Evolution of Precipitation Structure During the November DYNAMO MJO Event: Cloud‐Resolving Model Intercomparison and Cross Validation Using Radar Observations

Evolution of precipitation structures are simulated and compared with radar observations for the November Madden-Julian Oscillation (MJO) event during the DYNAmics of the MJO (DYNAMO) field campaign. Three ground-based, ship-borne, and spaceborne precipitation radars and three cloud-resolving models (CRMs) driven by observed large-scale forcing are used to study precipitation structures at different locations over the central equatorial Indian Ocean. Convective strength is represented by 0-dBZ echo-top heights, and convective organization by contiguous 17-dBZ areas. The multi-radar and multi-model framework allows for more stringent model validations. The emphasis is on testing models’ ability to simulate subtle differences observed at different radar sites when the MJO event passed through. The results show that CRMs forced by site-specific large-scale forcing can reproduce not only common features in cloud populations but also subtle variations observed by different radars. The comparisons also revealed common deficiencies in CRM simulations where they underestimate radar echo-top heights for the strongest convection within large, organized precipitation features. Cross validations with multiple radars and models also enable quantitative comparisons in CRM sensitivity studies using different large-scale forcing, microphysical schemes and parameters, resolutions, and domain sizes. In terms of radar echo-top height temporal variations, many model sensitivity tests have better correlations than radar/model comparisons, indicating robustness in model performance on this aspect. It is further shown that well-validated model simulations could be used to constrain uncertainties in observed echo-top heights when the low-resolution surveillance scanning strategy is used.

[1]  Mathew R. Schwaller,et al.  GPM Satellite Simulator over Ground Validation Sites , 2013 .

[2]  Di Wu,et al.  Benefits of a 4th Ice Class in the Simulated Radar Reflectivities of Convective Systems Using a Bulk Microphysics Scheme , 2014 .

[3]  R. Houze,et al.  Cloud organization and growth during the transition from suppressed to active MJO conditions , 2015 .

[4]  K. Landu,et al.  Advection, moistening, and shallow‐to‐deep convection transitions during the initiation and propagation of Madden‐Julian Oscillation , 2014 .

[5]  Matthias Steiner,et al.  Climatological Characterization of Three-Dimensional Storm Structure from Operational Radar and Rain Gauge Data , 1995 .

[6]  A. Sobel,et al.  Response of Atmospheric Convection to Vertical Wind Shear: Cloud-System-Resolving Simulations with Parameterized Large-Scale Circulation. Part I: Specified Radiative Cooling , 2014 .

[7]  S. Hagos,et al.  A Retrieval of Tropical Latent Heating Using the 3D Structure of Precipitation Features , 2016 .

[8]  R. Houze,et al.  The precipitating cloud population of the Madden‐Julian Oscillation over the Indian and west Pacific Oceans , 2013 .

[9]  R. Houze,et al.  Evolution of precipitation and convective echo top heights observed by TRMM radar over the Indian Ocean during DYNAMO , 2015 .

[10]  A. Sobel,et al.  Response of convection to relative sea surface temperature: Cloud‐resolving simulations in two and three dimensions , 2011 .

[11]  R. Houze,et al.  The cloud population and onset of the Madden‐Julian Oscillation over the Indian Ocean during DYNAMO‐AMIE , 2013 .

[12]  S. McFarlane,et al.  Evaluation of Cloud-Resolving Model Intercomparison Simulations Using TWP-ICE Observations: Precipitation and Cloud Structure , 2011 .

[13]  Xiaoqing Wu,et al.  A Comparison of TWP-ICE Observational Data with Cloud-Resolving Model Results , 2012 .

[14]  G. Powers,et al.  A Description of the Advanced Research WRF Version 3 , 2008 .

[15]  T. Clark,et al.  Dynamics of the Cloud-Environment Interface and Entrainment in Small Cumuli: Two-Dimensional Simulations in the Absence of Ambient Shear , 1985 .

[16]  Edward J. Zipser,et al.  The Role of Environmental Shear and Thermodynamic Conditions in Determining the Structure and Evolution of Mesoscale Convective Systems during TOGA COARE , 1998 .

[17]  A. Sobel,et al.  Modeling the MJO in a cloud‐resolving model with parameterized large‐scale dynamics: Vertical structure, radiation, and horizontal advection of dry air , 2016 .

[18]  K. Lau,et al.  Characteristics of Precipitation, Cloud, and Latent Heating Associated with the Madden-Julian Oscillation , 2010 .

[19]  G. Thompson,et al.  Evaluation of convection‐permitting model simulations of cloud populations associated with the Madden‐Julian Oscillation using data collected during the AMIE/DYNAMO field campaign , 2014 .

[20]  William S. Olson,et al.  Improving Simulations of Convective Systems from TRMM LBA: Easterly and Westerly Regimes , 2007 .

[21]  Weixin Xu,et al.  Convective Characteristics of the Madden-Julian Oscillation over the Central Indian Ocean Observed by Shipborne Radar during DYNAMO , 2013 .

