edu.ucar.opensky::articles:12563 UCAR/NCAR - Library OpenSky Support PO Box 3000 Boulder CO 80307-3000 opensky@ucar.edu http://opensky.ucar.edu/ homepage pointOfContact 2025-12-26T03:50:31.175449 ISO 19115-2 Geographic Information - Metadata - Part 2: Extensions for Imagery and Gridded Data ISO 19115-2:2009(E) https://n2t.org/ark:/85065/d7tq62bd Evaluation of near-surface parameters in the two versions of the atmospheric model in CESM1 using flux station observations 2013-01-01T00:00:00Z publication https://n2t.org/ark:/85065/d7tq62bd https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00020.1 Lindvall, J. author Svensson, G. author Hannay, Cecile E. author UCAR/NCAR - Library publisher This paper describes the performance of the Community Atmosphere Model (CAM) versions 4 and 5 in simulating near-surface parameters. CAM is the atmospheric component of the Community Earth System Model (CESM). Most of the parameterizations in the two versions are substantially different, and that is also true for the boundary layer scheme: CAM4 employs a nonlocal K-profile scheme, whereas CAM5 uses a turbulent kinetic energy (TKE) scheme. The evaluation focuses on the diurnal cycle and global observational and reanalysis datasets are used together with multiyear observations from 35 flux tower sites, providing high-frequency measurements in a range of different climate zones. It is found that both model versions capture the timing of the diurnal cycle but considerably overestimate the diurnal amplitude of net radiation, temperature, wind, and turbulent heat fluxes. The seasonal temperature range at mid- and high latitudes is also overestimated with too warm summer temperatures and too cold winter temperatures. The diagnosed boundary layer is deeper in CAM5 over ocean in regions with low-level marine clouds as a result of the turbulence generated by cloud-top cooling. Elsewhere, the boundary layer is in general shallower in CAM5. The two model versions differ substantially in their representation of near-surface wind speeds over land. The low-level wind speed in CAM5 is about half as strong as in CAM4, and the difference is even larger in areas where the subgrid-scale terrain is significant. The reason is the turbulent mountain stress parameterization, only applied in CAM5, which acts to increase the surface stress and thereby reduce the wind speed. UCAR/NCAR - Library OpenSky Support PO Box 3000 Boulder CO 80307-3000 opensky@ucar.edu http://opensky.ucar.edu/ homepage pointOfContact PDF Text theme Resource Type 2016-01-01T00:00:00Z publication Copyright 2013 American Meteorological Society (AMS). Permission to use figures, tables, and brief excerpts from this work in scientific and educational works is hereby granted provided that the source is acknowledged. Any use of material in this work that is determined to be "fair use" under Section 107 or that satisfies the conditions specified in Section 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law (17 USC, as revised by P.L. 94-553) does not require the Society's permission. Republication, systematic reproduction, posting in electronic form on servers, or other uses of this material, except as exempted by the above statements, requires written permission or license from the AMS. Additional details are provided in the AMS Copyright Policies, available from the AMS at 617-227-2425 or amspubs@ametsoc.org. Permission to place a copy of this work on this server has been provided by the AMS. The AMS does not guarantee that the copy provided here is an accurate copy of the published work. None eng geoscientificInformation