Storm Prediction Center Highlights
Download
1 / 145

Storm Prediction Center Highlights - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 393 Views
  • Updated On :

Storm Prediction Center Highlights EMC Production Suite Review December 8, 2010 Steven Weiss Storm Prediction Center, Norman, OK. National Weather Center. National Weather Center. SPC Russ Schneider Greg Carbin Gregg Grosshans Joe Byerly Jay Liang Andy Dean Israel Jirak Chris Melick

Related searches for Storm Prediction Center Highlights

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Storm Prediction Center Highlights' - PamelaLan


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Slide1 l.jpg
Storm Prediction Center HighlightsEMC Production Suite ReviewDecember 8, 2010Steven Weiss Storm Prediction Center, Norman, OK

National Weather Center

National Weather Center


Acknowledgements l.jpg

SPC

Russ Schneider

Greg Carbin

Gregg Grosshans

Joe Byerly

Jay Liang

Andy Dean

Israel Jirak

Chris Melick

Chris Siewert

SPC Forecasters

NSSL

Jack Kain

Adam Clark

Patrick Marsh

Ryan Sobash

Mike Coniglio

Bob Rabin

HPC

Dave Novak

Faye Barthold

Mike Bodner

Keith Brill

HPC Forecasters

AWC

Jason Levit

Bruce Entwistle

AWC Forecasters

NASA/SPoRT/USRA

Bill McCaul

Jon Case

EMC

Geoff DiMego

Zavisa Janjic

Matt Pyle

Jun Du

Geoff Manikin

Brad Ferrier

GSD

Stan Benjamin

Steve Weygandt

John Brown

Curtis Alexander

NESDIS/NOAA Satellite

Steve Goodman

Bonnie Reed

Bill Campbell

OU/CAPS

Ming Xue

Fanyou Kong

Kevin Thomas

NCAR

Morris Weisman

Wei Wang

DTC

Tara Jensen

Barb Brown

Bill Kuo

CIMSS-UW

Jason Otkin

Wayne Feltz

CIRA-CSU

Louie Grasso

Dan Lindsey

Acknowledgements


Outline l.jpg
Outline

  • Thanks to EMC/NCO

  • SPC Mission and Responsibility

  • Virtual temperature in CAPE calculations

  • Hazardous Weather Testbed

    • Multiple WRF models including 26 member Storm Scale Ensemble Forecast (SSEF)

  • Convection-allowing WRF guidance for severe convective weather

    • Two case examples from 2010

  • Discussion of Upcoming Modeling Needs

    • SPC “Wish List”


Good news from spc perspective or a late thanksgiving card l.jpg
Good News From SPC Perspective (or a Late Thanksgiving Card)

  • Model production continues to be remarkably timely and reliable

    • Forecasters know when model output will be available

  • Excellent working relationship with EMC/NCO

    • Very responsive to inquiries and requests

  • RUC Extension to 18 hrs; GFS Resolution Increase

  • Support and improvements to 4 km WRF models

    • Operational Hi Res Window

    • Continued development of experimental 4 km WRF-NMM

      • 00 and 12z runs over full CONUS domain

      • Convective parameter maximum grids

    • Plans for operational CONUS 4 km nest in new NAM (NMM-B)

  • Upcoming SREF and Rapid Refresh implementations in 2011

  • Outstanding collaboration/support for Hazardous Weather Testbed


Slide5 l.jpg

STORM PREDICTION CENTER

HAZARDOUS PHENOMENA

  • Hail, Wind, Tornadoes

  • Excessive rainfall

  • Fire Weather

  • Winter weather


Spc mission and responsibility l.jpg

Storm Prediction Center Primary Products

SPC Mission and Responsibility

  • Tornado and Severe Thunderstorm Watches

    • Watch Status Reports

  • Severe Weather Outlooks through Day 8

    • 4-hr PeriodEnhancedThunderstorm Outlooks for Day 1

  • Short-Term Mesoscale Discussions

    • Severe Convective Weather

    • Heavy Rain

    • Hazardous Winter Weather

  • Fire Weather Outlooks through Day 8

    • New fire weather day shift; enhanced collaboration with NIFC & GACCs

  • Categorical and Probabilistic Products


Virtual cape computation l.jpg
“Virtual” CAPE Computation

  • Historically, CAPE calculations in mid-latitudes and tropics have used different formulations

  • Tropical analysis of instability has typically included virtual temperature

(MWR 1993)


Virtual cape computation8 l.jpg
“Virtual” CAPE Computation

  • Historically, CAPE calculations in mid-latitudes and tropics have had different formulations

  • Until the 1990s, mid-latitude CAPE calculation often did not include virtual temperature

(WAF 1994)


Virtual cape computation9 l.jpg
“Virtual” CAPE Computation

  • By the mid-1990s, SPC instability computations were corrected to include virtual temperature in N-SHARP sounding analysis program and other diagnostic CAPE and LI fields

  • SPC Hourly Mesoanalysis fields (SPC web page) incorporate virtual temperature in lifted parcel computations

    • These are widely used by WFOs for real-time analysis

  • For consistency and more proper representation of instability, we recommend use of virtual temperature in NCEP unified post processor

  • What is the effect of incorporating virtual temperature on CAPE and LI computations?

