Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Radiation balance #34

Open
MartinDix opened this issue Sep 30, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Radiation balance #34

MartinDix opened this issue Sep 30, 2024 · 0 comments

Comments

@MartinDix
Copy link

Latest CM3 runs (e.g. cm3-run-16-09-2024) have a net TOA energy flux around 2.7 W/m^2 initially.

Met Office GC5 AMIP runs were tuned to give the desired radiation balance at N216, not N96. The tuning is described at https://code.metoffice.gov.uk/trac/gmed/wiki/ticket/573/TicketDetails describes the radiation tuning of the N216 version.

This is an extract of the table near the end of https://code.metoffice.gov.uk/trac/gmed/wiki/ticket/577/TicketSensitivityTests

rsut rlut net
Obs CERES EBAF 4.1 99.0 240.3 +1.0
N96 RC3 98.56 239.53 +2.31
N216 RC3 99.07 240.59 +0.74

RC3 is almost the same as the final version, except for an update to the boundary layer buoyancy https://code.metoffice.gov.uk/trac/jules/ticket/1242.

Alejandro Bodas's presentation at the 2023 Momentum Workshop says they retuned the GC5-N96ORCA1 PI control aiming at rsut=99, rlut=240.5, close to CERES EBAF4 values (because UKESM suggested PI and current were pretty close). Used two_d_fsd_factor = 1.70, cape_timescale =2700 s in place of standard two_d_fsd_factor=1.65 cape_timescale=1800.0, though not clear if this is the final value.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant