slide1
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Transitioning HWRF upgrades into operations at EMC A Joint Hurricane Testbed (JHT) Program

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 18

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


  • 131 Views
  • Uploaded on

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.

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 'Transitioning HWRF upgrades into operations at EMC A Joint Hurricane Testbed JHT Program' - lavada


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

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
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

slide4

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

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

V3 znot

HWRF 2010

*** Note track nearly identical

slide9

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
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

The NOAH LSM Issues in HWRF

~150 historic 2008 Atlantic cases

~280 2010 Atlantic cases run in parallel

track noah lsm test cases
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
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
Hot spots (parent grid) in Noah LSM

NOAH LSM

GFDL slab

LST > 330K

280<LST<310K

lateral bc problems nest v3r2 makes problems worse
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

hot spots controlled by
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
ad