    • The impact is proportional to the water vapor content of the atmosphere

    • Typically, larger differences in CAPE magnitude are apparent when the lifted parcel has high mixing ratio

    • CAPE differences: ~100-250 J/kg (most important in low CAPE situations)

    • LI differences: ~ 1 deg K


Slide10 l.jpg

Doswell/Rasmussen Study All 1992 00z Soundings with Positive CAPE (5876 Total) Difference between Virtual and Non-Virtual CAPE

For CAPE < 3000 J.kg, difference < 250 J/kg

As CAPE increases beyond 1000 J/kg, differences trend toward 10-15%


Virtual cape computation11 l.jpg
“Virtual” CAPE Computation

  • SPC has been working with Geoff Manikin for several years to test code to compute virtual CAPE

  • He has tested virtual CAPE in NAM and Rapid Refresh computations and examined difference fields

  • Values and differences between virtual and non-virtual CAPE correspond well to those found by Doswell and Rasmussen

  • Here are some recent examples


Nam low cape case 12z 30 nov 2010 9 hr forecast valid 21z over land l.jpg
NAM “Low CAPE”* Case – 12z 30 Nov 2010 9-hr forecast valid 21z (*Over Land)

“Non-Virtual” CAPE CAPE Difference

<150 J/kg over land

“Virtual” CAPE CIN Difference


Rr high cape case 16z 21 oct 2010 3 hr forecast valid 19z l.jpg
RR “High CAPE” Case – 16z 21 Oct 2010 3-hr forecast valid 19z

“Non-Virtual” CAPE CAPE Difference

Generally < 300 J/kg, max difference 400 J/kg

“Virtual” CAPE


Nam lifted index case 12z 1 dec 2010 15 hr forecast valid 03z l.jpg
NAM Lifted Index Case – 12z 1 Dec 2010 15-hr forecast valid 03z

“Non-Virtual” LI LI Difference

“Virtual” LI


Virtual cape computation15 l.jpg
Virtual CAPE Computation

  • Recommendation: NCEP unified post processor CAPE and LI calculations should be corrected to include effects of virtual temperature

  • Options

    • Change current grids to incorporate virtual temperature

    • Add new “virtual grids” in addition to existing “non-virtual grids”

  • SPC prefers first option



Convection allowing wrf models l.jpg
Convection-Allowing WRF Models

  • Severe weather types (tornadoes, hail, wind damage) can be closely related to convective mode

    • Tornadoes (discrete or embedded supercells)

    • Damaging wind (bow echoes and QLCSs)

    • Very large hail (supercells)

  • Traditional operational models (NAM, GFS, RUC) do not resolve convective-scale details

  • Convection-allowing WRF models with 4 km grid length

    • Resolve mesoscale structure (linear MCS’s, bow echoes)

    • Can approximate storm scale features including supercells

  • But analysis and prediction of pre-storm and near-storm mesoscale environment is of paramount importance


Examples of different convective modes as seen by radar reflectivity l.jpg
Examples of Different Convective Modes as Seen by Radar Reflectivity

Discrete Multi-cell Cells Cluster

Bow Echo Linear System System with Embedded Bows (and leading cells)


4 km wrf models used daily at spc l.jpg
4 km WRF Models Used Daily at SPC Reflectivity

  • WRF-NMM (EMC) and WRF-ARW (EMC and NSSL)

    • Operational EMC WRFs three times daily in HiResWindow to 48h

      • 00 and 12 UTC over Central/East domain

      • 06 UTC over West/Central domain

    • Experimental EMC and NSSL WRFs

      • EMC WRF-NMM run twice daily (00 and 12 UTC)

      • NSSL WRF-ARW run once daily (12 UTC)

      • 36h forecasts over full CONUS

    • Cold start with NAM initial and boundary conditions

    • No parameterized convection

    • Unique convective fields such as:

      • Simulated reflectivity

      • Measures of updraft rotation in model storms

      • Hourly maximum fields (“history variables”)


Noaa hazardous weather testbed l.jpg

EFP Reflectivity

EWP

NOAA Hazardous Weather Testbed

  • An organization and facility that supports and promotes collaborative research activities between SPC, NSSL, WFO OUN, and the broader national and international meteorological community of research scientists, academia, and forecasters.

Initially Two Main Program Areas

Experimental

Forecast

Program

Experimental

Warning

Program

Prediction of hazardous mesoscale and stormscale events from a few hours to a week in advance

Detection and prediction of hazardous mesoscale and stormscale events up to several hours in advance


Noaa hazardous weather testbed21 l.jpg

EFP Reflectivity

EFP

EWP

EWP

NOAA Hazardous Weather Testbed

  • An organization that supports and promotes collaborative research activities between SPC, NSSL, WFO OUN, and the broader national and international meteorological community of research scientists, academia, and forecasters.

Since 2009 - Three Main Program Areas

Experimental

Forecast

Program

Experimental

Warning

Program

GOES-R PG

Real time OT&E of GOES-R products prior to launch

GOES-R Proving Ground


Spring experiments http www nssl noaa gov projects hwt efp l.jpg
Spring Experiments Reflectivityhttp://www.nssl.noaa.gov/projects/hwt/efp/

When:

  • ~8 am to 4 pm M-F from May into mid-June

    Where:

  • In National Weather Center HWT between OUN and SPC

    Focus:

  • Evaluate emerging scientific concepts and tools in a simulated operational forecasting environment

    Participation:

  • ~60-70 researchers and forecasters from U.S. and international government agencies, academia, and the private sector

  • 8-14 active participants at any time


Slide23 l.jpg

HWT Spring Experiment Reflectivity2010 Participating Institutions:

NOAA Agencies UniversitiesGov’t Agencies Private

  • NCEP/EMC (2) -NCEP/AWC (6) -NCEP/HPC (5) -NCEP/SPC (7) -NCEP/OPC -NWS/ABQ -NWS/HUN -NWS/ANC -NWS/CAE -OAR/NSSL (4) -NESDIS (2)

-Oklahoma -Iowa State -Albany/SUNY (3) -Texas A&M -MIT/LL -UA/Huntsville (2)

