SUBMITTED BY: Tanya Tsarabaeva Tanya Alexeeva Sabina Mamedova.
Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In...
-
Upload
william-dickerson -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
0
Transcript of Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In...
![Page 1: Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052701/56649dea5503460f94ae4fb8/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam
NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research Laboratory)
6th Annual CMAS Conference Chapel Hill, NC2 October 2007
A Nudging Strategy for Mesobeta-Scale WRF Simulations Suitable
for Retrospective Air Quality Modeling:Preliminary Results
![Page 2: Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052701/56649dea5503460f94ae4fb8/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
What is “Nudging”?
• Formally, “Newtonian relaxation”• Method of dynamically relaxing model toward observed state
Includes non-physical forcing term in prognostic equations Uses difference between model and best estimate of observation in
space and time• Used throughout retrospective simulations (i.e., a “dynamic
analysis”) to keep meteorology as close to observed as possible Extends run length of “usable” meteorology for AQ modeling
• One method of FDDA in MM5 and WRF• Typically applied to:
Horizontal wind components (U and V) Temperature (T) above the PBL Water vapor mixing ratio (Q) above the PBL
![Page 3: Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052701/56649dea5503460f94ae4fb8/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Motivation
• Current nudging strategies for MM5 and WRF typically based on four papers: Stauffer and Seaman, MWR, 1990
• Initial MM5 nudging paper; both analysis and obs nudging Stauffer, Seaman, and Binkowski, MWR, 1991
• Nudging in PBL…OK for wind, restrict for mass and moisture Stauffer and Seaman, JAM, 1994
• Multiscale approach to phase from analysis to obs nudgingas horizontal grid spacing decreases
Seaman, Stauffer, and Lario-Gibbs, JAM, 1995• Define nudging coefficients for multiscale approach• Use 36/12/4 km nesting for air quality modeling
![Page 4: Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052701/56649dea5503460f94ae4fb8/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Motivation (continued)
• Seaman et al. (1995) used input analyses derived from 12-h, 2.5-deg 3D analyses and 3-h, 2.5-deg surface analyses Analysis to observations done in MM5 with “RAWINS” toward
conventional surface observations and rawinsondes
• Current archived analyses are often as fine as 3-h, 12-km (e.g., NAM218) for 3D and surface Analyses include combination of conventional and remote-
sensed observations Can use “RAWINS” with MM5; only 3DVar in WRF (for now)
• Is nudging strategy (coefficients and multiscale approach) in Seaman et al. (1995) too restrictive given today’s data availability?
![Page 5: Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052701/56649dea5503460f94ae4fb8/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
WRFv2.2+ Setup
Input Analyses NARR (32-km) grid, 3-hourly
Explicit Microphysics WSM 6
Convective Parameterization Kain-Fritsch
PBL Model ACM2*
Land-Surface Model Pleim-Xiu LSM*
Radiation RRTM LW & Dudhia SW
* Not in released code; to be included in WRFv3
![Page 6: Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052701/56649dea5503460f94ae4fb8/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
WRF Domain12 km, 290 x 251 x 34 layers
![Page 7: Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052701/56649dea5503460f94ae4fb8/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Sensitivity Overview
Low: Typical nudging coefficients for 12-km 1.0 x 10-4 s-1 for U,V,T; 1.0 x 10-5 s-1 for Q From Seaman et al., JAM, 1995 for analysis nudging with obs nudging @12-km
Std: Typical nudging coefficients for 36-km 3.0 x 10-4 s-1 for U,V,T,Q ~1-h e-folding time for physical processes
High: Nudging coefficients with half e-folding time of Std 5.5 x 10-4 s-1 for U,V,T,Q ~0.5-h e-folding time for physical processes
Std+PBL: Same as Std, but with nudging toward temperature and moisture in PBL
High+PBL: Same as High, but with nudging toward temperature and moisture in PBL
12 UTC 4 Aug – 00 UTC 25 Aug 2006
Four 5.5-day overlapping run segments
![Page 8: Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052701/56649dea5503460f94ae4fb8/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Preliminary Analysis
• Show mean error (“bias”) from 20-day runs Keep it simple, for now MAE and RMSE do not change “bottom line”
• Verify against ~700 NWS surface stations Includes T, “Q”, wind, surface pressure Included in analyses (i.e., nudged) Includes urban, suburban, and rural sites
• Verify against 67 CASTNET observations Includes T, RH, wind, SW radiation Independent of analyses (i.e., not considered in nudging) Largely rural sites
![Page 9: Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052701/56649dea5503460f94ae4fb8/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
2-m Temperature vs. CASTNETDaily By Day in WRF Run
![Page 10: Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052701/56649dea5503460f94ae4fb8/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
2-m Dew Point vs. CASTNETDaily By Day in WRF Run
![Page 11: Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052701/56649dea5503460f94ae4fb8/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
SW Radiation vs. CASTNETDaily By Day in WRF Run
![Page 12: Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052701/56649dea5503460f94ae4fb8/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
10-m Wind Speed vs. CASTNETDaily By Day in WRF Run
![Page 13: Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052701/56649dea5503460f94ae4fb8/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Diurnal 2-m TemperatureNudged Not Nudged
![Page 14: Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052701/56649dea5503460f94ae4fb8/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Diurnal 2-m Mixing Ratio
2-m Q for CASTNET not included because CASTNET does not report surface pressure, which is required to convert RH to Q.
