SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “single-column”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2005

Applications and Improvement of a Coupled, Global and Cloud-Resolving Modeling System

Recently Grabowski (2001) and Khairoutdinov and Randall (2001) have proposed the use of 2D CFWs as a "super parameterization" [or multi-scale modeling framework (MMF)] to represent cloud processes within atmospheric general circulation models (GCMs). In the MMF, a fine-resolution 2D CRM takes the place of the single-column parameterization used in conventional GCMs. A prototype Goddard MMF based on the 2D Goddard Cumulus Ensemble (GCE) model and the Goddard finite volume general circulation model (fvGCM) is now being developed. The prototype includes the fvGCM run at 2.50 x 20 horizontal resolution with 32 vertical layers from the surface to 1 mb and the 2D (x-z) GCE using 64 horizontal and 32 vertical grid points with 4 km horizontal resolution and a cyclic lateral boundary. The time step for the 2D GCE would be 15 seconds, and the fvGCM-GCE coupling frequency would be 30 minutes (i.e. the fvGCM physical time step). We have successfully developed an fvGCM-GCE coupler for this prototype. Because the vertical coordinate of the fvGCM (a terrain-following floating Lagrangian coordinate) is different from that of the GCE (a z coordinate), vertical interpolations between the two coordinates are needed in the coupler. In interpolating fields from the GCE to fvGCM, we use an existing fvGCM finite- volume piecewise parabolic mapping (PPM) algorithm, which conserves the mass, momentum, and total energy. A new finite-volume PPM algorithm, which conserves the mass, momentum and moist static energy in the z coordinate, is being developed for interpolating fields from the fvGCM to the GCE. In the meeting, we will discuss the major differences between the two MMFs (i.e., the CSU MMF and the Goddard MMF). We will also present performance and critical issues related to the MMFs. In addition, we will present multi-dimensional cloud datasets (i.e., a cloud data library) generated by the Goddard MMF that will be provided to the global modeling community to help improve the representation and performance of moist processes in climate models and to improve our understanding of cloud processes globally (the software tools needed to produce cloud statistics and to identify various types of clouds and cloud systems from both high-resolution satellite and model data will be also presented).

Tao, W.-K.↗

NASA NTRS2005

Coupled fvGCM-GCE Modeling System, 3D Cloud-Resolving Model and Cloud Library

Recent GEWEX Cloud System Study (GCSS) model comparison projects have indicated that cloud- resolving models (CRMs) agree with observations better than traditional single-column models in simulating various types of clouds and cloud systems from different geographic locations. Current and future NASA satellite programs can provide cloud, precipitation, aerosol and other data at very fine spatial and temporal scales. It requires a coupled global circulation model (GCM) and cloud-scale model (termed a super-parameterization or multi-scale modeling framework, MMF) to use these satellite data to improve the understanding of the physical processes that are responsible for the variation in global and regional climate and hydrological systems. The use of a GCM will enable global coverage, and the use of a CRM will allow for better and more sophisticated physical parameterization. NASA satellite and field campaign cloud related datasets can provide initial conditions as well as validation for both the MMF and CRMs. A seed fund is available at NASA Goddard to build a MMF based on the 2D Goddard Cumulus Ensemble (GCE) model and the Goddard finite volume general circulation model (fvGCM). A prototype MMF in being developed and production runs will be conducted at the beginning of 2005. In this talk, I will present: (1) A brief review on GCE model and its applications on precipitation processes, ( 2 ) The Goddard MMF and the major difference between two existing MMFs (CSU MMF and Goddard MMF), (3) A cloud library generated by Goddard MMF, and 3D GCE model, and (4) A brief discussion on the GCE model on developing a global cloud simulator.

