Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The model for the cloud-topped marine boundary layer presented by Stage and Businger (1981) is discussed and compared with previous models. Our model gives a considerably different interpretation of the energetics of the layer and indicates that a much higher fraction (20%) of the layer turbulence kinetic energy production is available to drive entrainment than previously supposed. In a test case, the Lilly (1968) minimum entrainment model gives entrainment rates similar to ours; however, this model is based on physically unrealistic assumptions about layer energetics. It is noted that two soundings from the International Field Year for the Great Lakes (IFYGL) exhibit behavior not allowed by Deardorff’s (1976) model. In these cases our model gives a good fit to the data and Deardorff’s model predicted a boundary layer much deeper than observed. The depth of the layer of radiative cooling at cloud top is shown to be important only if it is a significant fraction of the mixed-layer depth zB. Layer ...
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stage et al. (1981) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: