1 / 17

Evaluation of AROME Model in Western Mediterranean during SOP1 of HyMeX Project

Statistical evaluation of AROME model performance in SOP1 using surface and altitude data, QPF analysis, and comparison with RS data, showcasing similar quality and slight biases in temperature bias.

judith
Download Presentation

Evaluation of AROME Model in Western Mediterranean during SOP1 of HyMeX Project

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. EVALUATION DU MODELE AROME_WMEDPOUR LA SOP1 d’HyMeX (5 Sept. – 6 Nov. 2012) N. Fourrié, M.Nuret, E. Bresson

  2. Deliverable D4.A5 IODA-MED • Outil = évaluation statistique de DPREVI/COMPAS (monitoring opérationnel) • Données de surface (SYNOP+RADOME) • Données d’altitude (RS) • QPF sur cumuls 6h et 24h • ISP (Images Sat. Prévues, IR & WV) • Le cas de la POI8 28/09/2012

  3. COMPARAISON AUX STATIONS DE SURFACE(SYNOP+RADOME) --- bias __ eqm MSLP VENT_DD VENT_FF AROME vs AROME_WMED

  4. COMPARAISON AUX STATIONS DE SURFACE(SYNOP+RADOME)AROME vs AROME_WMED HU2M T2M RR-6 NEBUL

  5. COMPARAISON AUX STATIONS DE SURFACE(SYNOP+RADOME)AROME vs AROME_WMED • AROME et AROME_WMED de qualité similaire • biais froid (~ - 0°2C) en t2m pour AROME_WMED?

  6. --- bias __ eqm COMPARAISON AUX RS ECH+00 ECH+12 ECH+24 GEOPOTENTIEL AROME vs AROME_WMED

  7. --- bias __ eqm COMPARAISON AUX RS ECH+00 ECH+12 ECH+24 TEMPERATURE AROME vs AROME_WMED

  8. --- bias __ eqm COMPARAISON AUX RS ECH+00 ECH+12 ECH+24 HUMIDITE AROME vs AROME_WMED

  9. --- bias __ eqm COMPARAISON AUX RS VENT AROME vs AROME_WMED ECH+00 ECH+12 ECH+24 DD FF

  10. COMPARAISON AUX RS • AROME et AROME_WMED de qualité similaire • petit avantage AROME_WMED en vent et en humidité?

  11. QPF Cumul 24h • fbias AROME_WMED > fbias AROME (24h et 6h) Cumul 6h • cycle diurne du fbias AROME vs AROME_WMED

  12. QPF (24hr) POD AROME_WMED meilleur, FAR ~ identiques (pour cumuls 24h) BSS_NO seuil = 0.2mm/24hr seuil = 5mm/24hr seuil = 20mm/24hr

  13. QPF(6hr) POD supérieur pour AROME_WMED (cumuls 6hr), FAR constant

  14. ISP POD/FAR AROME_WMED meilleur (seuil 240°K) BSS_NO (approche probabiliste): avantage AROME_WMED

  15. POI 8: 28/09/2012 P48-P24 Bonne prévision de precipitations, meme a 48h d’échéance (> 200mm en 24hr observés) P24-P00

  16. POI 8: 28/09/2012 21UTC 21UTC (P+21) La bande convective est un peu en retard dans AROME_WMED

  17. Conclusions • AROME_WMED et AROME (France) de qualité comparable • pour la SOP1 • léger biais froid en T2m pour AROME_WMED • biais >0 (fbias) en RR6 et RR24 pour AROME_WMED • mais meilleurs scores en QPF (cumuls 24 et 6hr) • et ISP (meilleure détection sans augmenter les fausses alarmes). • phasage spatio-temporel à améliorer (IOP8 par ex.) localement, • assimilation des radar espagnols …

More Related