TCMT/DTC Activities - HFIP...• RRTMG scheme gives more cloud -radiative forcing (CRF) than GFDL...
31
Louisa Nance, Bill Kuo, and Barb Brown TCMT/DTC Activities
Transcript of TCMT/DTC Activities - HFIP...• RRTMG scheme gives more cloud -radiative forcing (CRF) than GFDL...
Louisa Nance, Bill Kuo, and Barb Brown
TCMT/DTC Activities
HFIP Goals
NWP model development and
support
HWRF: Developers & community support
Independent Testing & Evaluation
Extensive HWRF T&E/diagnostics: physics &
initialization
Community support:MET & MET-TC
Retro
DemoRDITT
Methods & tools for community
MET-TCdev Methods/tools
from retro/RDITT
Revision Series
TC-centric QPF evaluationRI/RW methodology
HFIP annual meeting
HFIP website
Data Service
Community interactions
DTC Visitor Program
Workshops
NHC diagnostic display
Tutorials
Joint NCAR & ESRL Effort NCAR/RAL
Joint funding from OAR, HFIP, Air Force, NSF, NCAR HFIP Funding
Bill Kuo
Tropical Cyclone activities at DTC
Bernardet et al., 2014. Community support and transition of research to operations for the Hurricane Weather Research and Forecast (HWRF) Model. BAMS early release (doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00093.1)
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Note that a lot of the work described here is not HFIP funded. For example, DTC Visitor Program. And most of the work has a large counterpart from DTC NOAA Base funds.
HWRF Developers and Community Support Developer support Code management plan/repository maintenance for all
components of end-to-end system Significant contribution to end-to-end system scripting upgrade –
more robust and increased efficiency for R2O process
Community user support Users guide and scientific documentation Tutorials (in-person, telecons and online) Helpdesk
4
Developmental Testbed Center Support www.dtcenter.org/HurrWRF/users
Yearly releases, code downloads, datasets, documentation, helpdesk
800 registered users
Operational and research capabilities (idealized simulation, alternate physics)
Stable, tested code
Current release: HWRF v3.6a (2014 operational)
2014: tutorials in College Park, MD and Taiwan
Developer support
5
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Yearly updated Users Guide and documentation
Recent projects supported by DTC code management R. Fovell (UCLA) made changes to HWRF PBL B. Thomas (URI) added modified Cd/Ch to HWRF sfc layer R. Yablonsky and B. Thomas have added revised MPIPOM-TC H. Winterbottom (ESRL) regional HWRF ensemble for DA
DTC does not undertake development, but the code management facilitates the inclusion of new code, making more options available for testing
Created a website for HWRF developers and conducted training in code management (www.dtcenter.org/HurrWRF/developers)
6
Scripts and automation HWRF has new modular scripts in object-oriented Python Reduction of script size by 60% from previous ksh Joint EMC/DTC effort (Sam Trahan & Tim Brown)
HWRF can now be automated with the GSD Rocoto Workflow Manager More robust for complex dependencies than previous kick_scripts Rocoto used in DTC for years now adopted by EMC
DTC made a substantial contribution toward HWRF scripts and automation
Rocoto training provided to all HWRF developers by DTC
Coming soon!! HRD’s basinscale capability in centralized scripts
7
Presenter
Presentation Notes
HWRF automation with the Rocoto Workflow Manager is NEW THIS YEAR. DTC supports the community in doing case studies through multi-season runs.
