Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-2022-84
https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-2022-84
28 Apr 2022
 | 28 Apr 2022
Status: this preprint has been withdrawn by the authors.

Arctic sea ice and snow from different ice models: A CICE–SI3 intercomparison study

Imke Sievers, Andrea M. U. Gierisch, Till A. S. Rasmussen, Robinson Hordoir, and Lars Stenseng

Abstract. Sea ice models fill many purposes. They are used in global climate models or for short term forecasts to plan shipping routes. No matter what their output is used for, understanding the cause for there variability is crucial.

In the this study two commonly used sea-ice models, CICE and SI3 were compared after running both models with similar boundary condition, on the same grid, with the same forcing and initialised with the same data, with the aim to understand how the two models differ from each other when forced equally. The set-up also allows linking certain model biases observed in both models to the external forcing. We found that the models compare well to sea ice concentration, sea ice thickness and snow thickness observations, with small regional differences, which could be linked to different model processes. The processes with the highest influence are the drag formulation, the albedo, and the treatment of snow. We find that the treatment of snow has a significant influence on the difference in sea ice thickness between the models, even though their forcing is equal.

This preprint has been withdrawn.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.
Imke Sievers, Andrea M. U. Gierisch, Till A. S. Rasmussen, Robinson Hordoir, and Lars Stenseng

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
  • CC1: 'Comment on tc-2022-84', Florent Garnier, 20 May 2022
  • RC1: 'Comment on tc-2022-84', Jean Sterlin, 27 May 2022
    • AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Imke Sievers, 10 Aug 2022
  • RC2: 'Comment on tc-2022-84', Frederic Dupont, 27 May 2022
    • AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Imke Sievers, 10 Aug 2022
  • RC3: 'Comment on tc-2022-84', Martin Vancoppenolle, 28 May 2022
    • AC3: 'Reply on RC3', Imke Sievers, 10 Aug 2022
  • RC4: 'Comment on tc-2022-84', Anonymous Referee #4, 29 May 2022
    • AC4: 'Reply on RC4', Imke Sievers, 10 Aug 2022

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
  • CC1: 'Comment on tc-2022-84', Florent Garnier, 20 May 2022
  • RC1: 'Comment on tc-2022-84', Jean Sterlin, 27 May 2022
    • AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Imke Sievers, 10 Aug 2022
  • RC2: 'Comment on tc-2022-84', Frederic Dupont, 27 May 2022
    • AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Imke Sievers, 10 Aug 2022
  • RC3: 'Comment on tc-2022-84', Martin Vancoppenolle, 28 May 2022
    • AC3: 'Reply on RC3', Imke Sievers, 10 Aug 2022
  • RC4: 'Comment on tc-2022-84', Anonymous Referee #4, 29 May 2022
    • AC4: 'Reply on RC4', Imke Sievers, 10 Aug 2022
Imke Sievers, Andrea M. U. Gierisch, Till A. S. Rasmussen, Robinson Hordoir, and Lars Stenseng
Imke Sievers, Andrea M. U. Gierisch, Till A. S. Rasmussen, Robinson Hordoir, and Lars Stenseng

Viewed

Total article views: 1,309 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total Supplement BibTeX EndNote
861 392 56 1,309 67 44 35
  • HTML: 861
  • PDF: 392
  • XML: 56
  • Total: 1,309
  • Supplement: 67
  • BibTeX: 44
  • EndNote: 35
Views and downloads (calculated since 28 Apr 2022)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 28 Apr 2022)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 1,257 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 1,257 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 

Cited

Latest update: 13 Jul 2024
Download

This preprint has been withdrawn.

Short summary
To predict Arctic sea ice models are used. Many ice models exists. They all are skill full, but give different results. Often this differences result from forcing as for example air temperature. Other differences result from the way the physical equations are solved in the model. In this study two commonly used models are compared under equal forcing, to find out how much the models differ under similar external forcing. The results are compared to observations and to eachother.