Summary
This paper is concerned with the simulation of deep convection for the CCOPE 19 July 1981 case study. Clark's three-dimensional (3D) cloud model modified to use the bulk water parameterization scheme of Lin et al. has been used in the simulation of the CCOPE 19 July 1981 case in coarse mesh, fine mesh, and interactive grid nested schemes, respectively. Comparisons with observations show this 3D grid nested cloud model is capable of both capturing both the dynamic and microphysical properties of the cloud.
In the nested grid fine mesh model simulation, the timing and mode of cloud growth, the diameter of liquid cloud, the cloud top rate of rise, the maximum cloud water content, and the altitude of first radar echo are consistent with observations. The simulated thunderstorm begins to dissipate, after precipitation reaches the ground as indicated by the decreasing values of maximum updraft and maximum liquid cloud water content, and ends as a precipitating anvil as was observed in the actual thunderstorm. The model precipitation developed through ice phase processes consistent with the analysis of observations from the actual thunderstorm.
Qualitative comparisons of the actual radar RHIs with simulated reflectively patterns from the 3D model show remarkable similarity, especially after the mature stage is reached. Features of the actual RHI patterns, such as the weak echo region, upshear anvil bulge, strong upwind reflectivity gradients, and the upwind outflow region near the surface are reproduced in the simulation. Comparison of the actual radar PPIs with horizontal cross sections of radar reflectivity simulated by the 3D model, however, show modest differences in the storm size with the 3D simulated thunderstorm being 1–2 km longer in the west-east direction than the actual thunderstorm. The model-predicted maximum updraft speed is smaller than the 2D model-predicted maximum updraft speed, but still greater than what was observed.
Comparisons among the nested grid fine mesh model (MB), nested grid coarse mesh model (MA), fine mesh model (FM), coarse mesh model (CM), and 2D model results previously published show that the nested grid fine mesh model (MB) gives the best simulation result. The various 3D model simulation results are generally similar to each other except for the difference in the domain maximum values. The domain maximum values in the fine mesh models (MB and FM) are generally higher than the coarse mesh models as a result of averaging over a smaller area.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Aleksić, N. M., Farley, R. D., Orville, H. D., 1989: A numerical cloud model study of the Hallett-Mossop ice multiplication process in strong convection.Atmos. Res.,23, 1–30.
Arakawa, A., 1966: Computational design for long term integration of the equations of motion: Two-dimensional incompressible flow. Part I.J. Comput. Phys.,1, 119–143.
Clark, T. L., 1977: A small scale numerical model using a terrain following coordinate system.J. Comput. Phys.,24, 186–215.
Clark, T. L., 1979: Numerical simulations with a three-dimensional cloud model: lateral boundary condition experiments and multi-cellular severe storm simulations.J. Atmos. Sci.,36, 2191–2215.
Clark, T. L., 1982: Cloud modeling in three spatial dimensions, Chapter 10. In: Knight, C. A., Squires, P. (eds.)Hailstorms of the Central High Plains I: The National Hail Research Experiment. Boulder, CO: Colorado Associated Univ. Press, 282 pp.
Clark, T. L., Farley, R. D., 1984: Severe downslope windstorm calculations in two and three spatial dimensions using anelastic interactive grid nesting: A possible mechanism for gustiness.J. Atmos. Sci.,41, 329–350.
Clark, T. L., Gall, R., 1982: Three-dimensional numerical model simulations of airflow over mountainous terrain: A comparison with observations.Mon. Wea. Rev.,110, 766–791.
Cotton, W. R., Tripoli, G. J., 1978: Cumulus convection in shear flow: three-dimensional numerical experiments.J. Atmos. Sci.,35, 1503–1521.
Dudhia, J., Moncrieff, M. W., 1989: A three-dimensional numerical study of an Oklahoma squall line containing right-flank supercells.J. Atmos. Sci.,46, 3363–3391.
Dye, J. E., Jones, J. J., Winn, W. P., Cerni, T. A., Gardiner, B., Lamb, D., Pitter, R. L., Hallet, J., Saunders, C. P. R., 1986: Early electrification and precipitation development in a small, isolated Montana cumulonimbus.J. Geophys. Res.,91, 1231–1247.
Farley, R. D., Price, P. E., Orville, H. D., Hirsch, J. H., 1989: On the numerical simulation of graupel/hail initiation via the riming of snow in bulk water microphysical cloud models.J. Appl. Meteor.,28, 1128–1131.
Gardiner, B., Lamb, D., Pitter, R. L., Hallett, J., 1985: Measurements of initial potential gradient and particle charges in a Montana summer thunderstorm.J. Geophys. Res.,90, 6079–6086.
Harlow, F. H., Welch, J. E., 1965: Numerical calculation of time-dependent viscous incompressible flow of fluid with free surface.Phys. Fluids,8, 2182–2189.
Helsdon, J. H., Jr., Farley, R. D., 1987a: A numerical modeling study of a Montana thunderstorm. Part I: Model results versus observations involving non-electrical aspects.J. Geophys. Res.,92, 5645–5659.
Helsdon, J. H., Jr., Farley, R. D., 1987b: A numerical modeling study of a Montana thunderstorm. Part II: Model results vs. observations involving electrical aspects.J. Geophys. Res.,92, 5661–5675.
Jones, J. J., Winn, W. P., Dye, J. E., 1982: Early electrification in a cumulus. Preprints, Conf. Cloud Physics, Boston, MA, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 562–565.
Kessler, E., 1969: On the distribution and continuity of water substance in atmospheric circulations.Meteor. Monogr. No. 32, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 84 pp.
Kurihara, Y., Bender, M. A., 1983: A numerical scheme to treat the open lateral boundary of a limited area model.Mon. Wea. Rev.,111, 445–454.
Lilly, D. K., 1962: On the numerical simulation of buoyant convection.Tellus,14, 148–172.
Lilly, D. K., 1965: On the computational stability of numerical solutions of time-dependent nonlinear geophysical fluid dynamics problems.Mon. Wea. Rev.,93, 11–26.
Lin, Y. L., Farley, R. D., Orville, H. D., 1983: Bulkparameterization of the snow field in a cloud model.J. Climate Appl. Meteor.,22, 1065–1092.
Miller, M. J., 1978: The Hampstead storm: A numerical simulation of a quasistationary cumulonimbus system.Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,104, 413–427.
Ogura, Y., Phillips, N. A., 1962: Scale analysis of deep and shallow convection in the atmosphere.J. Atmos. Sci.,19, 173–179.
Orlanski, I., 1976: A simple boundary condition for unbounded hyperbolic flows.J. Comput. Phys.,21, 251–269.
Orville, H. D., 1985: Comment on “Effects of the pressure perturbation field in numerical models of unidirectionally sheared thunderstorm convection: two versus three dimensions”.J. Atmos. Sci.,42, 2220–2221.
Orville, H. D., Kopp, F. J., 1977: Numerical simulation of the history of a hailstorm.J. Atmos. Sci.,34, 1596–1618.
Redelsperger, J. L., Lafore, J. P., 1988: A three-dimensional simulation of a tropical squall line: Convective organization and thermodynamic vertical transport.J. Atmos. Sci.,45, 1334–1356.
Schlesinger, R. E., 1978: A three-dimensional numerical model of an isolated thunderstorm: Part I. Comparative experiments for variable ambient wind shear.J. Atmos. Sci.,35, 690–713.
Schlesinger, R. E., 1984: Effects of the pressure, perturbation field in numerical models of unidirectionally sheared thunderstorm convection: two versus three dimensions.J. Atmos. Sci.,41, 1571–1587.
Smagorinsky, J., 1963: General circulation experiments with the primitive equations: I. The basic experiment.Mon. Wea. Rev.,91, 99–164.
Smith, P. L., Jr., Myers, C. G., Orville, H. D., 1975: Radar reflectivity factor calculations in numerical cloud models using bulk parameterizations of precipitation.J. Appl. Meteor.,14, 1156–1165.
Smolarkiewicz, P. K., 1984: A full multidimensional positive definite advection transport algorithm with small implicit difussion.J. Comput. Phys.,65, 325–363.
Smolarkiewicz, P. K., Clark, T. L., 1985: Numerical simulations of the evolution of a three-dimensional field of cumulus clouds. Part I: Model description, comparison with observations and sensitivity studies.J. Atmos. Sci.,42, 502–522.
Smolarkiewicz, P. K., Clark, T. L., 1986: The multinational positive definite advection transport algorithm. Further development and applications.J. Comput. Phys.,67, 394–439.
Steiner, J. T., 1973: A three-dimensional model of cumulus cloud development.J. Atmos. Sci.,30, 414–435.
Wang, S., 1989: A comparison of 3D and 2D cloud model results with observations and among themselves. M.S. Thesis, Dept. of Meteorology, S. D. School of Mines and Technology, Rapid City, SD, 94 pp.
Wisner, C., Orville, H. D., Myers, C., 1972: A numerical model of a hail-bearing cloud.J Atmos. Sci.,29, 1160–1181.
WMO, 1986: Weather modification research programme, Irsee, FRG. WMP No. 8, Report of the Intnl. Cloud Modeling Workshop/Conf., Tech. Document WMO/TD-No. 139, Geneva.
WMO, 1988: Cloud physical and weather modification research programme, Toulouse, France. WMP No. 11, Report of the Second Intnl. Cloud Modeling Workshop/ Conf., Tech. Document WMO/TD-No. 268, Geneva.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
With 7 Figures
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Farley, R.D., Wang, S. & Orville, H.D. A comparison of 3D model results with observations for an isolated CCOPE thunderstorm. Meteorl. Atmos. Phys. 49, 187–207 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01025407
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01025407