1 / 48

SREPS Priority Project: final report

SREPS Priority Project: final report. C. Marsigli, A. Montani, T. Paccagnella ARPA-SIM - HydroMeteorological Service of Emilia-Romagna, Bologna, Italy. F. Gofa, P. Louka HNMS – Hellenic National Meteorological Service, Athens, Greece. This presentation is complemented by the posters:.

mooreryan
Download Presentation

SREPS Priority Project: final report

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. SREPS Priority Project:final report C. Marsigli, A. Montani, T. Paccagnella ARPA-SIM - HydroMeteorological Service of Emilia-Romagna, Bologna, Italy F. Gofa, P. Louka HNMS – Hellenic National Meteorological Service, Athens, Greece SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  2. This presentation is complemented by the posters: On the impact of varying the value of a set of COSMO model parameters for short-range predictions.C. Marsigli, A. Montani, and T. Paccagnella COSMO SREPS verification over GreeceP. louka, F. Gofa and T Charantonis SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  3. Outline • Brief recall about the COSMO-SREPS methodology & system set-up • Analysis of the results on MAP D-PHASE OP • Multi Model ICs/BCs vs different Physics Parameter perturbations • Relationship between error and spread • Conclusions SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  4. COSMO-SREPS methodology driving model perturbations (ics and bcs) - larger scale errors COSMO model perturbations - smaller scale errors • i.c. and b.c. perturbations -> INM multi-model multi-boundary ensemble (SREPS) • LAM perturbations -> physics parameter perturbations SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  5. INM SREPS 25 km COSMO SREPS 10 km COSMO DE EPS 2.8 km SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  6. IFS – ECMWF global COSMO at 25 km on IFS GME – DWD global COSMO at 25 km on GME by INM Spain UM – UKMO global COSMO at 25 km on UM GFS – NCEP global COSMO at 25 km on GFS SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  7. IFS – ECMWF global COSMO at 25 km on IFS System set-up P1: control (ope) P2: conv. scheme (KF) P3: tur_len=1000 P4: pat_len=10000 GME – DWD global COSMO at 25 km on GME 16 COSMO runs 10 km hor. res. 40 vertical levels by INM Spain UM – UKMO global COSMO at 25 km on UM GFS – NCEP global COSMO at 25 km on GFS 00 UTC JJA=53 SON=54 SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  8. run nr. parameter name parameter description range default used 1 ope ctrl convection scheme 2 T or KF T KF lconv maximal turbulent length scale 3 [100,1000] m 500 150 tur_len maximal turbulent length scale 4 [100,1000] m 500 1000 tur_len length scale of thermal surface patterns 5 [0,10000] m 500 10000 pat_len ratio of laminar scaling factors for heat over 6 [1,100] 20 1 rat_sea ratio of laminar scaling factors for heat over 7 [1,100] 20 60 rat_sea cloud water threshold for autoconversion 8 [0.,0.001] 0 0.001 qc0 9 crsmin Minimal stomata resistance [50,200] s/m 150 50 10 crsmin Minimal stomata resistance [50,200] s/m 150 200 ]0,c_lnd[ 11 c_soil Surface area index of the evaporating soil 1 0 12 c_soil Surface area index of the evaporating soil ]0,c_lnd[ 1 2 surface area density of the roughness elements over land 13 [1,10] 2 1 c_lnd surface area density of the roughness elements over land 14 [1,10] 2 10 c_lnd scaling factor of the laminar layer depth 15 [0.1,10] 1 0.1 rlam_heat scaling factor of the laminar layer depth 16 [0.1,10] 1 10 rlam_heat SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  9. testing period COSMO-SREPS was running regularly during the MAP D-PHASE DOP, at 00 UTC SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  10. ARPA-SIM HNMS Verification JJA 2007 SON 2007 Domain: Alpine region Data used: • COSMO data • Synop data • COSMO I7 analyses Analysis of: • Multi Model ICs/BCs vs different Physics Parameter perturbations • Z500/ t850/ T2m • Precipitation • Deterministic indeces • Probabilistic indeces • Relationship between error and spread Verification (06-12/2007) Domain: Greece • Data used: SYNOP data covering Greece • Parameters verified: • 2m temperature • Mean Sea Level Pressure (MSLP) • Precipitation • Deterministic indeces • Probabilistic indeces SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  11. ARPA-SIM HNMS Verification JJA 2007 SON 2007 Domain: Alpine region Data used: • COSMO data • Synop data • COSMO I7 analyses Analysis of: • Multi Model ICs/BCs vs different Physics Parameter perturbations • Z500/ t850/ T2m • Precipitation • Deterministic indeces • Probabilistic indeces • Relationship between error and spread Verification (06-12/2007) Domain: Greece • Data used: SYNOP data covering Greece • Parameters verified: • 2m temperature • Mean Sea Level Pressure (MSLP) • Precipitation • Deterministic indeces • Probabilistic indeces SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  12. Obs. Network used by ARPA-SIM JJA=53 runs SON=54 runs COSMO observations 218 synop stations on the Alpine area SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  13. Greek SYNOP stations SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  14. Some remarks…. Alpine Region and Greece ! Two regions very different but both complex! Different climatology few and less intense precip. events in Greece (this is why Dec has been included for Greece) summer 2007 very very hot in Greece SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  15. MultiModel ICs/BCs vs different Physics Parameter perturbations JJA 2007 - 50 days intra-group distance SON 2007 - 49 days Same model parameters Different driving model Z500 COSMO analysis Same driving model Different model parameters SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  16. MultiModel ICs/BCs vs different Physics Parameter perturbations Different driving models play the major role JJA 2007 - 50 days intra-group distance SON 2007 - 49 days Same model parameters Different driving model Z500 COSMO analysis Same driving model Different model parameters T850 COSMO analysis SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008 C

