Articles | Volume 16, issue 10
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2975-2023
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-2975-2023
Model evaluation paper
 | 
31 May 2023
Model evaluation paper |  | 31 May 2023

Intercomparison of the weather and climate physics suites of a unified forecast–climate model system (GRIST-A22.7.28) based on single-column modeling

Xiaohan Li, Yi Zhang, Xindong Peng, Baiquan Zhou, Jian Li, and Yiming Wang

Related authors

Using a single column model (SGRIST1.0) for connecting model physics and dynamics in the Global-to-Regional Integrated forecast SysTem (GRIST-A20.8)
Xiaohan Li, Yi Zhang, Xindong Peng, and Jian Li
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2020-254,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2020-254, 2020
Revised manuscript not accepted
Short summary

Related subject area

Atmospheric sciences
Evaluation and development of surface layer scheme representation of temperature inversions over boreal forests in Arctic wintertime conditions
Julia Maillard, Jean-Christophe Raut, and François Ravetta
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 3303–3320, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3303-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-3303-2024, 2024
Short summary
Modelling wind farm effects in HARMONIE–AROME (cycle 43.2.2) – Part 1: Implementation and evaluation
Jana Fischereit, Henrik Vedel, Xiaoli Guo Larsén, Natalie E. Theeuwes, Gregor Giebel, and Eigil Kaas
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2855–2875, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2855-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2855-2024, 2024
Short summary
Analytical and adaptable initial conditions for dry and moist baroclinic waves in the global hydrostatic model OpenIFS (CY43R3)
Clément Bouvier, Daan van den Broek, Madeleine Ekblom, and Victoria A. Sinclair
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2961–2986, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2961-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2961-2024, 2024
Short summary
Challenges of constructing and selecting the “perfect” boundary conditions for the large-eddy simulation model PALM
Jelena Radović, Michal Belda, Jaroslav Resler, Kryštof Eben, Martin Bureš, Jan Geletič, Pavel Krč, Hynek Řezníček, and Vladimír Fuka
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2901–2927, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2901-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2901-2024, 2024
Short summary
A machine learning approach for evaluating Southern Ocean cloud radiative biases in a global atmosphere model
Sonya L. Fiddes, Marc D. Mallet, Alain Protat, Matthew T. Woodhouse, Simon P. Alexander, and Kalli Furtado
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 2641–2662, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2641-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-2641-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Bechtold, P., Semane, N., Lopez, P., Chaboureau, J. P., Beljaars, A., and Bormann, N.: The role of shallow convection in ECMWF's Integrated Forecasting System, ECMWF Technical Memoranda, 2014. 
Bretherton, C. S. and Park, S.: The University of Washington Shallow Convection and Moist Turbulence Schemes and Their Impact on Climate Simulations with the Community Atmosphere Model, J. Climate, 22, 3449–3469, https://doi.org/10.1175/2008jcli2557.1, 2009. 
Bogenschutz, P. A., Gettelman, A., Morrison, H., Larson, V. E., Schanen, D. P., Meyer, N. R., and Craig, C.: Unified parameterization of the planetary boundary layer and shallow convection with a higher-order turbulence closure in the Community Atmosphere Model: single-column experiments, Geosci. Model Dev., 5, 1407–1423, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-1407-2012, 2012. 
Brown, A., Milton, S., Cullen, M., Golding, B., Mitchell, J., and Shelly, A.: Unified Modeling and Prediction of Weather and Climate: A 25-Year Journey, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 93, 1865–1877, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-12-00018.1, 2012. 
Chepfer, H., Bony, S., Winker, D., Cesana, G., Dufresne, J. L., Minnis, P., Stubenrauch, C. J., and Zeng, S.: The GCM-oriented CALIPSO cloud product (CALIPSO-GOCCP), J. Geophys. Res., 115, D00H16, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012251, 2010. 
Download
Short summary
The weather and climate physics suites used in GRIST-A22.7.28 are compared using single-column modeling. The source of their discrepancies in terms of modeling cloud and precipitation is explored. Convective parameterization is found to be a key factor responsible for the differences. The two suites also have intrinsic differences in the interaction between microphysics and other processes, resulting in different cloud features and time step sensitivities.