1 / 34

INSTYTUT METEOROLOGII I GOSPODARKI WODNEJ

INSTYTUT METEOROLOGII I GOSPODARKI WODNEJ. INSTITUTE OF METEOROLOGY AND WATER MANAGEMENT. TITLE : IMPLEMENTATION OF MOSAIC APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM. AUTHORS: Grzegorz Duniec, Andrzej Mazur. DATE: 05.09.2010. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM. Studies.

derex
Download Presentation

INSTYTUT METEOROLOGII I GOSPODARKI WODNEJ

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. INSTYTUT METEOROLOGII I GOSPODARKI WODNEJ INSTITUTE OF METEOROLOGY AND WATER MANAGEMENT TITLE : IMPLEMENTATION OF MOSAIC APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM AUTHORS: Grzegorz Duniec, Andrzej Mazur DATE: 05.09.2010

  2. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM Studies • Validation of SUBS – done for ver. 4.8 of COSMO MODEL • Estimation of the influence of SUBS on model results for different parameterization of physics and numerics

  3. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM Numerical schemes Tests setup • Leapfrog: 3–timelevel HE-VI (Horizontally Explicit – Vertically Implicit) Integration • Leapfrog: 3–timelevel semi–implicit • Runge – Kutta: 2–timelevel HE–VI Integration with irunge_kutta=1 (3-order standard scheme) • Runge – Kutta: 2–timelevel HE–VI Integration with irunge_kutta=2 (variant scheme with Total Variation Diminishing) Convection schemes • Kain – Fritsch (1992) • Tiedtke (1989) • Modified Tiedtke scheme for shallow convection

  4. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM Tests setup (cntd.) Domain (113x101 grid points, 40 levels, resolution 7km, forecast time horizon 3 hours)

  5. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM Explanation of abbreviations • Orig – original COSMO ver. 4.8 • Ctrl – control (subs-modified code of COSMO ver 4.8 with no account for subs: nsubs=0) • Twins – subs modified COSMO ver. 4.8 with nsubs=4, low resolution input data only (nsubs=4, identical subpixels) • Subs – modified COSMO ver. 4.8, nsubs=4, high–resolution data included

  6. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM Resulting fields (selected) • T2m – air temperature at 2m above groud level • TD – dew point temperature • TSO – soil temperature at 0 cm down (surface temp.) • U10m – zonal wind component, 10m above ground level • V10m – meridional wind component, 10m above ground level • Water+ice content of soil layers 1cm down

  7. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM Dates chosen for tests • Six different synoptic situations chosen for tests (domain marked with black frame in next six slides) • 2009.II.01 (00UTC) low temperature, ground was frozen solid • 2009.IV.22 (12 UTC) sunny/fair day • 2009.X.16 (00 UTC, 06 UTC) ground covered with snow • 2009.XI.04 (12 UTC) windy day with intensive precipitation • 2009.XI.21 (06 UTC) dense fog • and data for previous case with correct formula for derivation of mean qvs to mimic flux averaging • 2006.VIII.01 (12 UTC)

  8. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM Synoptic situation – 01 II 2009 low temperature, ground was frozen solid

  9. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM Synoptic situation – 22 IV 2009 sunny/fair day

  10. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM Synoptic situation – 16 X 2009 ground covered with snow

  11. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM Synoptic sytuation – 04 XI 2009 windy day with intensive precipitation

  12. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM Synoptic sytuation – 21 XI 2009 dense fog

  13. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM Methodology Comparison (for all combinations of convection and numerical schemes) • orig vs ctrl • orig vs subs • orig vs twins • twins vs ctrl • subs vs ctrl • twins vs subs Statistics (for all combinations of convection and numerical schemes) • correlation • standard deviation • covariance • variance

  14. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM The ”best” configurations and results The „best” configuration (concerning correlation coefficient) was obtained forall combinations – results for water in soil (WSO) for 01 II, 22 IV, 16 X, 21 XI (with and without shallow convection).

  15. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM The ”best” configurations and results One of the „best” configuration (concerning correlation coefficient) was obtained forzonal wind component (U10) for 22 IV 2009 (without shallow convection).

  16. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM The ”best” configurations and results The „best” configuration (concerning correlation coefficient) was obtained fordew point temperature (TD) for 01 II 2009 (with shallow convection).

