Slide1 l.jpg
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 18

Transitioning HWRF upgrades into operations at EMC A Joint Hurricane Testbed (JHT) Program PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 103 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Transitioning HWRF upgrades into operations at EMC A Joint Hurricane Testbed (JHT) Program. Robert E. Tuleya*, Yihua Wu, VijayTallapragada, Young Kwon, Hyun-Sook Kim, Zhan Zhang, Qingfu Liu, J. O’Connor.

Download Presentation

Transitioning HWRF upgrades into operations at EMC A Joint Hurricane Testbed (JHT) Program

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

Transitioning HWRF upgrades into operations at EMC

A Joint Hurricane Testbed (JHT) Program

Robert E. Tuleya*, Yihua Wu, VijayTallapragada, Young Kwon,

Hyun-Sook Kim,Zhan Zhang, Qingfu Liu,J. O’Connor

65th Interdepartmental Hurricane Conference Miami Fl March 2011

*NOAA Visiting Scientist @CCPO/ODU


Jht project task areas l.jpg

JHT project task areas*

  • Improve HWRF intensity forecasts

    transition surface flux formulation from V2 to V3

  • Trouble shoot and diagnose HWRF problems

    transition surface flux formulation from V2 to V3

  • Upgrade land model and landfall prediction

    transition to NOAH LSM

*½ time effort


Transition from hwrf 2010 v2 operational sfc fluxes to alternative znot formulation v3 l.jpg

Transition from HWRF 2010 (V2) Operational Sfc Fluxes to Alternative znot Formulation(V3)


Slide4 l.jpg

HWRF 2010 V2 surface fluxes based on observation

2010 Results mixed: ~good track but low intensity bias

HEXOS data (1996, Decosmo et al)

CBLAST data (2007)

HWRF 2010 V2 used constant CH at high winds


Slide5 l.jpg

Similarity relationship for surface layer exchange coefficients under neutral condition

Stress ~ u*2 ~ Cdumum

Enthalpy flux ~ u*.q*~ Ch um ( qm – qs )

  • HWRF 2010 prod sfc flux formulation uses Cd & Ch with low level wind cut-off above which there is no stability dependence

  • Given Cd & Ch from HWRF 2010 operational code(Kwon), solve for zo and zot for neutral conditions as function of low level wind

  • Use function form of zo and zot in MO formulation of GFDL surface flux formulationAssume stability dependence can be important in some cases

  • Method allows for roughness to be changed later based on more physical basis—e.g. wave coupling, current interaction, etc.

  • Alternative znot formulation used in V3-R2


Possible differences in results between hwrf prod and znot formulation l.jpg

Possible differences in results between HWRF prod and znot formulation

  • Znot formulation does not exactly match CD & CH of Kwon. Algebraic fit of znot for enthalpy and momemtum

  • Znot formulation has stability dependence of GFDL(HWRF 2009) sfc flux routine


Hwrf 2010 v3 r2 neutral cd ch ch cd ratio l.jpg

HWRF 2010,V3-R2 (neutral)CD,CHCH/CD ratio

HWRF V3

HWRF 2010 CH/CD ratio significantly lower than GFDL & HWRF 2009


H210 test with znot formulation based on h210 ch 1x10 3 above 10m s l.jpg

H210 test with znot formulation based on H210 CH~1x10-3 above 10m/s

V3 znot

HWRF 2010

*** Note track nearly identical


Slide9 l.jpg

Red: Oper. HWRF V2.0

Cyan: HWRFV3.2 w/POM

Benchmarking HWRFV3.2–POM three season testing, ATLANTIC 2008-2009-2010.

HWRFV3.2 produced nearly identical results compared to operational 2010 HWRF.

HWRFV3.2 produced slightly less bias compared to operational 2010 HWRF. Consistent with slightly greater values of CH/CD for HWRFV3.2 vs 2010 HWRF


Summary of znot formulation method l.jpg

Summary of Znot formulation method

  • Relatively small difference between operational HWRF V2 and HWRF V3 znot formulation method

  • Some small improvement in reduction of low intensity bias?

  • Thermal znot can be reformulated to account for low intensity bias?? (next talk)


The noah lsm issues in hwrf l.jpg

The NOAH LSM Issues in HWRF

~150 historic 2008 Atlantic cases

~280 2010 Atlantic cases run in parallel


Track noah lsm test cases l.jpg

Track NOAH LSM test cases

2010 AL01-AL19 2008 cases

Track: Noah LSM ~20nm worse @96h Why???

Intensity: Noah LSM slightly better up to 96h (not shown)


Example of alex 2010 two problems areas l.jpg

Example of Alex (2010)two problems areas

Hot spots in LST in parent & nest domains

Apparent lateral BC problems


Hot spots parent grid in noah lsm l.jpg

Hot spots (parent grid) in Noah LSM

NOAH LSM

GFDL slab

LST > 330K

280<LST<310K


Lateral bc problems nest v3r2 makes problems worse l.jpg

Lateral BC problems (nest): V3R2 makes problems worse

HWRFV2 NOAH LSM

V3R2 NOAH LSM

Apparent lateral BC problems

with NOAH LSM (H210)

LSThot spot >500K


Slide16 l.jpg

Apply patch to fix Tsfc values along perimeter after LSM call, hot spots reduced/removed


Hot spots controlled by l.jpg

Hot Spots controlled by

  • patching LST from one point inside

  • changing from binary to netcdf!!

  • turning off gravity wave drag!!

    Issues and Solutions

  • Tsfc treated differently than other prognostic variables (e.g. u,v,T,R ???)

  • Apparent lateral BC problems remain for LST and other surface land parameters and variables in nest domain

  • Fix LSM issues in V3.2 and run in parallel for 2011


Slide18 l.jpg

END


  • Login