Tao, Wei-Kuo↗

NASA NTRS2005

A Coupled fcGCM-GCE Modeling System: A 3D Cloud Resolving Model and a Regional Scale Model

Recent GEWEX Cloud System Study (GCSS) model comparison projects have indicated that cloud-resolving models (CRMs) agree with observations better than traditional single-column models in simulating various types of clouds and cloud systems from different geographic locations. Current and future NASA satellite programs can provide cloud, precipitation, aerosol and other data at very fine spatial and temporal scales. It requires a coupled global circulation model (GCM) and cloud-scale model (termed a super-parameterization or multi-scale modeling framework, MMF) to use these satellite data to improve the understanding of the physical processes that are responsible for the variation in global and regional climate and hydrological systems. The use of a GCM will enable global coverage, and the use of a CRM will allow for better and ore sophisticated physical parameterization. NASA satellite and field campaign cloud related datasets can provide initial conditions as well as validation for both the MMF and CRMs. The Goddard MMF is based on the 2D Goddard Cumulus Ensemble (GCE) model and the Goddard finite volume general circulation model (fvGCM), and it has started production runs with two years results (1998 and 1999). Also, at Goddard, we have implemented several Goddard microphysical schemes (21CE, several 31CE), Goddard radiation (including explicity calculated cloud optical properties), and Goddard Land Information (LIS, that includes the CLM and NOAH land surface models) into a next generation regional scale model, WRF. In this talk, I will present: (1) A Brief review on GCE model and its applications on precipitation processes (microphysical and land processes), (2) The Goddard MMF and the major difference between two existing MMFs (CSU MMF and Goddard MMF), and preliminary results (the comparison with traditional GCMs), (3) A discussion on the Goddard WRF version (its developments and applications), and (4) The characteristics of the four-dimensional cloud data sets (or cloud library) stored at Goddard.

Tao, Wei-Kuo↗

NASA NTRS2006

A Coupled GCM-Cloud Resolving Modeling System, and A Regional Scale Model to Study Precipitation Processes

Recent GEWEX Cloud System Study (GCSS) model comparison projects have indicated that cloud-resolving models (CRMs) agree with observations better than traditional single-column models in simulating various types of clouds and cloud systems from different geographic locations. Current and future NASA satellite programs can provide cloud, precipitation, aerosol and other data at very fine spatial and temporal scales. It requires a coupled global circulation model (GCM) and cloud-scale model (termed a super-parameterization or multi-scale modeling framework, MMF) to use these satellite data to improve the understanding of the physical processes that are responsible for the variation in global and regional climate and hydrological systems. The use of a GCM will enable global coverage, and the use of a CRM will allow for better and more sophisticated physical parameterization. NASA satellite and field campaign cloud related datasets can provide initial conditions as well as validation for both the MMF and CRMs. The Goddard MMF is based on the 2D Goddard Cumulus Ensemble (GCE) model and the Goddard finite volume general circulation model (fvGCM), and it has started production runs with two years results (1998 and 1999). Also, at Goddard, we have implemented several Goddard microphysical schemes (21CE, several 31CE), Goddard radiation (including explicitly calculated cloud optical properties), and Goddard Land Information (LIS, that includes the CLM and NOAH land surface models) into a next generation regional scale model, WRF. In this talk, I will present: (1) A brief review on GCE model and its applications on precipitation processes (microphysical and land processes), (2) The Goddard MMF and the major difference between two existing MMFs (CSU MMF and Goddard MMF), and preliminary results (the comparison with traditional GCMs), and (3) A discussion on the Goddard WRF version (its developments and applications).

Tao, Wei-Kuo↗

NASA NTRS2006

A Coupled GCM-Cloud Resolving Modeling System, and a Regional Scale Model to Study Precipitation Processes

