...
首页> 外文期刊>Advances in Meteorology >Comparison of Simulations of Updraft Mass Fluxes and Their Response to Increasing Aerosol Concentration between a Bin Scheme and a Bulk Scheme in a Deep-Convective Cloud System
【24h】

Comparison of Simulations of Updraft Mass Fluxes and Their Response to Increasing Aerosol Concentration between a Bin Scheme and a Bulk Scheme in a Deep-Convective Cloud System

机译:对高音云系统血压方案与散热方案增加的升空质量助熔剂模拟及其响应的比较

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Key microphysical processes whose parameterizations have substantial impacts on the simulation of updraft mass fluxes and their response to aerosol are investigated in this study. For this investigation, comparisons of these parameterizations are made between a bin scheme and a bulk scheme. These comparisons show that the differences in the prediction of cloud droplet number concentration (CDNC) between the two schemes determine whether aerosol-induced invigoration of updrafts or convection occurs. While the CDNC prediction leads to aerosol-induced invigoration of updrafts and an associated 20% increase in the peak value of the updraft-mass-flux vertical profile in the bin scheme, it leads to aerosol-induced suppression of updrafts and an associated 7% decrease in the peak value in the bulk scheme. The comparison also shows that the differences in ice processes, in particular, in the snow loading lead to the different vertical patterns of the updraft-mass-flux profile, which is represented by the peak value and its altitude, between the schemes. Higher loading of snow leads to around 20–30% higher mean peak value and its around 40% higher altitude in the bin scheme than in the bulk scheme. When differences in the CDNC prediction and ice processes are removed, differences in the invigoration and the vertical pattern disappear between the schemes. However, despite this removal, differences in the magnitude of updraft mass fluxes still remain between the schemes. Associated with this, the peak value is around 10% different between the schemes. Also, after the removal, there are differences in the magnitude between cases with different aerosol concentrations for each scheme. Associated with this, the peak value is also around 10% different between those cases for each scheme. The differences between the cases with different aerosol concentrations for each scheme are generated by different evaporative cooling and different intensity of gust fronts between those cases. The remaining differences between the schemes are generated by different treatments of collection and sedimentation processes.
机译:在本研究中研究了参数化对上升肿块助熔剂的模拟具有实质性影响的关键微神科过程及其对气溶胶的反应。对于这次调查,这些参数化的比较是在BIN方案和批量方案之间进行的。这些比较表明,两种方案之间的云液滴数浓度(CDNC)预测的差异决定了气溶胶诱导的上升气流或对流的敏感。虽然CDNC预测导致Updraft的气溶胶诱导的敏感性,但在箱方案中提高上升式 - 质量通量垂直轮廓的峰值相关的20%,导致气溶胶诱导的上升抑制和相关的7%批量方案中的峰值减小。比较还表明,冰过程的差异尤其在雪地装载中导致上升式质量通量曲线的不同垂直图案,其在方案之间由峰值和其高度表示。较高的雪地升程导致平均峰值的平均峰值大约在20-30%左右,比在批量方案中的达到距离方案中的高度约为40%。当去除CDNC预测和冰过程的差异时,敏感性和垂直图案的差异在方案之间消失。然而,尽管去除了,所以在方案之间仍然存在上升量势态的大小差异。与此相关联,该方案之间的峰值值约为10%。此外,在去除后,每个方案的气溶胶浓度不同的情况之间存在差异。与此相关联,每个方案的这些情况之间的峰值也差异约为10%。通过不同的蒸发冷却和这些情况之间的阵风的不同强度产生不同气溶胶浓度的情况之间的差异。这些方案之间的剩余差异由不同的收集和沉降过程产生。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号