[22]  R. Houze,et al.  Three-Dimensional Kinematic and Microphysical Evolution of Florida Cumulonimbus. Part II: Frequency Distributions of Vertical Velocity, Reflectivity, and Differential Reflectivity , 1995 .

[23]  M. H. Zhang,et al.  Objective Analysis of ARM IOP Data: Method and Sensitivity , 1999 .

[24]  A. Sobel,et al.  Cloud‐resolving simulation of TOGA‐COARE using parameterized large‐scale dynamics , 2013 .

[25]  W. Lapenta,et al.  The Goddard Multi-Scale Modeling System with Unified Physics , 2008 .

[26]  Richard H. Johnson,et al.  Sounding-Based Thermodynamic Budgets for DYNAMO , 2015 .

[27]  Weixin Xu,et al.  Evolution, Properties, and Spatial Variability of MJO Convection near and off the Equator during DYNAMO , 2015 .

[28]  Richard H. Johnson,et al.  Structure and Properties of Madden–Julian Oscillations Deduced from DYNAMO Sounding Arrays , 2013 .

[29]  D. Randall,et al.  Cloud resolving modeling of the ARM summer 1997 IOP: Model formulation, results, uncertainties, and sensitivities , 2003 .

[30]  Patrick Minnis,et al.  Simulations of cloud‐radiation interaction using large‐scale forcing derived from the CINDY/DYNAMO northern sounding array , 2015 .

[31]  A. Rapp,et al.  Radar observations of MJO and Kelvin wave interactions during DYNAMO/CINDY2011/AMIE , 2014 .

[32]  Jiwen Fan,et al.  Evaluation of cloud‐resolving and limited area model intercomparison simulations using TWP‐ICE observations: 1. Deep convective updraft properties , 2014 .

[33]  Angela K. Rowe,et al.  Microphysical characteristics of MJO convection over the Indian Ocean during DYNAMO , 2014 .

[34]  Chidong Zhang,et al.  MJO Moisture Budget during DYNAMO in a Cloud-Resolving Model , 2016 .

[35]  S. Klein,et al.  Observed large-scale structures and diabatic heating and drying profiles during TWP-ICE , 2010 .

[36]  Charles N. Long,et al.  Tracking Pulses of the Madden–Julian Oscillation , 2013 .

[37]  A. Sobel,et al.  Regional Simulation of the October and November MJO Events Observed during the CINDY/DYNAMO Field Campaign at Gray Zone Resolution , 2015 .

[38]  H. Masunaga,et al.  Evaluation of Long-Term Cloud-Resolving Model Simulations Using Satellite Radiance Observations and Multifrequency Satellite Simulators , 2009 .

[39]  Edward J. Zipser,et al.  A Cloud and Precipitation Feature Database from Nine Years of TRMM Observations , 2008 .

[40]  M. Wheeler,et al.  An All-Season Real-Time Multivariate MJO Index: Development of an Index for Monitoring and Prediction , 2004 .

[41]  H. Morrison,et al.  Toward the mitigation of spurious cloud-edge supersaturation in cloud models , 2008 .

[42]  R. Trapp.  Mesoscale Convective Systems , 2013 .

[43]  Weixin Xu,et al.  1 1 Morphology , Intensity , and Rainfall Production of MJO Convection : 2 Observations from DYNAMO Shipborne Radar and TRMM , 2014 .

[44]  Y. Hong,et al.  The TRMM Multisatellite Precipitation Analysis (TMPA): Quasi-Global, Multiyear, Combined-Sensor Precipitation Estimates at Fine Scales , 2007 .

[45]  Audrey B. Wolf,et al.  WRF and GISS SCM simulations of convective updraft properties during TWP‐ICE , 2009 .

[46]  Derek J. Posselt,et al.  The Goddard Cumulus Ensemble model (GCE): Improvements and applications for studying precipitation processes , 2014 .

[47]  Richard H. Johnson,et al.  Diurnally Modulated Cumulus Moistening in the Preonset Stage of the Madden–Julian Oscillation during DYNAMO* , 2015 .

[48]  T. L’Ecuyer,et al.  The Madden-Julian Oscillation Recorded in Early Observations from the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) , 2006 .

[49]  R. Houze,et al.  Three-Dimensional Kinematic and Microphysical Evolution of Florida Cumulonimbus. Part I: Spatial Distribution of Updrafts, Downdrafts, and Precipitation , 1995 .

[50]  R. Houze,et al.  Evolution of the Population of Precipitating Convective Systems over the Equatorial Indian Ocean in Active Phases of the Madden–Julian Oscillation , 2013 .

[52]  Minghua Zhang,et al.  Constrained Variational Analysis of Sounding Data Based on Column-Integrated Budgets of Mass, Heat, Moisture, and Momentum: Approach and Application to ARM Measurements. , 1997 .

[53]  C. Long,et al.  Quality-Controlled Upper-Air Sounding Dataset for DYNAMO/CINDY/AMIE: Development and Corrections , 2014 .

[54]  J. Curry,et al.  A New Double-Moment Microphysics Parameterization for Application in Cloud and Climate Models. Part I: Description , 2005 .

[55]  R. Houze.  Mesoscale convective systems , 2004 .