| description abstract | The authors compare short forecast errors and the balance of terms in the moisture and temperature prediction equations that lead to those errors for the Community Atmosphere Model versions 2 and 3 (CAM2 and CAM3, respectively) at T42 truncation. The comparisons are made for an individual model column from global model forecasts at the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Program (ARM) Southern Great Plains site for the April 1997 and June?July 1997 intensive observing periods. The goal is to provide insight into parameterization errors in the CAM, which ultimately should lead to improvements in the way processes are modeled. The atmospheric initial conditions are obtained from the 40-yr ECMWF Re-Analysis (ERA-40). The land initial conditions are spun up to be consistent with those analyses. The differences between the model formulations that are responsible for the major differences in the forecast errors and/or parameterization behaviors are identified. A sequence of experiments is performed, accumulating the changes from CAM3 back toward CAM2 to demonstrate the effect of the differences in formulations. In June?July 1997 the CAM3 temperature and moisture forecast errors were larger than those of CAM2. The terms identified as being responsible for the differences are 1) the convective time scale assumed for the Zhang?McFarlane deep convection, 2) the energy associated with the conversion between water and ice of the rain associated with the Zhang?McFarlane convection parameterization, and 3) the dependence of the rainfall evaporation on cloud fraction. In April 1997 the CAM2 and CAM3 temperature and moisture forecast errors are very similar, but different tendencies arising from modifications to one parameterization component are compensated by responding changes in another component to yield the same total moisture tendency. The addition of detrainment of water in CAM3 by the Hack shallow convection to the prognostic cloud water scheme is balanced by a responding difference in the advective tendency. A halving of the time scale assumed for the Hack shallow convection was compensated by a responding change in the prognostic cloud water. Changes to the cloud fraction parameterization affect the radiative heating, which in turn modifies the stability of the atmospheric column and affects the convection. The resulting changes in convection tendency are balanced by responding changes in the prognostic cloud water parameterization tendency. | |