DTC: Making the Operational EnKF a Community DA System
Actions:• GSI Review Committee became DA
(GSI/ENKF) Review Committee• EMC/DTC merged GSI and EnKF
repositories• Multiple platform compilation & regression
tests • Simplified run scripts• Users’ Guide
NOAA EnKF• Primarily developed by NOAA/ESRL• Operational as part of the GSI-based EnVar
system for NCEP GFS• Ongoing research for HWRF and other
regional applications• Shares observation operators with GSI
Goal: Build a code management framework and work toward making EnKF a community DA system
Upcoming events: DTC is planning to host a complementary instruction session for EnKF in January, 2015 (please contact DTC if interested)
Testing and evaluation activities High resolution hurricane test (2009) Code unification (EMC, HRD, and community) testing (2011) Cumulus parameterization & air-sea interactions (2012) HWRF surface energy flux (2012) Thompson & RRTMG microphysics and radiation (2013) Evaluation of GFS forecast out to 8 days (2013) GSI-hybrid tests using alternative ensembles (2013) Vortex initialization vs DA (2013) Scale-aware fractional cloudiness & radiation test (2014) HWRF spin-down case diagnostics (2014)
10
HWRF Atmos-ocean fluxes changes - I Motivation Uhlhorn and Cione (HRD) retro runs show HWRF under-cools
relative to buoy composites
Hypothesis Yablonsky and Ginis (URI) and DTC formulated hypothesis that
under cooling was due to mostly artificial flux reduction in POM-TC Less momentum flux, less mixing, less cold water on surface Not needed as now HWRF has higher resol and revised Cd, Ck? Flux reduction was put in POM-TC in 2007 due to over cooling
Yablonsky, R., I. Ginis, B. Thomas, V. Tallapragada, D. Sheinin, and L. Bernardet, 2014. Description and analysis of the ocean component of NOAA’s operational HWRF model. J. of Atmos. Ocean Tech., early release, http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-14-00063.1
13
Presenter
Presentation Notes
This test is not the central theme of this paper, but the test is described in the paper.
HWRF Atmos-ocean fluxes changes - II
R2O• Innovation in operational 2013 HWRF• A great example of DTC-operations-
research collaboration
Changes implemented (25% flux reduction eliminated) Experiment configuration DTC ran retrospectively all 2012 AL and EP storms Case study and diagnostics with HRD participation
Results Intensity bias in AL eliminated
Control AL = positive intensity bias
DTC = near zero bias
14
Moist Physics/Radiation HWRF tests - I
T/RRTMGF/GFDL (control)
North Atlantic Eastern North Pacific
HWRF operations uses GFDL radiation and Ferrier microphysics. • EMC tested RRTMG radiation and DTC tested RRTMG/Thompson combo
Puzzling results… Thompson/RRTMG degraded tracks in EP. Why????
Collaboration with Rob Fovell, 2014 DTC Visitor• RRTMG scheme gives more cloud-radiative forcing (CRF) than GFDL
• Makes storms larger, therefore more beta-drift, affecting track• With RRTMG (CRF), need changes in PBL eddy mixing to contain storm size• Changes implemented and being tested at EMC for HWRF 2015 15
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Motivation for testing RRTMG and Thompson is that they are more sophisticated schemes, which should better represent physical processes. DTC tested the two together because we implemented a coupling between the two schemes: now RRTMG gets the number concentration of hydrometeors from the Thompson scheme, instead of making internal assumptions. Paper by Bu et al. shows that more CRF makes larger storms
DTC diagnostics of RRMTG RRTMG has too much shortwave radiation at sfc because RRTMG is transparent to SAS clouds(unlike GFDL radiation) Certain cloud systems (e.g., E Pac stratus) not explicitly captured
DTC scale-aware partial cloudiness innovation
If RH reaches a (grid-depend) threshold (may need tuning) , make radiation scheme “see” fractional cloudiness (Mocko and Cotton, 1995)
Implemented for GFDL radiation (left) and RRTMG, better SW at sfc
RRTMG required algorithm to create liquid/ice water content of fractional clouds – also will require adjustments16
Presenter
Presentation Notes