Recent GEWEX Cloud System Study (GCSS) model comparison projects have indicated that cloud-resolving models (CRMs) agree with observations better than traditional single-column models in simulating various types of clouds and cloud systems from different geographic locations. Current and future NASA satellite programs can provide cloud, precipitation, aerosol and other data at very fine spatial and temporal scales. It requires a coupled global circulation model (GCM) and cloud-scale model (termed a super-parameterization or multi-scale modeling framework, MMF) to use these satellite data to improve the understanding of the physical processes that are responsible for the variation in global and regional climate and hydrological systems. The use of a GCM will enable global coverage, and the use of a CRM will allow for better and more sophisticated physical parameterization. NASA satellite and field campaign cloud related datasets can provide initial conditions as well as validation for both the MMF and CFWs. The Goddard MMF is based on the 2D Goddard Cumulus Ensemble (GCE) model and the Goddard finite volume general circulation model (fvGCM), and it has started production runs with two years results (1 998 and 1999). In this talk, I will present: (1) A brief review on GCE model and its applications on precipitation processes (microphysical and land processes), (2) The Goddard MMF and the major difference between two existing MMFs (CSU MMF and Goddard MMF), and preliminary results (the comparison with traditional GCMs), and (3) A discussion on the Goddard WRF version (its developments and applications).

Tao, Wei-Kuo↗

NASA NTRS2007

A Coupled GCM-Cloud Resolving Modeling System, and a Regional Scale Model to Study Precipitation Processes

Recent GEWEX Cloud System Study (GCSS) model comparison projects have indicated that cloud-resolving models (CRMs) agree with observations better than traditional single-column models in simulating various types of clouds and cloud systems from different geographic locations. Current and future NASA satellite programs can provide cloud, precipitation, aerosol and other data at very fine spatial and temporal scales. It requires a coupled global circulation model (GCM) and cloud-scale model (termed a superparameterization or multi-scale modeling framework, MMF) to use these satellite data to improve the understanding of the physical processes that are responsible for the variation in global and regional climate and hydrological systems. The use of a GCM will enable global coverage, and the use of a CRM will allow for better and more sophisticated physical parameterization. NASA satellite and field campaign cloud related datasets can provide initial conditions as well as validation for both the MMF and CRMs. The Goddard MMF is based on the 2D Goddard Cumulus Ensemble (GCE) model and the Goddard finite volume general circulation model (fvGCM), and it has started production runs with two years results (1998 and 1999). Also, at Goddard, we have implemented several Goddard microphysical schemes (2ICE, several 31CE), Goddard radiation (including explicitly calculated cloud optical properties), and Goddard Land Information (LIS, that includes the CLM and NOAH land surface models) into a next generatio11 regional scale model, WRF. In this talk, I will present: (1) A brief review on GCE model and its applications on precipitation processes (microphysical and land processes), (2) The Goddard MMF and the major difference between two existing MMFs (CSU MMF and Goddard MMF), and preliminary results (the comparison with traditional GCMs), and (3) A discussion on the Goddard WRF version (its developments and applications).

Tao, Wei-Kuo↗

NASA NTRS2006

A Coupled GCM-Cloud Resolving Modeling System, and A Regional Scale Model to Study Precipitation Processes

Tao, Wei-Kuo↗

NASA NTRS2006

Simulation of Shallow Cumuli and Their Transition to Deep Convective Clouds by Cloud-resolving Models with Different Third-order Turbulence Closures

The abilities of cloud-resolving models (CRMs) with the double-Gaussian based and the single-Gaussian based third-order closures (TOCs) to simulate the shallow cumuli and their transition to deep convective clouds are compared in this study. The single-Gaussian based TOC is fully prognostic (FP), while the double-Gaussian based TOC is partially prognostic (PP). The latter only predicts three important third-order moments while the former predicts all the thirdorder moments. A shallow cumulus case is simulated by single-column versions of the FP and PP TOC models. The PP TOC improves the simulation of shallow cumulus greatly over the FP TOC by producing more realistic cloud structures. Large differences between the FP and PP TOC simulations appear in the cloud layer of the second- and third-order moments, which are related mainly to the underestimate of the cloud height in the FP TOC simulation. Sensitivity experiments and analysis of probability density functions (PDFs) used in the TOCs show that both the turbulence-scale condensation and higher-order moments are important to realistic simulations of the boundary-layer shallow cumuli. A shallow to deep convective cloud transition case is also simulated by the 2-D versions of the FP and PP TOC models. Both CRMs can capture the transition from the shallow cumuli to deep convective clouds. The PP simulations produce more and deeper shallow cumuli than the FP simulations, but the FP simulations produce larger and wider convective clouds than the PP simulations. The temporal evolutions of cloud and precipitation are closely related to the turbulent transport, the cold pool and the cloud-scale circulation. The large amount of turbulent mixing associated with the shallow cumuli slows down the increase of the convective available potential energy and inhibits the early transition to deep convective clouds in the PP simulation. When the deep convective clouds fully develop and the precipitation is produced, the cold pools produced by the evaporation of the precipitation are not favorable to the formation of shallow cumuli.