  17. MultiModel ICs/BCs vs different Physics Parameter perturbations intra-group distance JJA 2007 - 50 days SON 2007 - 49 days Same model parameters Different driving model 2mT Northern Italy SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  18. MultiModel ICs/BCs vs different Physics Parameter perturbations As regards 2mT no big impact of physics parameter perturbations over Greece SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  19. error vs spread Underdispersive 2m T - relationship between error and spread JJA07 SON07 SYNOP over D-PHASE area - Nearest grid point SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008 COSMO I7 analysis

  20. Reasonable even if Underdispersive spread/skill relationship +12h +24h +36h +48h +60h +72h SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008 2mT Alpine area (synop stations)

  21. SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  22. Improvement with the time range spread/skill relationship +12h +24h +36h +48h +60h +72h SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008 t850 Alpine area (COSMO analyses)

  23. ecmwf gme ncep ukmo IFS GME NCEP UKMO JJA07 Northern Italy 2m temperature - BIAS p4 The two regions are very different!! Greece All period SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  24. 2m Temperature by months Strong dependency on the season ! • Underestimation of summer temperatures • June 2007 was exceptionally warm with strong heat waves • The maximum temperature in Athens reached 46.2 ºC ! • October to December RMSE statistically acceptable. • Different pattern between summer and autumn/winter months SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  25. 2m Temperature by months Strong dependency on the season ! • Underestimation of summer temperatures • June 2007 was exceptionally warm with strong heat waves • The maximum temperature in Athens reached 46.2 ºC ! • October to December RMSE statistically acceptable. • Different pattern between summer and autumn/winter months SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  26. IFS GME NCEP UKMO 2mTemperature By Member • Underestimation of Temperature. • It seems that GME driven members have better skill than the others. SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  27. GME seems to give a better performance regarding t2m (near surface parameter) SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  28. JJA07 ecmwf gme ncep ukmo 2m temperature - BIAS p4 Synop observations over Alpine area Nearest grid point – lsm + altitude correction SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  29. JJA07 ecmwf gme ncep ukmo 2m temperature - MAE p4 Synop observations over Alpine area Nearest grid point – lsm + altitude correction SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  30. SON07 ecmwf gme ncep ukmo 2m temperature - BIAS p4 Synop observations over Alpine area Nearest grid point – lsm + altitude correction SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  31. SON07 ecmwf gme ncep ukmo 2m temperature - MAE p4 Synop observations over Alpine area Nearest grid point – lsm + altitude correction SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  32. IT + CH JJA07 noss 1400 700 400 150 50 Same perturbation +30h TP 24h – ave 0.5x0.5 Same driving models +54h Same driving models Same perturbation Big impact of multi model BCs!!!!!!! Looking at the right column it is evident that even with few members the skill does not decrease too much when the driving models are different. SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  33. IT + CH JJA07 noss 1400 700 400 150 50 Same perturbation +30h TP 24h – ave 0.5x0.5 Same driving models +54h Same driving models Same perturbation Big impact of multi model BCs!!!!!!! Looking at the right column it is evident that even with few members the skill does not decrease too much when the driving models are different. SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  34. IT + CH SON07 noss 800 500 300 100 50 Same perturbation TP 24h – ave 0.5x0.5 Same driving model +30h Same driving model Same perturbation +54h SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  35. Greece Same driving model Same Phys. Pert. KF better but!! SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  36. Greece IFS GME NCEP UKMO Tiedtke1 Kain-Fritsch1 Tiedtke2 Tiedtke3 Same driving model Same Phys. Pert. POD & FAR plots (6hr acc prec- Greece) SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  37. Deterministic scores – ave 0.5 x 0.5 IT 1mm/24h 5mm/24h 10mm/24h pert SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  38. IT IT + CH Same driving model Same perturbation SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008 JJA07 +30h