  17. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM The ”worst” configurations and results One of the „worst” configuration (concerning correlation coefficient) was obtained fororig vs. twins, ctrl vs. twins, subs vs. twins for air temperature for 04 XI 2009:

  18. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM The ”worst” configurations and results One of the „worst” configuration (concerning correlation coefficient) was obtained for orig vs. twins, ctrl vs. twins, subs vs. twins for air temperature for 04 XI 2009:

  19. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM The ”worst” configurations and results The „worst” configuration (concerning correlation coefficient) was obtained forleapsemi – orig, ctrl and subs vs. twins – results for soil temperature for 16 X 2009:

  20. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM Two bugs in cosmo-subs detected (Corrected by Annika Schomburg) 1. The major bug is in the computation of the effective qv_s (specific humidity at the surface): wrong formula correct formula 2. The second error is not important for the model run itself, only for some of the output variables. In the module near_surface.f90 there is a loop over ns=1:nsubs1, which, by mistake, includes someof the output variables like rain_con, which are summed up too many times due to this loop. To correct this bug one can just exchange the single large loop by smaller loops only for those variables where necessary.

  21. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM Results with wrong formula for 1 VIII 2006 (example)

  22. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM Results with correct formula for 1 VIII 2006(example)

  23. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM The ”worst” configurations and results – 16 X 2009 Soil temperature at 0 cm down (surface temp.) DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ORIG AND TWINS (K) CORRELATION: 0,85

  24. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM The ”worst” configurations and results – 16 X 2009 Soil temperature at 0 cm down (surface temp.) DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SUBS AND TWINS (K) CORRELATION: 0,85

  25. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM The ”worst” configurations and results – 16 X 2009 Soil temperature at 0 cm down (surface temp.) DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CTRL AND TWINS (K) CORRELATION: 0,85

  26. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM The ”best” configurations and results – 22 IV 2009 Zonal component wind (U10) without shallow convection DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SUBS AND TWINS (K) CORRELATION: 0,991

  27. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM The ”best” configurations and results – 01 II 2009 Dew point temperature (TD) (with shallow convection) DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SUBS AND TWINS (K) CORRELATION: 0,998

  28. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM The ”worst” configurations and results – 04 XI 2009 Air temperature at 2 m (T2M) (without shallow convection) DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SUBS AND TWINS (K) CORRELATION: 0,026

  29. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM The ”worst” configurations and results – 04 XI 2009 Air temperature at 2 m (T2M) (with shallow convection) DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CTRL AND TWINS (K) CORRELATION: 0,020

  30. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM Results for 1 VIII 2006 with wrong formula Zonal wind component (U10) DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SUBS AND TWINS (K) CORRELATION: 0,21

  31. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM Results for 1 VIII 2006 with correct formula Zonal wind component (U10) DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SUBS AND TWINS (K) CORRELATION: 0,995

  32. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM Summary • Extended tests of MOSAIC4COSMO implentation was performed. • Miscellaneous combinations of various numerical schemes and physical parameterizations were tested for six different synoptic situations • Except for November 4th, 2009, correlation between results for selected meteorological fields is quite good (from 0.85 to ~1) • Numerical errors (esp. in data preparation) seem to be a reason for poor correlation for November 4th, 2009

  33. IMPLEMENTATION OF TILE APPROACH IN COSMO AT IMWM Plans • We want to test two new data sets with very interesting meteorological situation(s): • 15 VIII 2008 –very strong thunderstorm, • May 2010 –very intensive precipitation. • 2. We intend to check an influence of subs and twins on: • moisture flux, • heat flux, • microstructure of Stratus- and Stratocumulus clouds (e.g. liquid water content or ice content, esp. in winter), • cloud cover with Stratus- or Stratocumulus clouds, • precipitation intensity, • height of cloud base for Stratus- and Stratocumulus clouds, • microstructure of fog layers, • structure of boundary layer… • 3. If there will be an interest to – maybe to go for tile approach…

  34. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION AUTHORS: Grzegorz Duniec 01-673 Warszawa, ul.: Podleśna 61 phone: +48 (22) 56 94 131 grzegorz.duniec@imgw.pl Andrzej Mazur 01-673 Warszawa, ul.: Podleśna 61 phone: +48 (22) 56 94 134 andrzej.mazur@imgw.pl

More Related