English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
 
 
DownloadE-Mail
  Geographically versus dynamically defined boundary layer cloud regimes and their use to evaluate general circulation model cloud parameterizations

Nam, C., & Quaas, J. (2013). Geographically versus dynamically defined boundary layer cloud regimes and their use to evaluate general circulation model cloud parameterizations. Geophysical Research Letters, 40, 4951-4956. doi:10.1002/grl.50945.

Item is

Files

show Files
hide Files
:
grl50945.pdf (Publisher version), 584KB
Name:
grl50945.pdf
Description:
-
OA-Status:
Visibility:
Public
MIME-Type / Checksum:
application/pdf / [MD5]
Technical Metadata:
Copyright Date:
-
Copyright Info:
-
License:
-

Locators

show

Creators

show
hide
 Creators:
Nam, Christine1, 2, Author           
Quaas, Johannes1, Author           
Affiliations:
1The Atmosphere in the Earth System, MPI for Meteorology, Max Planck Society, Bundesstraße 53, 20146 Hamburg, DE, ou_913550              
2IMPRS on Earth System Modelling, MPI for Meteorology, Max Planck Society, Bundesstraße 53, 20146 Hamburg, DE, ou_913547              

Content

show
hide
Free keywords: Boundary layer clouds; CloudSat; COSP; ECHAM5; Radar simulator; Tropical low clouds
 Abstract: Regimes of tropical low-level clouds are commonly identified according to large-scale subsidence and lower tropospheric stability (LTS). This definition alone is insufficient for the distinction between regimes and limits the comparison of low-level clouds from CloudSat radar observations and the ECHAM5 GCM run with the COSP radar simulator. Comparisons of CloudSat radar cloud altitude-reflectivity histograms for stratocumulus and shallow cumulus regimes, as defined above, show nearly identical reflectivity profiles, because the distinction between the two regimes is dependent upon atmospheric stability below 700 hPa and observations above 1.5 km. Regional subsets, near California and Hawaii, for example, have large differences in reflectivity profiles than the dynamically defined domain; indicating different reflectivity profiles exist under a given large-scale environment. Regional subsets are better for the evaluation of low-level clouds in CloudSat and ECHAM5 as there is less contamination between 2.5 km and 7.5 km from precipitating hydrometeors which obscured cloud reflectivities. Key Points: Identification of low clouds by large-scale dynamics insufficient for radar Stratocumulus and shallow cumulus regimes have nearly identical reflectivities Geographical regions are better for evaluating low-level clouds with a radar. © 2013. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.

Details

show
hide
Language(s): eng - English
 Dates: 2013-07-242013-09-062013-09-192013-09-28
 Publication Status: Issued
 Pages: -
 Publishing info: -
 Table of Contents: -
 Rev. Type: Peer
 Identifiers: DOI: 10.1002/grl.50945
 Degree: -

Event

show

Legal Case

show

Project information

show

Source 1

show
hide
Title: Geophysical Research Letters
  Other : Geophys. Res. Letts.
  Abbreviation : Geophys. Res. Lett.
Source Genre: Journal
 Creator(s):
Affiliations:
Publ. Info: Washington, D.C. : American Geophysical Union
Pages: - Volume / Issue: 40 Sequence Number: - Start / End Page: 4951 - 4956 Identifier: ISSN: 0094-8276
CoNE: https://pure.mpg.de/cone/journals/resource/954925465217