Cheng, Anning↗

NASA NTRS2009

A Multiscale Modeling System: Developments, Applications, and Critical Issues

The foremost challenge in parameterizing convective clouds and cloud systems in large-scale models are the many coupled dynamical and physical processes that interact over a wide range of scales, from microphysical scales to the synoptic and planetary scales. This makes the comprehension and representation of convective clouds and cloud systems one of the most complex scientific problems in Earth science. During the past decade, the Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment (GEWEX) Cloud System Study (GCSS) has pioneered the use of single-column models (SCMs) and cloud-resolving models (CRMs) for the evaluation of the cloud and radiation parameterizations in general circulation models (GCMs; e.g., GEWEX Cloud System Science Team 1993). These activities have uncovered many systematic biases in the radiation, cloud and convection parameterizations of GCMs and have led to the development of new schemes (e.g., Zhang 2002; Pincus et al, 2003; Zhang and Wu 2003; Wu et al. 2003; Liang and Wu 2005; Wu and Liang 2005, and others). Comparisons between SCMs and CRMs using the same large-scale forcing derived from field campaigns have demonstrated that CRMs are superior to SCMs in the prediction of temperature and moisture tendencies (e.g., Das et al. 1999; Randall et al 2003b; Xie et al. 2005).

Tao, Wei-Kuo↗

NASA NTRS2011

Evaluation of Convective Transport in the GEOS-5 Chemistry and Climate Model

The NASA Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS-5) Chemistry and Climate Model (CCM) consists of a global atmospheric general circulation model and the combined stratospheric and tropospheric chemistry package from the NASA Global Modeling Initiative (GMI) chemical transport model. The subgrid process of convective tracer transport is represented through the Relaxed Arakawa-Schubert parameterization in the GEOS-5 CCM. However, substantial uncertainty for tracer transport is associated with this parameterization, as is the case with all global and regional models. We have designed a project to comprehensively evaluate this parameterization from the point of view of tracer transport, and determine the most appropriate improvements that can be made to the GEOS-5 convection algorithm, allowing improvement in our understanding of the role of convective processes in determining atmospheric composition. We first simulate tracer transport in individual observed convective events with a cloud-resolving model (WRF). Initial condition tracer profiles (CO, CO2, O3) are constructed from aircraft data collected in undisturbed air, and the simulations are evaluated using aircraft data taken in the convective anvils. A single-column (SCM) version of the GEOS-5 GCM with online tracers is then run for the same convective events. SCM output is evaluated based on averaged tracer fields from the cloud-resolving model. Sensitivity simulations with adjusted parameters will be run in the SCM to determine improvements in the representation of convective transport. The focus of the work to date is on tropical continental convective events from the African Monsoon Multidisciplinary Analyses (AMMA) field mission in August 2006 that were extensively sampled by multiple research aircraft.

Pickering, Kenneth E.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Advancements in the Representation of Cloud-Aerosol Microphysics in the GEOS-5 AGCM

