Evaluation of a large-eddy model simulation of a mixed-phase altocumulus cloud using microwave radiometer, lidar and Doppler radar data

Using the Met Office large-eddy model (LEM) we simulate a mixed-phase altocumulus cloud that was observed from Chilbolton in southern England by a 94 GHz Doppler radar, a 905 nm lidar, a dual-wavelength microwave radiometer and also by four radiosondes. It is important to test and evaluate such simulations with observations, since there are significant differences between results from different cloud-resolving models for ice clouds. Simulating the Doppler radar and lidar data within the LEM allows us to compare observed and modelled quantities directly, and allows us to explore the relationships between observed and unobserved variables. For general-circulation models, which currently tend to give poor representations of mixed-phase clouds, the case shows the importance of using: (i) separate prognostic ice and liquid water, (ii) a vertical resolution that captures the thin layers of liquid water, and (iii) an accurate representation the subgrid vertical velocities that allow liquid water to form. It is shown that large-scale ascents and descents are significant for this case, and so the horizontally averaged LEM profiles are relaxed towards observed profiles to account for these. The LEM simulation then gives a reasonable. cloud, with an ice-water path approximately two thirds of that observed, with liquid water at the cloud top, as observed. However, the liquid-water cells that form in the updraughts at cloud top in the LEM have liquid-water paths (LWPs) up to half those observed, and there are too few cells, giving a mean LWP five to ten times smaller than observed. In reality, ice nucleation and fallout may deplete ice-nuclei concentrations at the cloud top, allowing more liquid water to form there, but this process is not represented in the model. Decreasing the heterogeneous nucleation rate in the LEM increased the LWP, which supports this hypothesis. The LEM captures the increase in the standard deviation in Doppler velocities (and so vertical winds) with height, but values are 1.5 to 4 times smaller than observed (although values are larger in an unforced model run, this only increases the modelled LWP by a factor of approximately two). The LEM data show that, for values larger than approximately 12 cm s(-1), the standard deviation in Doppler velocities provides an almost unbiased estimate of the standard deviation in vertical winds, but provides an overestimate for smaller values. Time-smoothing the observed Doppler velocities and modelled mass-squared-weighted fallspeeds shows that observed fallspeeds are approximately two-thirds of the modelled values. Decreasing the modelled fallspeeds to those observed increases the modelled IWC, giving an IWP 1.6 times that observed.

Observations of the depth of ice particle evaporation beneath frontal cloud to improve NWP modelling

The evaporation (sublimation) of ice particles beneath frontal ice cloud can provide a significant source of diabatic cooling which can lead to enhanced slantwise descent below the frontal surface. The strength and vertical extent of the cooling play a role in determining the dynamic response of the atmosphere, and an adequate representation is required in numerical weather-prediction (NWP) models for accurate forecasts of frontal dynamics. In this paper, data from a vertically pointing 94 GHz radar are used to determine the characteristic depth-scale of ice particle sublimation beneath frontal ice cloud. A statistical comparison is made with equivalent data extracted from the NWP mesoscale model operational at the Met Office, defining the evaporation depth-scale as the distance for the ice water content to fall to 10% of its peak value in the cloud. The results show that the depth of the ice evaporation zone derived from observations is less than 1 km for 90% of the time. The model significantly overestimates the sublimation depth-scales by a factor of between two and three, and underestimates the local ice water content by a factor of between two and four. Consequently the results suggest the model significantly underestimates the strength of the evaporative cooling, with implications for the prediction of frontal dynamics. A number of reasons for the model discrepancy are suggested. A comparison with radiosonde relative humidity data suggests part of the overestimation in evaporation depth may be due to a high RH bias in the dry slot beneath the frontal cloud, but other possible reasons include poor vertical resolution and deficiencies in the evaporation rate or ice particle fall-speed parametrizations.