-NWS/DTX -NWS/EAX -NWS/EKA -NWS/TWC -NWS/FGZ -NWS/PIH -NWS/TFX -CIMSS/UW(8) -OAR/PSD

-NCAR/DTC (6) -FAA/Academy (2) -FAA/ATCSCC (2) -NASA/SPoRT (4) -AFWA (2) -Environ. Canada (3)

-Mitre (CAASD) -FirstEnergy -SSAI

-NWS/RAH -NWS/ILN -NWS/OKX -NWS/RLX -NWS/ATCSCC -NWS/OST (5) -NWS/MDL (2) -CIRA/CSU (2) -OAR/GSD (3)

-

The HWT is a facilitator of R2O & O2R across the larger community


Hazardous weather testbed unique benefits l.jpg
Hazardous Weather Testbed Unique Benefits Reflectivity

  • The close working relationship between operational and research meteorologists has fostered

    • Increased appreciation by Research Scientists of forecaster insights, and operational constraints and requirements

    • Education of Operational Forecasters about cutting-edge NWP models & science concepts for application to severe weather forecasting

    • Accelerated Transfer of useful new science and technology from research to operations


Primary hwt collaborative forecast projects l.jpg

Primary HWT Collaborative Forecast Projects Reflectivity

Focus has been on exploring advanced NWP applications for severe weather prediction

1997

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007-09

2010

WINWEX ‘97

SE2010 Hi-Res WRF & Ensembles; Severe storm, Aviation and QPF Desks

SE2002 IHOP forecasting support (Conv. Init.)

SE2006

Pre-implementation evaluation of NAM-WRF

SE2000 Evaluation of Model soundings, RUC-based SFCOA, hail

SE2004

First detailed look at Hi-Res WRF

SE2003 Short-Range Ensembles (SREF)

SE2007-09 Hi-Res WRF & Ensembles

SE2001 Subjective Verif., Conv. Param.

SE2005

Hi-Res WRF configuration testing


2010 hwt spring experiment l.jpg
2010 HWT Spring Experiment Reflectivity

  • Expansion of Convective Hazards

    • Explore high resolution NWP applications for

      • Severe thunderstorms (SPC-NSSL)

      • Aviation-impacts (AWC)

      • QPF/Heavy Rain (HPC)



Slide28 l.jpg

(4 GB/day) Experiment

NSSL

(00 UTC)

SPC

(36 GB/day)

CAPS

(00, 09, 12, 15, 18 UTC)

(5 GB/day)

NCAR

(00, 12 UTC)

(70 GB/day*)

HRRR/RUC13

(00, 09, 12, 15, 18 UTC)

(18 GB/day)

EMC

(00, 12 UTC)

DTC

WEBSITE

ARCHIVE

CAPS: 1.5 TB

EMC: 544 GB

HRRR: 270 GB

NCAR: 152 GB

NSSL: 235 GB

(3+ TB TOTAL)

HAZARDOUS WEATHER TESTBED

Courtesy: Patrick Marsh NSSL/OU

*10 GB/day archived


June 17 2010 l.jpg
June 17, 2010 Experiment

  • Tornado Outbreak – Upper Midwest

    • Record tornado day in Minnesota (48 tornadoes)

    • 17 EF2+ tornadoes including four rated EF4 (in MN and ND)

    • 3 killed, more than 40 injured, and widespread damage

    • Strongly forced situation with well-defined frontal boundary

Tornado Damage in Holmes, ND


Deterministic 00z wrf model forecasts valid 18z 04z l.jpg

Deterministic 00z WRF Model Forecasts valid 18z-04z Experiment

EMC 4 km WRF-NMM

NSSL 4 km WRF-ARW


Wrf simulated reflectivity 18 hr forecast valid 18z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity Experiment18 hr Forecast valid 18z 17 June 2010

NMM4NSSL4

Radar


Wrf simulated reflectivity 19 hr forecast valid 19z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity Experiment19 hr Forecast valid 19z 17 June 2010

NMM4NSSL4

Radar


Wrf simulated reflectivity 20 hr forecast valid 20z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity Experiment20 hr Forecast valid 20z 17 June 2010

NMM4NSSL4

Radar


Wrf simulated reflectivity 21 hr forecast valid 21z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity Experiment21 hr Forecast valid 21z 17 June 2010

NMM4NSSL4

Otter Tail Cnty EF4 1 Killed

Radar


Wrf simulated reflectivity 22 hr forecast valid 22z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity Experiment22 hr Forecast valid 22z 17 June 2010

NMM4NSSL4

Radar


Wrf simulated reflectivity 23 hr forecast valid 23z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity Experiment23 hr Forecast valid 23z 17 June 2010

NMM4NSSL4

Polk Cnty EF3 1 Killed

Radar


Wrf simulated reflectivity 24 hr forecast valid 00z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity Experiment24 hr Forecast valid 00z 18 June 2010

NMM4NSSL4

Radar

Freeborn Cnty EF4 1 Killed


Wrf simulated reflectivity 25 hr forecast valid 01z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity Experiment25 hr Forecast valid 01z 18 June 2010

NMM4NSSL4

Radar


Wrf simulated reflectivity 26 hr forecast valid 02z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity Experiment26 hr Forecast valid 02z 18 June 2010

NMM4NSSL4

Radar


Wrf simulated reflectivity 27 hr forecast valid 03z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity Experiment27 hr Forecast valid 03z 18 June 2010

NMM4NSSL4

Radar


Wrf simulated reflectivity 28 hr forecast valid 04z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity Experiment28 hr Forecast valid 04z 18 June 2010

NMM4NSSL4

NSSL WRF developed excessive cold pool and surged leading edge of convection too far southeast across Iowa. Initially “slow” NMM was better with location but intensity was too weak near Mississippi River.