Despite numerous challenges, the physical parameterization of cloud-aerosol interactions in atmospheric GCMs has become a top priority for advancement because of our need to simulate and understand past, current, and future indirect effects of aerosols on clouds. The challenges stem from the involvement of wide range of cloud-scale dynamics and aerosol activation physical processes. Cloud dynamics modulate cloud areal extent and condensate, while aerosol activation depends on aerosol mass load, size distribution, internal mixing state, and nucleating properties, and ultimately determines cloud optical properties via particle sizes. Both macro- and micro-scale processes are obviously important for cloud-radiation interactions. We will present the main features of cloud microphysical properties in the GEOS- 5 Atmospheric GCM (AGCM) as simulated by the McRAS-AC (Microphysics of Clouds with Relaxed Arakawa-Schubert and Aerosol-Cloud interaction) scheme. McRAS-AC uses Fountoukis and Nenes (2005) aerosol activation for liquid clouds, and has an option for either Liu and Penner (2005) or Barahona and Nenes (2008, 2009) aerosol activation for ice clouds. Aerosol loading (on-line or climatological) comes from GOCART, with an assumed log-normal size distribution. Other features of McRAS-AC are level-by-level cloud-scale thermodynamics, and Seifert-Beheng (2001)-type precipitation microphysics, particularly from moist convection. Results from Single-Column Model simulations will be shown to demonstrate how cloud radiative properties, lifetimes, and precipitation are influenced by different parameterization assumptions. Corresponding fields from year-long simulations of the full AGCM will also be presented with geographical distributions of cloud effective particle sizes compared to satellite retrievals. While the primary emphasis will be on current climate, simulation results with perturbed aerosol loadings will also be shown to expose the radiative sensitivity of the microphysical parameterization.

Lee, D.↗

NASA NTRS2013

The NASA-Goddard Multi-Scale Modeling Framework - Land Information System: Global Land/atmosphere Interaction with Resolved Convection

The present generation of general circulation models (GCM) use parameterized cumulus schemes and run at hydrostatic grid resolutions. To improve the representation of cloud-scale moist processes and landeatmosphere interactions, a global, Multi-scale Modeling Framework (MMF) coupled to the Land Information System (LIS) has been developed at NASA-Goddard Space Flight Center. The MMFeLIS has three components, a finite-volume (fv) GCM (Goddard Earth Observing System Ver. 4, GEOS-4), a 2D cloud-resolving model (Goddard Cumulus Ensemble, GCE), and the LIS, representing the large-scale atmospheric circulation, cloud processes, and land surface processes, respectively. The non-hydrostatic GCE model replaces the single-column cumulus parameterization of fvGCM. The model grid is composed of an array of fvGCM gridcells each with a series of embedded GCE models. A horizontal coupling strategy, GCE4fvGCM4Coupler4LIS, offered significant computational efficiency, with the scalability and I/O capabilities of LIS permitting landeatmosphere interactions at cloud-scale. Global simulations of 2007e2008 and comparisons to observations and reanalysis products were conducted. Using two different versions of the same land surface model but the same initial conditions, divergence in regional, synoptic-scale surface pressure patterns emerged within two weeks. The sensitivity of largescale circulations to land surface model physics revealed significant functional value to using a scalable, multi-model land surface modeling system in global weather and climate prediction.

cumulus schemes↗

NASA NTRS2013

Evaluation of Intercomparisons of Four Different Types of Model Simulating TWP-ICE

Four model intercomparisons were run and evaluated using the TWP-ICE field campaign, each involving different types of atmospheric model. Here we highlight what can be learnt from having single-column model (SCM), cloud-resolving model (CRM), global atmosphere model (GAM) and limited-area model (LAM) intercomparisons all based around the same field campaign. We also make recommendations for anyone planning further large multi-model intercomparisons to ensure they are of maximum value to the model development community. CRMs tended to match observations better than other model types, although there were exceptions such as outgoing long-wave radiation. All SCMs grew large temperature and moisture biases and performed worse than other model types for many diagnostics. The GAMs produced a delayed and significantly reduced peak in domain-average rain rate when compared to the observations. While it was shown that this was in part due to the analysis used to drive these models, the LAMs were also driven by this analysis and did not have the problem to the same extent. Based on differences between the models with parametrized convection (SCMs and GAMs) and those without (CRMs and LAMs), we speculate that that having explicit convection helps to constrain liquid water whereas the ice contents are controlled more by the representation of the microphysics.

convection↗

NASA NTRS2013

Evaluation of Precipitation Simulated by Seven SCMs against the ARM Observations at the SGP Site

This study evaluates the performances of seven single-column models (SCMs) by comparing simulated surface precipitation with observations at the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Program Southern Great Plains (SGP) site from January 1999 to December 2001. Results show that although most SCMs can reproduce the observed precipitation reasonably well, there are significant and interesting differences in their details. In the cold season, the model-observation differences in the frequency and mean intensity of rain events tend to compensate each other for most SCMs. In the warm season, most SCMs produce more rain events in daytime than in nighttime, whereas the observations have more rain events in nighttime. The mean intensities of rain events in these SCMs are much stronger in daytime, but weaker in nighttime, than the observations. The higher frequency of rain events during warm-season daytime in most SCMs is related to the fact that most SCMs produce a spurious precipitation peak around the regime of weak vertical motions but rich in moisture content. The models also show distinct biases between nighttime and daytime in simulating significant rain events. In nighttime, all the SCMs have a lower frequency of moderate-to-strong rain events than the observations for both seasons. In daytime, most SCMs have a higher frequency of moderate-to-strong rain events than the observations, especially in the warm season. Further analysis reveals distinct meteorological backgrounds for large underestimation and overestimation events. The former occur in the strong ascending regimes with negative low-level horizontal heat and moisture advection, whereas the latter occur in the weak or moderate ascending regimes with positive low-level horizontal heat and moisture advection.

Model comparison↗

NASA NTRS2015

RACORO Continental Boundary Layer Cloud Investigations: 1. Case Study Development and Ensemble Large-Scale Forcings

Observation-based modeling case studies of continental boundary layer clouds have been developed to study cloudy boundary layers, aerosol influences upon them, and their representation in cloud- and global-scale models. Three 60 h case study periods span the temporal evolution of cumulus, stratiform, and drizzling boundary layer cloud systems, representing mixed and transitional states rather than idealized or canonical cases. Based on in situ measurements from the Routine AAF (Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Aerial Facility) CLOWD (Clouds with Low Optical Water Depth) Optical Radiative Observations (RACORO) field campaign and remote sensing observations, the cases are designed with a modular configuration to simplify use in large-eddy simulations (LES) and single-column models. Aircraft measurements of aerosol number size distribution are fit to lognormal functions for concise representation in models. Values of the aerosol hygroscopicity parameter, kappa, are derived from observations to be approximately 0.10, which are lower than the 0.3 typical over continents and suggestive of a large aerosol organic fraction. Ensemble large-scale forcing data sets are derived from the ARM variational analysis, European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, and a multiscale data assimilation system. The forcings are assessed through comparison of measured bulk atmospheric and cloud properties to those computed in "trial" large-eddy simulations, where more efficient run times are enabled through modest reductions in grid resolution and domain size compared to the full-sized LES grid. Simulations capture many of the general features observed, but the state-of-the-art forcings were limited at representing details of cloud onset, and tight gradients and high-resolution transients of importance. Methods for improving the initial conditions and forcings are discussed. The cases developed are available to the general modeling community for studying continental boundary clouds.

Boundary layers↗

NASA NTRS2021

Improving the Representation of Subtropical Boundary Layer Clouds in the NASA GEOS Model with the Eddy-Diffusivity/Mass-Flux Parameterization

A systematic underestimation of subtropical planetary boundary layer (PBL) stratocu-mulus clouds by the GEOS model has been significantly improved by a new Eddy-Diffusivity/Mass-Flux (EDMF) parameterization. The EDMF parameterization representsthe subgrid-scale transport in the dry and moist parts of the PBL in a unified mannerand it combines an adjusted eddy-diffusivity PBL scheme from GEOS with a stochasticmulti-plume mass-flux model. The new EDMF version of the GEOS model is first com-pared against the CONTROL version in a single-column model (SCM) framework for twobenchmark cases representing subtropical stratocumulus and shallow cumulus clouds, andvalidated against large eddy simulations. Global simulations are performed and comparedagainst observations and reanalysis data. The results show that the EDMF version of theGEOS model produces more realistic subtropical PBL clouds. Noteworthy, the EDMF im-provements first detected in the SCM framework translate into similar improvements of theglobal GEOS model.

