Journal cover Journal topic
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 5.668 IF 5.668
  • IF 5-year value: 6.201 IF 5-year
    6.201
  • CiteScore value: 6.13 CiteScore
    6.13
  • SNIP value: 1.633 SNIP 1.633
  • IPP value: 5.91 IPP 5.91
  • SJR value: 2.938 SJR 2.938
  • Scimago H <br class='hide-on-tablet hide-on-mobile'>index value: 174 Scimago H
    index 174
  • h5-index value: 87 h5-index 87
Volume 10, issue 9
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 4097–4109, 2010
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-4097-2010
© Author(s) 2010. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 4097–4109, 2010
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-4097-2010
© Author(s) 2010. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

  03 May 2010

03 May 2010

The sensitivity of stratocumulus-capped mixed layers to cloud droplet concentration: do LES and mixed-layer models agree?

J. Uchida1, C. S. Bretherton2, and P. N. Blossey2 J. Uchida et al.
  • 1Department of Applied Mathematics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
  • 2Department of Atmospheric Science, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA

Abstract. The sensitivity of a stratocumulus-capped mixed layer to a change in cloud droplet concentration is evaluated with a large-eddy simulation (LES) and a mixed layer model (MLM). The strength of the second aerosol indirect effect simulated by the two model types agrees within 50% for cases in which the LES-simulated boundary layer remains well mixed, if the MLM entrainment closure includes the effects of cloud droplet sedimentation.

To achieve this agreement, parameters in the MLM entrainment closure and the drizzle parameterization must be retuned to match the LES. This is because the LES advection scheme and microphysical parameterization significantly bias the entrainment rate and precipitation profile compared to observational best guesses. Before this modification, the MLM simulates more liquid water path and much more drizzle at a given droplet concentration than the LES and is more sensitive to droplet concentration, even undergoing a drizzle-induced boundary layer collapse at low droplet concentrations. After this modification, both models predict a comparable decrease of cloud liquid water path as droplet concentration increases, cancelling 30–50% of the Twomey effect for our case. The agreement breaks down at the lowest simulated droplet concentrations, for which the boundary layer in the LES is not well mixed.

Our results highlight issues with both types of model. Potential LES biases due to inadequate resolution, subgrid mixing and parameterized microphysics must be carefully considered when trying to make a quantitative inference of the second indirect effect from an LES of a stratocumulus-topped boundary layer. On the other hand, even slight internal decoupling of the boundary layer invalidates the central assumption of an MLM, substantially limiting the range of conditions that MLM-predicted sensitivities to droplet concentration are meaningful.

Publications Copernicus
Download
Citation