysics and dynamics, including their interactions with the surrounding environment and storm organization (Bony et al. 2015, Hagos and Houze 2016, Donner et al. 2016, Morrison et al. 2020). Aerosol is an important environmental factor that could affect convective clouds and precipitation since cloud droplet and ice formation processes are initiated by it. Andrae et al. (2004) hypothesized that aerosols associated with increased biomass burning particles acting as cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) result in smaller and more monodisperse cloud droplets leading to suppression of warm rain formation, ultimately leading to more cloud water being lofted above the freezing level based on observations in the Amazon region. The subsequent increase in latent heat release increases the buoyancy of rising convective parcels invigorating the deep convection. This work was followed by a description of the theoretical basis for this “cold-phase invigoration” by Rosenfeld et al. (2008), who argued that it could have a significant effect for deep convective clouds with warm cloud-bases. Several modeling studies (e.g., Khain et al. 2005, 2009, van den Heever et al. 2006, Fan et al. 2007, 2009, 2012, Lee et al. 2008, Storer et al. 2010, Lebo et al. 2012, Storer and van den Heever 2013, Chen et al. 2020, Dagan et al. 2022) have investigated these aerosol-convection interactions and the environmental factors that influence their relative importance and magnitude. More recently, several studies have indicated that “warm-phase invigoration”, the enhancement of convection through condensational heating, also appears to play a role in enhancing both shallow cumuli (Seiki and Nakajima 2014, Saleeby et al 2015) and deeper tropical convection (Lebo and Seinfeld 2011, Khain et al. 2012, Sheffield et al 2015, Fan et al. 2018, Igel and van den Heever 2021), as well as Houston thunderstorms (Fan et al. 2007, 2020). However, still other studies have provided additional evidence of systematic biases in simulated convective outflow ice size distribution properties, which are consistent with a lack of poorly understood secondary ice production within convective updrafts (e.g., Fridlind et al. 2017). To help address these critical gaps in our understanding of cloud processes, aerosol processes and aerosol-cloud interactions, the Tracking Aerosol Convection Interactions Experiment was designed building upon efforts by the Aerosol, Cloud, Precipitation and Climate (ACPC) Initiative (http://acpcintiative.org/), a joint effort of the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP) and the World Climate Research Program (WCRP) that focused on resolving uncertainties in the interactions between aerosol and clouds towards better understanding the role that these interactions play in the climate system. The TRACER campaign was motivated by recommendations from a number of pilot studies undertaken by ACPC (van den Heever et al. 2017, Fridlind et al. 2019, Hu et al. 2019, Fan et al. 2020, Marinescu et al. 2021, Hernandez-Deckers et al. 2022) that pointed towards the southeastern Texas region as a locale where aerosol-convection interactions could be studied owing to the copious occurrence of isolated convection during the summer months accompanied by diverse and significant sources of aerosols from both anthropogenic and natural sources. The TRACER campaign began on 01 October 2021 and extended through 30 September 2022 with an intensive operational period (IOP) during June-September 2022. Three main sites (Table 1) were managed by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) user facility.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