Kay Suselj↗

NASA NTRS2022

The Earth Model Column Collaboratory (EMC2) v1.1: An Open-Source Ground-Based Lidar and Radar Instrument Simulator and Subcolumn Generator for Large-Scale Models

Climate models are essential for our comprehensive understanding of Earth's atmosphere and can provide critical insights on future changes decades ahead. Because of these critical roles, today's climate models are continuously being developed and evaluated using constraining observations and measurements obtained by satellites, airborne, and ground-based instruments. Instrument simulators can provide a bridge between the measured or retrieved quantities and their sampling in models and field observations while considering instrument sensitivity limitations. Here we present the Earth Model Column Collaboratory (EMC2), an open-source ground-based lidar and radar instrument simulator and subcolumn generator, specifically designed for large-scale models, in particular climate models, but also applicable to high-resolution model output. EMC2 provides a flexible framework enabling direct comparison of model output with ground-based observations, including generation of subcolumns that may statistically represent finer model spatial resolutions. In addition, EMC2 emulates ground-based (and air- or space-borne) measurements while remaining faithful to large-scale models' physical assumptions implemented in their cloud or radiation schemes. The simulator uses either single particle or bulk particle size distribution lookup tables, depending on the selected scheme approach, to perform the forward calculations. To facilitate model evaluation, EMC2 also includes three hydrometeor classification methods, namely, radar- and sounding-based cloud and precipitation detection and classification, lidar-based phase classification, and a Cloud Feedback Model Intercomparison Project Observational Simulator Package (COSP) lidar simulator emulator. The software is written in Python, is easy to use, and can be straightforwardly customized for different models, radars, and lidars. Following the description of the logic, functionality, features, and software structure of EMC2, we present a case study of highly supercooled mixed-phase cloud based on measurements from the U.S. Department of Energy Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) West Antarctic Radiation Experiment (AWARE). We compare observations with the application of EMC2 to outputs from four configurations of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) climate model (ModelE3) in single-column model (SCM) mode and from a large-eddy simulation (LES) model. We show that two of the four ModelE3 configurations can form and maintain highly supercooled precipitating cloud for several hours, consistent with observations and LES. While our focus is on one of these ModelE3 configurations, which performed slightly better in this case study, both of these configurations and the LES results post-processed with EMC2 generally provide reasonable agreement with observed lidar and radar variables. As briefly demonstrated here, EMC2 can provide a lightweight and flexible framework for comparing the results of both large-scale and high-resolution models directly with observations, with relatively little overhead and multiple options for achieving consistency with model microphysical or radiation scheme physics.

Earth Model Column Collaboratory↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An LES Survey of Cold-Air Outbreaks Spanning ACTIVATE and COMBLE

Two recent field campaigns offer unique new opportunities to survey coupled aerosol and cloud processes operating within cold-air outbreaks (CAOs). NASA's 2019-2023 Aerosol Cloud meTeorology Interactions oVer the western Atlantic Experiment (ACTIVATE) project provided airborne in situ and remote sensing observations in multiple CAOs off the central US Eastern Seaboard. Contemporaneously, DOE's 2019-2020 Cold-air Outbreaks in the Marine Boundary Layer Experiment (COMBLE) provided continuous ground-based in situ and remote sensing measurements during hundreds of hours of CAO conditions at two sites flanking the Norwegian Sea. Here we highlight lessons learned from contrasting sets of aerosol-aware Lagrangian large-eddy simulation case studies derived from each campaign, as well as outstanding uncertainties. Cases simulated include all of the most extensively sampled CAO flights during ACTIVATE, and a wide range of CAO strengths and mesoscale structures during COMBLE. Each case study is also suitable for simulation with large-scale models in single-column model mode or with a limited-domain approach using periodic boundary conditions. We seek to address the central question: what microphysical process pathways control the Lagrangian evolution of surface and top-of-atmosphere radiative fluxes under ACTIVATE and COMBLE conditions? Many science team members, co-investigators, and collaborators will be gratefully acknowledged in association with their contributions to making this work possible.

cold-air outbreaks↗