It is pretty typical that models cannot represent the E Pac stratus deck. It requires sufficient horizontal and vertical resolution, plus good physics, dynamics. HWRF is not alone in missing that. Top left: visible satellite observation (clouds show in white) Top center and right: HWRF forecasts by DTC with Fer+GFDL and Fer+RRTMG show lack of stratus clouds and extreme lack of SW attenuation when RRTMG is employed . This is SW radiation at ground, so clouds show in gray) Parent domain shows 1-h radiation accumulation. Nest domain show instantaneous. Therefore, so not expect continuity between parent and nest. Two different subgrid scale cloudiness schemes (Mocko and Cotton 1995) were implemented for testing in HWRF: Kvamsto (1990) and Sundqvist et al (1989). Sundqvist shown here. With these schemes, the GFDL radiation experiences explicit clouds even when RH < 100%. These model changes significantly improve the amount of SW radiation reaching the surface. These two experiments were created without passing convective clouds to the GFDL parameterization for a comparison against the right bottom figure. Interestingly, the subgrid cloudiness scheme act to force additional explicit cloud formation in HWRF!!! In other words, creating fake clouds in RRTMG makes explicit clouds actually form!!! The interaction with the radiation and the land surface is likely representing the boundary layer conditions more realistically and allowing the PBL to remain capped and moist and create clouds that should exist. Whereas letting full radiation thru, must be creating a worsening positive feedback loop to transport moisture, perhaps heat, out of the PBL making likelihood to create clouds even lower. By using this partial cloudiness scheme, it is likely that the connection between SAS and radiation is not as necessary. I was hoping to pass this code to EMC for testing this week, but now I feel we still need to do more in house testing before this goes out the door.
DTC 2013 Tests: GSI-hybrid Tests Using Alternative Ensembles
Column precipitable water analysis850hPa geopotential height analysis increments
2013 HWRF Operational Configuration: using GFS ensemble
Alternative configuration: using HWRF ensemble
17
Presenter
Presentation Notes
HWRF ensemble: Generated by DTC using EMC 2013 code & configuration (provided by Zhan Zhang) -- Model physics perturbation with stochastic convective trigger -- 20 member GEFS (Ensemble Transform with Rescaling (ETR) based) for IC/BC perturbations RGNL analyses provides better flow-dependent and finer scale structures. Similar results were found for other analysis times and fields.
DTC Visitor ProgramThe DTC Visitor Program provides funding for the research community to work in improvement of operational models Jonathan Vigh (NCAR)
Development of an HWRF diagnostics module to evaluate intensity and structure using synthetic flight paths through tropical cyclones
Tom Galarneau (NCAR)Diagnosing tropical cyclone motion forecast errors in HWRFDiagnosing Tropical Cyclone Motion Forecast Errors in the 2014 HWRF Retrospective Test (H214)
Robert Fovell (UCLA)Improving HWRF track and intensity forecasts via model physics evaluation and tuning
Shaowu Bao (SCCU)Evaluation of two HWRF microphysics/radiation configurations with remote-sensing data
www.dtcenter.org/visitorsCurrently open to proposals
20
Diagnosing TC Motion Errors in H213Courtesy of Tom Galarneau
Purpose:Apply TC motion error diagnostic equation from Galarneau and Davis (2013; MWR) to short-range (24-h) H213 forecasts
Equation: TC motion error = environment wind error + near-storm vorticity asymmetry error + vertical depth errorResults:• Environment wind errors are dominant contributor to
motion errors on average• Westward-moving TCs are too slow due to subtropical
ridge that does not extend far enough west• Northwestward-moving TCs are sensitive to vorticity
asymmetries near the TC vortex on western flank of subtropical ridge
• Northeastward-moving TCs are slow due to weaker and more zonal midlatitude steering flow/waveguide
Climatology of H213 TC motion errorsfor NE-moving TCs
21
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Example of results from a DTC Visitor project
Barbara Brown
NCAR Tropical Cyclone Modeling Team
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Note that a lot of the work described here is not HFIP funded. For example, DTC Visitor Program. And most of the work has a large counterpart from DTC NOAA Base funds.