  39. IFS – ECMWF global Test of more parameter perturbations (same father) P1: control (ope) P2: conv. scheme (KF) P3: parameter 1 P4: parameter 2 P5: … On the impact of varying the value of a set of COSMO model parameters for short-range predictions. C. Marsigli, A. Montani, and T. Paccagnella SON 07 16 LM runs at 10 km SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  40. ctrl KF tur_len=150 tur_len=1000 pat_len=10000 rat_sea=1 rat_sea=60 qc0=0.001 crsmin=50 crsmin=200 c_soil=0 c_soil=2 c_lnd=1 c_lnd=10 rlam_heat=0.1 rlam_heat=10 T2m deterministic scores – npo IT SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  41. ctrl KF tur_len=150 tur_len=1000 pat_len=10000 rat_sea=1 rat_sea=60 qc0=0.001 crsmin=50 crsmin=200 c_soil=0 c_soil=2 c_lnd=1 c_lnd=10 rlam_heat=0.1 rlam_heat=10 T2m deterministic scores – npo IT SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  42. Conclusions • Alpine Region and Greece ! • Two regions very different but both complex! • Different climatology SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  43. Conclusions (Temperature and geopotential) • Perturbations -Multi Model ICs/BCs & Perturbations on Ph. Params: • the perturbing of model parameters produce a detectable spread among members but • the use of different driving models seems to dominate with respect to physics parameter perturbations as regards the contribution to the spread; these contributions are different in the two seasons (2mT) • As regards the performance of the different driving models there is a strong dependence on forecast range, season, verification area SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  44. Conclusions (Temperature and geopotential) • Perturbations -Multi Model ICs/BCs & Perturbations on Ph. Params: • the perturbing of model parameters produce a detectable spread among members but • the use of different driving models seems to dominate with respect to physics parameter perturbations as regards the contribution to the spread • As regards the performance of the different driving models there is a strong dependence on forecast range, season, verification area SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  45. Conclusions (Temperature and geopotential) • spread-skill relationship: a correlation between error and spread exists, but the system is under-dispersive -> a more comprehensive representation of model error will improve spread SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  46. Conclusions (precipitation) • the use of different driving models seems to dominate with respect to physics parameter perturbations as regards the contribution to the spread • It is not evident a systematic relationship between the quality of the precipitation forecast and ICs/BCs provided by a specific global model • Perturbations of the convective schemes are more important than the perturbations of the particular parameters for turbulent and length scales used • It seems that the members with Kain-Fritsch convective scheme have better resolution they overestimate precipitation more than Tiedtke scheme • Precipitation amount is generally overestimated SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  47. On-going activities and future plans • continue the analysis over the DOP MAP D-PHASE : • statistical analysis of the system • comparison with the other available mesoscale ensemble systems (D-PHASE activity) • verification carried out by HNMS • introduce the new parameter perturbations (after an analysis of their impact also in summer) • analyse the impact of adding soil perturbations consens SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

  48. Last FTEs of Chiara were used for this TASK ROMEO SREPS Priority Project COSMO General Meeting Cracov 2008

More Related