Analysis of 25a and 25b

[cecilehannay]

We started 25a and 25b based on last week discussion.

25a = 23 + c8 = 4.2->4.5 + start from spunup ice
25b = 23 + c8 = 4.2->4.5 + start from spunup ice/ocn

The goal (changing c8) was to make the clouds thicker.

Julio ran the timeseries over the week-end. And Justin is going to run the ADF.

The runs are now 30 years and are stopped for some analysis.

It is clear from julio's plot that RESTOM is still high and we will need another set of tuning. Let's see where SWCF and LWCF are with the tuning.

@JulioTBacmeister, @adamrher, @swrneale, @andrewgettelman, @gustavo-marques, @fobryan3, @dan800

[cecilehannay]

So far, the sea-ice in Lab sea looks ok in Julio's diags. Maybe @fobryan3 could give a more detailed analysis. Thanks.

[megandevlan]

It looks like the SWCF is more reasonable for 025a and 025b compared to 023, but still a bit high:

Surface SH/LH fluxes in the Lab Sea region have gotten pretty high in 025b, but it looks like we see something similar in 022d so probably related to using a different ocean restart file.

[adamrher]

These new runs 25a/b are designed to have 23 (#158) as the control, but 23 is initialized differently. So there is no proper control for these new runs, that could be used to isolate the c8 changes in 25a/b.

That said, the 2 W/m2 reduction in SWCF is consistent with F-case /c8 experiments last week that did have a proper control for comparison. @JulioTBacmeister can you put run 23 on your RESTOM plot so we can see what c8 (+inic) did?

[justin-richling]

If it helps @adamrher here are time series from ADF w/ 023

[cecilehannay]

Thanks, Justin. I think we can drop 22c and 24 from the plot.
Just keep 9, 16, 23, 25a and 25b.

[cecilehannay]

From Julio's plot and ADF diags:
RESTOM from 23->25b: 1.13->0.79 W/m2
SWCF from 23->25b: 41.87->43.71 W/m2
Lab sea looking ok after 33 years.

I think that there is no point to extent 25a and 25b because we are still off. Instead, I would start new simulations 26a and 26b with a second set of tuning targeting to further increase SWCF and decrease RESTOM. Maybe with gamma_coef this time.

[cecilehannay]

It would be good to have Dave Bailey 's feedback on the sea-ice, with the caveat the run might be too short in terms of sea-ice variability. But at least, it would be reassuring to know there is no showstopper.

[cecilehannay]

At @adamrher's request, I added the numbers for 25a. These are similar to 25b.

c8 = 4.2->4.5

• 25a
  RESTOM from 23->25b: 1.13->0.80 W/m2 (-0.33 W/m2)
  SWCF from 23->25b: 41.87->43.62 W/m2 (1.75 W/m2)

• 25b
  RESTOM from 23->25b: 1.13->0.79 W/m2 (-0.34 W/m2)
  SWCF from 23->25b: 41.87->43.71 W/m2 (1.84 W/m2)

Justin added the ADF versus obs. We might want to target the stratocumulus regions at some point. It might require gamma_coef.

we expect that the RESTOM will be still high with c8 = 4.8. Maybe the last step would be an adjustment of gamma_coef.

[JulioTBacmeister]

I've looked at the March ocean mixed layer thickness in 25a and there are still depths 500-1000m in the Lab Sea region through to year 33. No question it would be good to have complete ocean and sea-ice diagnostics, but I think they won't reveal a showstopper.

[cecilehannay]

Thanks @JulioTBacmeister: Should I go ahead and started 26a and 26b with c8 = 4.8? Or only one of them?

[JulioTBacmeister]

I'd say go ahead and start both 26a and 26b.

[fobryan3]

I am super busy today so have not been able to look at the solutions other than ncview-ing the ice distribution. I will try to look more in depth at the ocean solutions tomorrow, but agree with Juio that continuing to tune up the radiative properties in additional runs is a good path forward.

…

On Tue, Sep 6, 2022 at 2:21 PM JulioTBacmeister ***@***.***> wrote: I'd say go ahead and start both 26a and 26b. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#177 (reply in thread)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALNOABIMEKJUSOGAD5OB5ALV46RVJANCNFSM6AAAAAAQF4GZKA> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

--

_______________________________________________________________________ Dr. Frank O. Bryan Oceanography Section , Climate and Global Dynamics Laboratory National Center for Atmospheric Research, P.O. Box 3000, Boulder, CO 80307 USA e-mail: ***@***.*** / voice : (303) 497-1394 / fax : (303) 497-1700

[klindsay28]

Here are a handful of plots that I've made with 25a and 25b included: Integrated global ocean temp. This slope in these curves is directly related to the largish RESTOM.  Annual and March Lab Sea average tos (SST), average sos (SSS), average mlotst (mixed layer depth), and integrated aice (ice fraction). I don't see show stoppers.    

…

On Tue, Sep 6, 2022 at 2:28 PM fobryan3 ***@***.***> wrote: I am super busy today so have not been able to look at the solutions other than ncview-ing the ice distribution. I will try to look more in depth at the ocean solutions tomorrow, but agree with Juio that continuing to tune up the radiative properties in additional runs is a good path forward. On Tue, Sep 6, 2022 at 2:21 PM JulioTBacmeister ***@***.***> wrote: > I'd say go ahead and start both 26a and 26b. > > — > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > < #177 (reply in thread) >, > or unsubscribe > < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALNOABIMEKJUSOGAD5OB5ALV46RVJANCNFSM6AAAAAAQF4GZKA > > . > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: > ***@***.***> > -- _______________________________________________________________________ Dr. Frank O. Bryan Oceanography Section , Climate and Global Dynamics Laboratory National Center for Atmospheric Research, P.O. Box 3000, Boulder, CO 80307 USA e-mail: ***@***.*** / voice : (303) 497-1394 / fax : (303) 497-1700 — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#177 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADWZPO6FJXUXT7PAKR2QBE3V46SPNANCNFSM6AAAAAAQF4GZKA> . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>