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

Abstract

his study evaluates the performances of seven single-column models (SCMs) by comparing simulated cloud fraction with observations at the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Program (ARM) Southern Great Plains (SGP) site from January 1999 to December 2001. Compared with the 3-yr mean observational cloud fraction, the ECMWF SCM underestimates cloud fraction at all levels and the GISS SCM underestimates cloud fraction at levels below 200 hPa. The two GFDL SCMs underestimate lower-to-middle level cloud fraction but overestimate upper-level cloud fraction. The three Community Atmosphere Model (CAM) SCMs overestimate upper-level cloud fraction and produce lower-level cloud fraction similar to the observations but as a result of compensating overproduction of convective cloud fraction and underproduction of stratiform cloud fraction. Besides, the CAM3 and CAM5 SCMs both overestimate midlevel cloud fraction, whereas the CAM4 SCM underestimates. The frequency and partitioning analyses show a large discrepancy among the seven SCMs: Contributions of nonstratiform processes to cloud fraction production are mainly in upper-level cloudy events over the cloud cover range 10%?80% in SCMs with prognostic cloud fraction schemes and in lower-level cloudy events over the cloud cover range 15%?50% in SCMs with diagnostic cloud fraction schemes. Further analysis reveals different relationships between cloud fraction and relative humidity (RH) in the models and observations. The underestimation of lower-level cloud fraction in most SCMs is mainly due to the larger threshold RH used in models. The overestimation of upper-level cloud fraction in the three CAM SCMs and two GFDL SCMs is primarily due to the overestimation of RH and larger mean cloud fraction of cloudy events plus more occurrences of RH around 40%?80%, respectively.