The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A New Two-Moment Bulk Stratiform Cloud Microphysics Scheme in the Community Atmosphere Model, Version 3 (CAM3). Part I: Description and Numerical Tests
Open accessAbstract
A new two-moment stratiform cloud microphysics scheme in a general circulation model is described. Prognostic variables include cloud droplet and cloud ice mass mixing ratios and number concentrations. The scheme treats several microphysical processes, including hydrometeor collection, condensation/evaporation, freezing, melting, and sedimentation. The activation of droplets on aerosol is physically based and coupled to a subgrid vertical velocity. Unique aspects of the scheme, relative to existing two-moment schemes developed for general circulation models, are the diagnostic treatment of rain and snow number concentration and mixing ratio and the explicit treatment of subgrid cloud water variability for calculation of the microphysical process rates. Numerical aspects of the scheme are described in detail using idealized one-dimensional offline tests of the microphysics. Sensitivity of the scheme to time step, vertical resolution, and numerical method for diagnostic precipitation is investigated over a range of conditions. It is found that, in general, two substeps are required for numerical stability and reasonably small time truncation errors using a time step of 20 min; however, substepping is only required for the precipitation microphysical processes rather than the entire scheme. A new numerical approach for the diagnostic rain and snow produces reasonable results compared to a benchmark simulation, especially at low vertical resolution. Part II of this study details results of the scheme in single-column and global simulations, including comparison with observations.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Aerosols, Cloud Microphysics, and Fractional Cloudiness
Albrecht, B. A. (1989) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.245.4923.1227 · Cited by 4,422
Cited by
Bentsen, M., Bethke, I., Debernard, J. B., Iversen, T., Kirkevåg, A., Seland, Ø., Drange, H., Roelandt, C., Seierstad, I. A., Hoose, C., et al. (2013) · Geoscientific Model Development · doi:10.5194/gmd-6-687-2013 · Cited by 1,084
Neale, R. B., Richter, J., Park, S., Lauritzen, P. H., Vavrus, S. J., Rasch, P. J., & Zhang, M. (2013) · Journal of Climate · doi:10.1175/jcli-d-12-00236.1 · Cited by 788
Liu, X., Ma, P.-L., Wang, H., Tilmes, S., Singh, B., Easter, R. C., Ghan, S. J., & Rasch, P. J. (2016) · Geoscientific Model Development · doi:10.5194/gmd-9-505-2016 · Cited by 671
Hoose, C., Kristjánsson, J. E., Chen, J.-P., & Hazra, A. (2010) · Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences · doi:10.1175/2010jas3425.1 · Cited by 432
Quaas, J., Ming, Y., Menon, S., Takemura, T., Wang, M., Penner, J. E., Gettelman, A., Lohmann, U., Bellouin, N., Boucher, O., et al. (2009) · Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics · doi:10.5194/acp-9-8697-2009 · Cited by 432
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Morrison, H., & Gettelman, A.
- Venue
- Journal of Climate
- Publisher
- American Meteorological Society
- Published
- 2008-08-01
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 15
- Pages
- 3642-3659
- ISSN
- 0894-8755 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-0442
- OpenAlex
- W2153226382
- Cited by
- 1,167
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 19.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.