Radar


Ssef tests of double moment microphysics 27 hr forecast valid 03z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
SSEF Tests of Double-Moment Microphysics 27 hr Forecast valid 03z 18 June 2010

Thompson WDM6

All members identical to SSEF 4 km ARW control run (upper left) except for different double-moment microphysics schemes. All moved convection southeastward too rapidly.

Morrison

Radar


Examination of hrrr forecasts for short term update information l.jpg

Examination of HRRR Forecasts for Short-Term Update Information

Simulated Reflectivity from 14z, 16z, and 18z HRRR Runs Valid 14-23z


Hrrr simulated reflectivity 1 km agl forecasts valid 14z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
HRRR Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) Information Forecasts valid 14z 17 June 2010

14z 16z (NA) 00-hr

18z (NA) Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Hrrr simulated reflectivity 1 km agl forecasts valid 15z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
HRRR Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) Information Forecasts valid 15z 17 June 2010

14z 16z (NA) 01-hr

18z (NA) Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Hrrr simulated reflectivity 1 km agl forecasts valid 16z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
HRRR Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) Information Forecasts valid 16z 17 June 2010

14z 16z 02-hr 00-hr

18z (NA) Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Hrrr simulated reflectivity 1 km agl forecasts valid 17z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
HRRR Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) Information Forecasts valid 17z 17 June 2010

14z 16z 03-hr 01-hr

18z (NA) Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Hrrr simulated reflectivity 1 km agl forecasts valid 18z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
HRRR Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) Information Forecasts valid 18z 17 June 2010

14z 16z 04-hr 02-hr

18z Observed 00-hr Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Hrrr simulated reflectivity 1 km agl forecasts valid 19z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
HRRR Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) Information Forecasts valid 19z 17 June 2010

14z 16z 05-hr 03-hr

18z Observed 01-hr Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Hrrr simulated reflectivity 1 km agl forecasts valid 20z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
HRRR Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) Information Forecasts valid 20z 17 June 2010

14z 16z 06-hr 04-hr

18z Observed 02-hr Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Hrrr simulated reflectivity 1 km agl forecasts valid 21z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
HRRR Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) Information Forecasts valid 21z 17 June 2010

14z 16z 07-hr 05-hr

18z Observed 03-hr Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Hrrr simulated reflectivity 1 km agl forecasts valid 22z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
HRRR Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) Information Forecasts valid 22z 17 June 2010

14z 16z 08-hr 06-hr

18z Observed 04-hr Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Hrrr simulated reflectivity 1 km agl forecasts valid 23z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
HRRR Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) Information Forecasts valid 23z 17 June 2010

14z 16z 09-hr 07-hr

18z Observed 05-hr Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Hrrr simulated reflectivity 1 km agl forecasts valid 00z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
HRRR Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) Information Forecasts valid 00z 18 June 2010

14z 16z 10-hr 08-hr

18z Observed 06-hr Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Hourly maximum fields hmfs from wrf models l.jpg

Hourly Maximum Fields (HMFs) From WRF Models Information

Incorporated into NSSL, EMC, HRRR, NCAR, AFWA, and CAPS Convection-Allowing Models


Convection allowing wrf models hourly maximum fields l.jpg
Convection-Allowing WRF Models InformationHourly Maximum Fields

  • Provides simulated storm attribute information

    • Track maximum value at every model time step and output as hourly maximum field (HMF; Kain et al. 2010).

  • HMFs include:

    • Updraft Helicity, which represents a rotating updraft in a simulated storm (Kain et al. 2008)

    • Updraft/Downdraft Speed

    • 10-m AGL Wind Speed to identify convective gusts

    • 1-km AGL Simulated Reflectivity

    • Vertically Integrated Graupel, a proxy for hail in a model storm


Examples of hourly maximum fields l.jpg

Simulated Reflectivity Information>40 dBZ

Updraft Helicity (m2s-2)

Examples of Hourly Maximum Fields

  • HMFs can provide unique perspective on convective mode and simulated storm tracks.

  • Co-located swaths of hourly max UH and simulated reflectivity highlight simulated long-track supercells.


Deterministic 00z wrf model forecasts valid 18z 00z l.jpg

Deterministic 00z WRF Model Forecasts valid 18z-00z Information

HMF of Updraft Helicity

EMC 4 km WRF-NMM NSSL 4 km WRF-ARW


Wrf max updraft helicity 18 hr forecast valid 18z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Max Updraft Helicity Information18 hr Forecast valid 18z 17 June 2010

NMM4NSSL4

Previous Hour Severe Reports


Wrf max updraft helicity 19 hr forecast valid 19z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Max Updraft Helicity Information19 hr Forecast valid 19z 17 June 2010

NMM4NSSL4

Previous Hour Severe Reports


Wrf max updraft helicity 20 hr forecast valid 20z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Max Updraft Helicity Information20 hr Forecast valid 20z 17 June 2010

NMM4NSSL4

Previous Hour Severe Reports


Wrf max updraft helicity 21 hr forecast valid 21z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Max Updraft Helicity Information21 hr Forecast valid 21z 17 June 2010

NMM4NSSL4

Previous Hour Severe Reports


Wrf max updraft helicity 22 hr forecast valid 22z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Max Updraft Helicity Information22 hr Forecast valid 22z 17 June 2010

NMM4NSSL4

Previous Hour Severe Reports


Wrf max updraft helicity 23 hr forecast valid 23z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Max Updraft Helicity Information23 hr Forecast valid 23z 17 June 2010

NMM4NSSL4

Previous Hour Severe Reports


Wrf max updraft helicity 24 hr forecast valid 00z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Max Updraft Helicity Information24 hr Forecast valid 00z 18 June 2010

NMM4NSSL4

Previous Hour Severe Reports


Ssef updraft helicity forecasts june 17 2010 l.jpg

SSEF Updraft Helicity Forecasts June 17 2010 Information

Maximum HMF from any Member

Neighborhood Exceedance Probability


Ssef updraft helicity hmf 18 hr forecasts valid 18z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
SSEF Updraft Helicity (HMF) Information18 hr Forecasts valid 18z 17 June 2010

Max Neighborhood Member Prob > 25 m2s-2

Previous Hour Severe Reports


Ssef updraft helicity hmf 19 hr forecasts valid 19z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
SSEF Updraft Helicity (HMF) Information19 hr Forecasts valid 19z 17 June 2010

Max Neighborhood Member Prob > 25 m2s-2

Previous Hour Severe Reports


Ssef updraft helicity hmf 20 hr forecasts valid 20z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
SSEF Updraft Helicity (HMF) Information20 hr Forecasts valid 20z 17 June 2010

Max Neighborhood Member Prob > 25 m2s-2

Previous Hour Severe Reports


Ssef updraft helicity hmf 21 hr forecasts valid 21z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
SSEF Updraft Helicity (HMF) Information21 hr Forecasts valid 21z 17 June 2010

Max Neighborhood Member Prob > 25 m2s-2

Previous Hour Severe Reports


Ssef updraft helicity hmf 22 hr forecasts valid 22z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
SSEF Updraft Helicity (HMF) Information22 hr Forecasts valid 22z 17 June 2010

Max Neighborhood Member Prob > 25 m2s-2

Previous Hour Severe Reports


Ssef updraft helicity hmf 23 hr forecasts valid 23z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
SSEF Updraft Helicity (HMF) Information23 hr Forecasts valid 23z 17 June 2010

Max Neighborhood Member Prob > 25 m2s-2

Previous Hour Severe Reports


Ssef updraft helicity hmf 24 hr forecasts valid 00z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
SSEF Updraft Helicity (HMF) Information24 hr Forecasts valid 00z 18 June 2010

Max Neighborhood Member Prob > 25 m2s-2

Previous Hour Severe Reports


Ssef updraft helicity hmf 25 hr forecasts valid 01z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
SSEF Updraft Helicity (HMF) Information25 hr Forecasts valid 01z 18 June 2010

Max Neighborhood Member Prob > 25 m2s-2

Previous Hour Severe Reports


Ssef updraft helicity hmf 26 hr forecasts valid 02z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
SSEF Updraft Helicity (HMF) Information26 hr Forecasts valid 02z 18 June 2010

Max Neighborhood Member Prob > 25 m2s-2

Previous Hour Severe Reports


Ssef updraft helicity hmf 27 hr forecasts valid 03z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
SSEF Updraft Helicity (HMF) Information27 hr Forecasts valid 03z 18 June 2010

Max Neighborhood Member Prob > 25 m2s-2

Previous Hour Severe Reports


Simulated satellite imagery from nssl wrf l.jpg

Simulated Satellite Imagery from NSSL-WRF Information

Collaboration with CIRA-CSU and CIMSS-UW


Simulated satellite imagery from 4 km nssl wrf l.jpg
Simulated Satellite Imagery from 4 km NSSL WRF Information

  • Generated from model gridded surface fields and profiles of moisture, temperature, and clouds sent to CIRA and CIMSS

    • CIRA and CIMSS radiative transfer models used to create WRF model simulated brightness temperatures

    • CIRA: 4 GOES-R IR channels; CIMSS: 8 GOES-R IR channels

    • Output sensitive to the microphysics scheme in model

  • Forecasters can infer the 4-D evolution of model dynamic processes and associated moisture fields, and make visual comparisons between satellite observations and NWP model

  • Researchers can study interactions between microphysics and radiative transfer modeling

  • Permits new model verification approach through statistical comparison of observed satellite data and simulated satellite data at resolution comparable to GOES (planned at DTC)


Wrf nssl simulated satellite imagery 18 hr forecasts valid 18z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF-NSSL Simulated Satellite Imagery 18 hr Forecasts valid 18z 17 June 2010

CIRA CIMSS IR WV

GOES GOES IR WV

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf nssl simulated satellite imagery 19 hr forecasts valid 19z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF-NSSL Simulated Satellite Imagery 19 hr Forecasts valid 19z 17 June 2010

CIRA CIMSS IR WV

GOES GOES IR WV

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf nssl simulated satellite imagery 20 hr forecasts valid 20z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF-NSSL Simulated Satellite Imagery 20 hr Forecasts valid 20z 17 June 2010

CIRA CIMSS IR WV

GOES GOES IR WV

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf nssl simulated satellite imagery 21 hr forecasts valid 21z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF-NSSL Simulated Satellite Imagery 21 hr Forecasts valid 21z 17 June 2010

CIRA CIMSS IR WV

GOES GOES IR WV

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf nssl simulated satellite imagery 22 hr forecasts valid 22z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF-NSSL Simulated Satellite Imagery 22 hr Forecasts valid 22z 17 June 2010

CIRA CIMSS IR WV

GOES GOES IR WV

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf nssl simulated satellite imagery 23 hr forecasts valid 23z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF-NSSL Simulated Satellite Imagery 23 hr Forecasts valid 23z 17 June 2010

CIRA CIMSS IR WV

GOES GOES IR WV

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf nssl simulated satellite imagery 24 hr forecasts valid 00z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF-NSSL Simulated Satellite Imagery 24 hr Forecasts valid 00z 18 June 2010

CIRA CIMSS IR WV

GOES GOES IR WV

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Explicit total lightning fields from nssl wrf l.jpg

Explicit Total Lightning Fields from NSSL-WRF

Collaboration with NASA/SPoRT/USRA


Explicit total lightning fields from 4 km nssl wrf l.jpg
Explicit Total Lightning Fields from 4 km NSSL WRF

  • Three Total Lightning Threat experimental parameters

    • Represents microphysical properties of hydrometeor types and charge separation processes within the WRF storms (McCaul et al. 2009)

    • Lightning Threat 1:  Upward flux of ice hydrometeors at -15C

    • Lightning Threat 2:  Column integrated ice hydrometeors

    • Lightning Threat 3:  Statistical blend of Threats 1 and 2

      • Optimizes temporal variability best depicted by Threat 1 and areal coverage best depicted by Threat 2 

      • Threat 3 is very heavily weighted by Threat 1

    • Uses hourly maximum field (HMF) of ice hydrometeor fields

      • Represents the hourly maximum total lightning threats

      • Units: flashes per km-2 per 5 min

    • Potential use as indicator of model Convective Initiation (CI)

    • Like all storm attribute fields (HMFs), highly dependent on ability of model to correctly predict space convection location and time


Wrf nssl explicit total lightning 18 hr forecasts valid 18z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF-NSSL Explicit Total Lightning WRF18 hr Forecasts valid 18z 17 June 2010

WRF Observed Tot Ltg Lightning

WRF Observed Refl Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf nssl explicit total lightning 19 hr forecasts valid 19z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF-NSSL Explicit Total Lightning WRF19 hr Forecasts valid 19z 17 June 2010

WRF Observed Tot Ltg Lightning

WRF Observed Refl Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf nssl explicit total lightning 20 hr forecasts valid 20z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF-NSSL Explicit Total Lightning WRF20 hr Forecasts valid 20z 17 June 2010

WRF Observed Tot Ltg Lightning

WRF Observed Refl Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf nssl explicit total lightning 21 hr forecasts valid 21z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF-NSSL Explicit Total Lightning WRF21 hr Forecasts valid 21z 17 June 2010

WRF Observed Tot Ltg Lightning

WRF Observed Refl Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf nssl explicit total lightning 22 hr forecasts valid 22z 17 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF-NSSL Explicit Total Lightning WRF22 hr Forecasts valid 22z 17 June 2010

WRF Observed Tot Ltg Lightning

WRF Observed Refl Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Slide93 l.jpg

Reliability diagram of WRF probabilistic lightning forecasts and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010)

NSSL-WRF SREF

(From Miller et al. (2010)


June 18 2010 l.jpg
June 18, 2010 and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010)

  • Multiple Severe Derecho-Producing MCSs Over Midwest

    • Wind gusts up to 80-90 mph reported with widespread damage

    • Heavy rainfall/flooding especially from overnight MCS

    • Extensive aviation impact at Chicago during afternoon rush hour

      • Hundreds of flights canceled or delayed

Courtesy: Walker Ashley

Leading Edge of Shelf Cloud Northwest Illinois


Wrf simulated reflectivity forecasts 13z 06z 18 june l.jpg

WRF Simulated Reflectivity Forecasts 13z-06z 18 June and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010)

4 km WRF-NMM & WRF-NSSL, and 1 km CAPS ARW Runs


Wrf simulated reflectivity 1 km agl 13 hr forecasts valid 13z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) 13 hr Forecasts valid 13z 18 June 2010

NMM4 NSSL4

How well 00z models predict evolution of overnight convection is a critical factor in developing proper mesoscale environment for the next day’s afternoon and evening convection cycle.

CAPS1 Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf simulated reflectivity 1 km agl 14 hr forecasts valid 14z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) 14 hr Forecasts valid 14z 18 June 2010

NMM4 NSSL4

CAPS1 Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf simulated reflectivity 1 km agl 15 hr forecasts valid 15z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) 15 hr Forecasts valid 15z 18 June 2010

NMM4 NSSL4

CAPS1 Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf simulated reflectivity 1 km agl 16 hr forecasts valid 16z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) 16 hr Forecasts valid 16z 18 June 2010

NMM4 NSSL4

CAPS1 Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf simulated reflectivity 1 km agl 17 hr forecasts valid 17z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) 17 hr Forecasts valid 17z 18 June 2010

NMM4 NSSL4

CAPS1 Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf simulated reflectivity 1 km agl 18 hr forecasts valid 18z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) 18 hr Forecasts valid 18z 18 June 2010

NMM4 NSSL4

Models were too fast with bow echo system across northern Illinois. Information on convective mode was useful for forecasters, but timing errors are present. Also note new storms persisting over NW Iowa.

CAPS1 Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf simulated reflectivity 1 km agl 19 hr forecasts valid 19z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) 19 hr Forecasts valid 19z 18 June 2010

NMM4 NSSL4

CAPS1 Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf simulated reflectivity 1 km agl 20 hr forecasts valid 20z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) 20 hr Forecasts valid 20z 18 June 2010

NMM4 NSSL4

CAPS1 Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf simulated reflectivity 1 km agl 21 hr forecasts valid 21z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) 21 hr Forecasts valid 21z 18 June 2010

NMM4 NSSL4

CAPS1 Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf simulated reflectivity 1 km agl 22 hr forecasts valid 22z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) 22 hr Forecasts valid 22z 18 June 2010

NMM4 NSSL4

CAPS1 Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf simulated reflectivity 1 km agl 23 hr forecasts valid 23z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) 23 hr Forecasts valid 23z 18 June 2010

NMM4 NSSL4

CAPS1 Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf simulated reflectivity 1 km agl 24 hr forecasts valid 00z 19 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) 24 hr Forecasts valid 00z 19 June 2010

NMM4 NSSL4

Second MCS over eastern Iowa predicted by NSSL and CAPS models

CAPS1 Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf simulated reflectivity 1 km agl 25 hr forecasts valid 01z 19 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) 25 hr Forecasts valid 01z 19 June 2010

NMM4 NSSL4

CAPS1 Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf simulated reflectivity 1 km agl 26 hr forecasts valid 02z 19 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) 26 hr Forecasts valid 02z 19 June 2010

NMM4 NSSL4

CAPS1 Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf simulated reflectivity 1 km agl 27 hr forecasts valid 03z 19 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) 27 hr Forecasts valid 03z 19 June 2010

NMM4 NSSL4

CAPS1 Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf simulated reflectivity 1 km agl 28 hr forecasts valid 04z 19 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) 28 hr Forecasts valid 04z 19 June 2010

NMM4 NSSL4

CAPS1 Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf simulated reflectivity 1 km agl 29 hr forecasts valid 05z 19 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) 29 hr Forecasts valid 05z 19 June 2010

NMM4 NSSL4

CAPS1 Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf simulated reflectivity 1 km agl 30 hr forecasts valid 06z 19 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) 30 hr Forecasts valid 06z 19 June 2010

NMM4 NSSL4

CAPS 1 km run develops and maintains linear MCS but NSSL-WRF weakens system too quickly before 06z.

CAPS1 Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Wrf simulated reflectivity 1 km agl 30 hr forecasts valid 06z 19 june 2010114 l.jpg
WRF Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) 30 hr Forecasts valid 06z 19 June 2010

CAPS4 NSSL4

CAPS1 Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Did the later 12z nmm4 perform better than the 00z run l.jpg

Did the Later 12z NMM4 Perform Better Than the 00z Run? and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010)

Let’s Compare Forecasts valid 21z, 00z, and 03z


Wrf nmm simulated reflectivity forecasts valid 21z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF-NMM Simulated Reflectivity and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) Forecasts valid 21z 18 June 2010

00z 12z NMM4 NMM4 21-hr 09-hr

Observed Radar


Wrf nmm simulated reflectivity forecasts valid 00z 19 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF-NMM Simulated Reflectivity and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) Forecasts valid 00z 19 June 2010

00z 12z NMM4 NMM4 24-hr 12-hr

Observed Radar


Wrf nmm simulated reflectivity forecasts valid 03z 19 june 2010 l.jpg
WRF-NMM Simulated Reflectivity and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) Forecasts valid 03z 19 June 2010

00z 12z NMM4 NMM4 27-hr 15-hr

Although 12z run failed to predict the first derecho-producing MCS, it was far superior to the 00z run predicting the second MCS.

Observed Radar


Hrrr forecasts of the multiple mcss on 18 june l.jpg

HRRR Forecasts of the Multiple MCSs on 18 June and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010)

Comparison of 14z, 16z, and 18z Model Runs Valid 14-00z


Hrrr simulated reflectivity 1 km agl forecasts valid 14z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
HRRR Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) Forecasts valid 14z 18 June 2010

14z 16z (NA) 00-hr

18z (NA) Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Hrrr simulated reflectivity 1 km agl forecasts valid 15z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
HRRR Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) Forecasts valid 15z 18 June 2010

14z 16z (NA) 01-hr

18z (NA) Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Hrrr simulated reflectivity 1 km agl forecasts valid 16z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
HRRR Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) Forecasts valid 16z 18 June 2010

14z 16z 02-hr 00-hr

18z (NA) Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Hrrr simulated reflectivity 1 km agl forecasts valid 17z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
HRRR Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) Forecasts valid 17z 18 June 2010

14z 16z 03-hr 01-hr

18z (NA) Observed Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Hrrr simulated reflectivity 1 km agl forecasts valid 18z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
HRRR Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) Forecasts valid 18z 18 June 2010

14z 16z 04-hr 02-hr

18z Observed 00-hr Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Hrrr simulated reflectivity 1 km agl forecasts valid 19z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
HRRR Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) Forecasts valid 19z 18 June 2010

14z 16z 05-hr 03-hr

18z Observed 01-hr Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Hrrr simulated reflectivity 1 km agl forecasts valid 20z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
HRRR Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) Forecasts valid 20z 18 June 2010

14z 16z 06-hr 04-hr

18z Observed 02-hr Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Hrrr simulated reflectivity 1 km agl forecasts valid 21z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
HRRR Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) Forecasts valid 21z 18 June 2010

14z 16z 07-hr 05-hr

18z Observed 03-hr Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Hrrr simulated reflectivity 1 km agl forecasts valid 22z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
HRRR Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) Forecasts valid 22z 18 June 2010

14z 16z 08-hr 06-hr

18z Observed 04-hr Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Hrrr simulated reflectivity 1 km agl forecasts valid 23z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
HRRR Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) Forecasts valid 23z 18 June 2010

14z 16z 09-hr 07-hr

18z Observed 05-hr Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Hrrr simulated reflectivity 1 km agl forecasts valid 00z 19 june 2010 l.jpg
HRRR Simulated Reflectivity (1 km AGL) and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) Forecasts valid 00z 19 June 2010

14z 16z 10-hr 08-hr

18z Observed 06-hr Radar

GOES Water Vapor Imagery


Ssef multi hazard guidance severe wind and heavy rain l.jpg

SSEF Multi-Hazard Guidance and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010) Severe Wind and Heavy Rain

Late Afternoon and Evening 18 June 2010


Ssef neighborhood probability 10 m wind 40 kt and severe reports forecast valid 22z 18 june 2010 l.jpg
SSEF Neighborhood Probability 10-m Wind and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010)> 40 kt and Severe Reports Forecast valid 22z 18 June 2010


Ssef neighborhood probability 10 m wind 40 kt and severe reports forecast valid 00z 19 june 2010 l.jpg
SSEF Neighborhood Probability 10-m Wind and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010)> 40 kt and Severe Reports Forecast valid 00z 19 June 2010


Ssef neighborhood probability 10 m wind 40 kt and severe reports forecast valid 02z 19 june 2010 l.jpg
SSEF Neighborhood Probability 10-m Wind and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010)> 40 kt and Severe Reports Forecast valid 02z 19 June 2010


Ssef neighborhood probability 10 m wind 40 kt and severe reports forecast valid 04z 19 june 2010 l.jpg
SSEF Neighborhood Probability 10-m Wind and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010)> 40 kt and Severe Reports Forecast valid 04z 19 June 2010


Ssef neighborhood probability 10 m wind 40 kt and severe reports forecast valid 06z 19 june 2010 l.jpg
SSEF Neighborhood Probability 10-m Wind and SPC SREF-based calibrated thunder guidance (20-00z fcst period 12 Mar-11 Jun 2010)> 40 kt and Severe Reports Forecast valid 06z 19 June 2010


Ssef qpf neighborhood probability 6 hr poe of 1 0 and 2 0 forecast valid 06z 19 june 2010 l.jpg
SSEF QPF Neighborhood Probability 6-hr POE of 1.0” and 2.0” Forecast valid 06z 19 June 2010

Prob>1.0” QPE>1.0”

SSEF probability guidance indicated strong wind threat would diminish later in the evening and primary hazardous weather threat would transition to heavy rain

Prob>2.0” QPE>2.0”


Slide138 l.jpg

0.01 inch 2.0”

0.1 inch

SSEF Threat Scores

0.5 inch

1.0 inch

Courtesy: Fanyou Kong (CAPS)


Ssef qpf bias for 0 1 hr threshold l.jpg
SSEF QPF BIAS for 0.1”/hr Threshold 2.0”

Bias=1

Courtesy: Xue et al. (2010)


Hwt planning 2011 l.jpg
HWT Planning – 2011 2.0”

  • Spring Experiment 2011 Preliminary Plans

    • Convective Initiation Focus (OAR/NWS)

      • Improvements in CI are critical to aviation, EMs, etc.

      • CI is lead component of overall severe weather forecasting process

        • Initiation, evolution, mode, intensity, longevity, decay

    • Lightning Prediction Focus (NWS)

    • CI can correspond directly to lightning prediction

  • Severe Thunderstorm Component (SPC/NSSL)

    • Continuation of ongoing test and evaluation of CAM and SSEF guidance for severe storm prediction

  • QPF/Heavy Rain Component (HPC)

    • HPC will be key partner again in 2011

  • Aviation-Impacts Component (AWC)

    • Primary aviation component will occur at AWT in 2011

    • Collaboration anticipated, especially with CI - Lightning component

  • Early plans - three desks for Severe, QPF, and CI-Lightning


Spc request list l.jpg
SPC Request List 2.0”

  • “Small Picture – Near Term”

    • Move ahead to include virtual CAPE in NCEP post

    • Provide “early” opportunity to bring in GEMPAK grids for new NAM, RR, and SREF once NCO begins running parallel code

  • “Bigger Picture”

    • SREF and GEFS/NAEFS

      • Move toward better integration with standard 6-hrly cycles (SREF)

      • Continue efforts to unify base models, upgrade perturbation methods, enhance physics diversity, increase resolution, and partner with other centers to provide additional ensemble diversity

    • Rapid Refresh, HRRR and HRRR Ensemble (HRRRE)

      • RR development and implementation

      • Continue CONUS HRRR development efforts - test DFI on 3 km grid

    • Convection-Allowing WRF models and HiResWindow

      • With NAM CONUS 4 km nest planned in 2011, reconsider role of Hi Res Window (e.g., experimental small member, short-term CAM ensemble?)

      • Work closely with research community to explore radar assimilation techniques (3DVAR, EnKF, hybrid) consistent with WoF concept

    • But, these require additional computing resources



Domain wide hmf distributions by ssef member jirak et al 2010 l.jpg
Domain-Wide HMF Distributions by SSEF Member (Jirak et al. 2010)

Updraft Helicity

Updraft Speed

Updraft Helicity similar between ARW and NMM members. However, magnitudes for Updraft / Downdraft Speeds and 10-m Wind Gusts larger for ARW members

Downdraft Speed

10-m Wind Speed


Contribution by ssef member to hmf ensemble max jirak et al 2010 l.jpg
Contribution by SSEF Member to HMF Ensemble Max (Jirak et al. 2010)

Updraft Helicity

Updraft Speed

NMM

Downdraft Speed

10-m Wind Speed

Sim. Reflectivity

- Uniform distribution for UH Max from all members

- ARW members contribute more frequently to max for updraft/downdraft, 10-m wind, and reflectivity

- Overall, SSEF ensemble max not dominated by a small number of members


Ssef nam sref 3h ets comparison l.jpg
SSEF, NAM, SREF 3h ETS comparison al. 2010)

ARW_C0: no radar data

ARW_CN: with radar

  • SSEF_PM (4km) outperforms NAM and SREF

  • ARW_CN (4km) outperforms NAM and SREF, except in light rain threshold where SREF_PM has higher ETS beyond 18 h

  • Radar assimilation impact evident through 18-21 h

Courtesy: Kong et al. (2010)


ad