Articles | Volume 9, issue 3
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1125-2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-9-1125-2016
Development and technical paper
 | 
24 Mar 2016
Development and technical paper |  | 24 Mar 2016

The location of the thermodynamic atmosphere–ice interface in fully coupled models – a case study using JULES and CICE

Alex E. West, Alison J. McLaren, Helene T. Hewitt, and Martin J. Best

Related authors

CMIP6 models overestimate sea ice melt, growth and conduction relative to ice mass balance buoy estimates
Alex E. West and Edward W. Blockley
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3041–3064, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3041-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3041-2025, 2025
Short summary
The sea ice component of GC5: coupling SI3 to HadGEM3 using conductive fluxes
Ed Blockley, Emma Fiedler, Jeff Ridley, Luke Roberts, Alex West, Dan Copsey, Daniel Feltham, Tim Graham, David Livings, Clement Rousset, David Schroeder, and Martin Vancoppenolle
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 6799–6817, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6799-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-6799-2024, 2024
Short summary
Understanding model spread in sea ice volume by attribution of model differences in seasonal ice growth and melt
Alex West, Edward Blockley, and Matthew Collins
The Cryosphere, 16, 4013–4032, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-4013-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-16-4013-2022, 2022
Short summary
Using Arctic ice mass balance buoys for evaluation of modelled ice energy fluxes
Alex West, Mat Collins, and Ed Blockley
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 4845–4868, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4845-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4845-2020, 2020
Short summary
Induced surface fluxes: a new framework for attributing Arctic sea ice volume balance biases to specific model errors
Alex West, Mat Collins, Ed Blockley, Jeff Ridley, and Alejandro Bodas-Salcedo
The Cryosphere, 13, 2001–2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-2001-2019,https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-13-2001-2019, 2019
Short summary

Related subject area

Cryosphere
CMIP6 models overestimate sea ice melt, growth and conduction relative to ice mass balance buoy estimates
Alex E. West and Edward W. Blockley
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3041–3064, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3041-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3041-2025, 2025
Short summary
Coupling framework (1.0) for the Úa (2023b) ice sheet model and the FESOM-1.4 z-coordinate ocean model in an Antarctic domain
Ole Richter, Ralph Timmermann, G. Hilmar Gudmundsson, and Jan De Rydt
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2945–2960, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2945-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2945-2025, 2025
Short summary
A gradient-boosted tree framework to model the ice thickness of the world's glaciers (IceBoost v1.1)
Niccolò Maffezzoli, Eric Rignot, Carlo Barbante, Troels Petersen, and Sebastiano Vascon
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2545–2568, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2545-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2545-2025, 2025
Short summary
Towards deep-learning solutions for classification of automated snow height measurements (CleanSnow v1.0.2)
Jan Svoboda, Marc Ruesch, David Liechti, Corinne Jones, Michele Volpi, Michael Zehnder, and Jürg Schweizer
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1829–1849, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1829-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1829-2025, 2025
Short summary
Quantitative sub-ice and marine tracing of Antarctic sediment provenance (TASP v1.0)
James W. Marschalek, Edward Gasson, Tina van de Flierdt, Claus-Dieter Hillenbrand, Martin J. Siegert, and Liam Holder
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1673–1708, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1673-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1673-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Best, M. J., Beljaars, A., Polcher, J., and Viterbo, P.: A Proposed Structure for Coupling Tiled Surfaces with the Planetary Boundary Layer, J. Hydrometerorol., 5, 1271–1278, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-382.1, 2004.
Best, M. J., Cox, P. M., and Warrilow, D. M.: Determining the optimal soil temperature scheme for atmospheric modelling applications, Bound. Lay. Meteorol., 114, 111–142, 2005.
Best, M. J., Pryor, M., Clark, D. B., Rooney, G. G., Essery, R .L. H., Ménard, C. B., Edwards, J. M., Hendry, M. A., Porson, A., Gedney, N., Mercado, L. M., Sitch, S., Blyth, E., Boucher, O., Cox, P. M., Grimmond, C. S. B., and Harding, R. J.: The Joint UK Land Environment Simulator (JULES), model description – Part 1: Energy and water fluxes, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 677–699, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-677-2011, 2011.
Bitz, C. M. and Lipscomb, W. H.: An energy-conserving thermodynamic model of sea ice, J. Geophys. Res., 104, 15669–15677, 1999.
Gordon, C., Cooper, C., Senior, C. A., Banks, H., Gregory, J. M., Johns, T. C., Mitchell, J. F. B., and Wood, R. A.: The simulation of SST, sea ice extents and ocean heat transports in a version of the Hadley Centre coupled model without flux adjustments, Clim. Dynam., 16, 147–168, https://doi.org/10.1007/s003820050010, 2000.
Download
Short summary
This study compares two methods of coupling a sea ice model to an atmospheric model in a series of idealized one-dimensional experiments. The JULES method calculates surface variables in the atmosphere; the CICE method calculates surface variables in the sea ice. It is found that simulations of all variables are more accurate in the JULES method, likely because of the shorter time step of the atmosphere.
Share