Nudged Not Nudged
![Page 15: Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052701/56649dea5503460f94ae4fb8/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Diurnal 10-m Wind SpeedNudged Not Nudged
![Page 16: Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052701/56649dea5503460f94ae4fb8/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Diurnal 10-m Wind DirectionNudged Not Nudged
![Page 17: Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052701/56649dea5503460f94ae4fb8/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Summary
• Preliminary results suggest: Nudging coefficients for wind, temperature, and moisture can be
increased over Seaman et al. (1995), i.e., “Low” values, *if not obs nudging*
Stronger nudging, i.e., “High” values, reduces bias in 10-m wind speed, but has little impact on 2-m temperature and dew point.
Nudging toward moisture may still need to be weaker than towards temperature and wind.
Nudging toward temperature and moisture in the PBL increases the bias for 2-m temperature, 2-m dew point, 10-m wind speed, and shortwave radiation at CASTNET sites (not nudged).
As expected, statistics vs. NWS observations are better than statistics vs. CASTNET sites, which are independent of the analyses.
Model behavior with and without nudging in the PBL is vastly different during stable (nighttime) regime than convective (daytime) regime
![Page 18: Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052701/56649dea5503460f94ae4fb8/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Next Steps
• Further evaluation with current runs Evaluation against upper-air observations,
PBL heights, precipitation, etc. Additional methods
• Repeat sensitivities with NAM-218 (12-km) input• Vary nudging strength “by variable”• Use observation nudging with analysis nudging• Test with analysis (e.g., RAWINS) in WRF
![Page 19: Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052701/56649dea5503460f94ae4fb8/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
8/4/
2006
8/5/
2006
8/6/
2006
8/7/
2006
8/8/
2006
8/9/
2006
8/10
/200
6
8/11
/200
6
8/12
/200
6
8/13
/200
6
8/14
/200
6
8/15
/200
6
8/16
/200
6
8/17
/200
6
8/18
/200
6
8/19
/200
6
8/20
/200
6
8/21
/200
6
8/22
/200
6
8/23
/200
6
8/24
/200
6
8/25
/200
6
wrf_ACMPX_12km (RMSE)
NARR_StdCoeffs (RMSE)wrf_ACMPX_12km (MAE)
NARR_StdCoeffs (MAE)
Looking Ahead…2-m Temp. using NARR and NAM218 vs. CASTNET
Uses 12-km NAM218 analyses; initialized 00 UTC 20 Jul
Uses 32-km NARR analyses; initialized 12 UTC 4 Aug
MA
E a
nd R
MS
E [
K]
![Page 20: Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.](https://reader034.fdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022052701/56649dea5503460f94ae4fb8/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Acknowledgments
• Jonathan Pleim (NOAA)
• Lara Reynolds (CSC)
Disclaimer: The research presented here was performed under the Memorandum of Understanding between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Commerce's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and under agreement number DW13921548. This work constitutes a contribution to the NOAA Air Quality Program. Although it has been reviewed by EPA and NOAA and approved for publication, it does not necessarily reflect their policies or views.