HFIP Goals
NWP model development and
support
HWRF: Developers & community support
Independent Testing & Evaluation
Extensive HWRF T&E/diagnostics: physics &
initialization
Community support:MET & MET-TC
Retro
DemoRDITT
Methods & tools for community
MET-TCdev Methods/tools
from retro/RDITT
Revision Series
TC-centric QPF evaluationRI/RW methodology
HFIP annual meeting
HFIP website
Data Service
Community interactions
DTC Visitor Program
Workshops
NHC diagnostic display
Tutorials
Community interactions HFIP website Meeting and workshop support
Examples HFIP Annual Meetings 2014 (2), 2011,
2010 , 2009. HFIP Regional Modeling Team Workshop
- September 17-18, 2012 HFIP Physics Workshop - August 9-11,
2011 HFIP Observations Workshop - May 11-
12, 2011 JCSDA-HFIP Workshop on Satellite Data
Assimilation for Hurricane Forecasting -December 2010
HFIP-THORPEX Ensemble Product Development Workshop - April 2010
First Hurricane Diagnostics and Verification Workshop - May 2009
24
https://verif.rap.ucar.edu/repository
TCMT HFIP Data Service
Goal: Provide model forecast data for enhanced diagnostic studies
Available data include: Tier 1 (Streams 1.5 and 2) and
diagnostic files 2011-2014 demonstration periods 2010-2014 retrospective periods
Password protected interface: Username & password: hfipteam
Future Enhancements: Tier 2 gridded products Interactive graphical user interface
(GUI) for improved accessibility, quick look graphics, download capabilities
HFIP Demo Real-time Display System
HFIP Demo website: Model descriptions ATCF forecast products Real-time forecast displays Near real-time verification results Historic results from past Demos
http://www.ral.ucar.edu/projects/hfip/ 26
New Diagnostic Display System Development of
interactive display system for NHC
Development coordinated with NHC (D. Zelinsky)
Display based on Open Street Map Open source Platform independent
Drill-down capability
27
MET and MET-TC MET: Community package
developed and supported by the DTC Traditional and new verification
approaches MET-TC: Flexible community
package for evaluation of TC predictions New RI/RW capability
MET and MET-TC are fully supported with tutorials, help-desk
TCMT contributes methods to both packages
MET applied to Vx of large-scale fields
MET-TC applied to Vx of track forecasts
http://www.dtcenter.org/met/users/
Examples: Retrospective evaluations Demonstration evaluations Extensive recon data impact study
(RDITT) Development of new
methods and displays to meet needs for specific information to answer particular questions
Focus on Distributions of errors Statistical significance Practical significance
Independent testing and evaluation
29
Example: RDITT report
Frequency of superior performance: an
alternative way of comparing performance
Box plots of errors allow examination of the whole distribution, including outliers / extremes
30
SD, TD, SS, TSSample Size:
81 - 22
HU - CAT 1, 2
Sample Size: 76 - 6
Major HUSample Size:
32 - 2
RDITT Example summary tables“Score card”
New verification tools and methods: Revision Series
Some ways to quantify “randomness”. Statistical tests Area of revisions. Average path length of revisions. Number of ‘crossovers’.
Work primarily done by Tressa Fowler and John Halley Gotway
Model AModel B
Official forecasts
Consistent adjustments
Inconsistentadjustments
32
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Hurricane Gabrielle
Revision series summaries: Examples
Area of revision path Revision path length
33
What about intensity revisions?
34
TCMT summary TCMT
Provides independent, consistent, testing / evaluation of experimental models Develops new verification methods and metrics (limited by required focus on Track
and Intensity) Provides extensive community services and support through web pages, data
services, display development, testing and evaluation of experimental and operational systems
Methods developed for Demo and Retro evaluations are equally useful for other types of evaluationsExamples: Evaluate model improvements with time Compare alternative modeling systems (e.g., impacts of parameterizations,
observations New methods are being applied around the world and will have a
life of their own – HFIP has had an impact in moving the TC verification field forward Methods also contribute to MET and MET-TC
35
Conclusion: Benefits of independent testing and evaluation Consistent methods and datasets Comparable results between systems Homogeneous evaluations
Rigorous evaluation standards and large samples Application of practical and statistical significance concepts
Clear assessment of trade-offs and benefits Enhanced credibility
36
