Presentation on theme: "High Resolution Forecasts at NCEP: 2014 Efforts and Future Plans Geoff DiMego et al. Mesoscale Modeling Branch EMC/NCEP 301-683-3764"— Presentation transcript:
High Resolution Forecasts at NCEP: 2014 Efforts and Future Plans Geoff DiMego et al. Mesoscale Modeling Branch EMC/NCEP 301-683-3764 email@example.com WoF/HIW 2 April 2014
T O P I C S Sochi runs HiResWindow upgrade (May) Fire Wx runs NAM upgrade (June) View of the future
NMMB Model Forecasts for Sochi WMO’s Frost-2014 Matthew Pyle (high-res deterministic) Dusan Jovic (ensemble system setup) Steven Levine (processing XML obs) NCEP Central Operations 9/3/1 km 7 member 7km Ens.
Deterministic NMMB Run Configuration Triply nested 9/3/1km NMMB prediction system centered near Sochi Used together with COSMO-RU2, INCA, GEM, Harmonie Initialized off GFS, run 4 times per day, forecasts to hrs GRIB2 grids provided every 30 minutes BUFR/XML soundings at gaming venues 50 vertical levels with model top of 50 hPa Physics: MicrophysicsFerrier (w/ a little Aligo) ConvectionBetts Miller Janjic (very slight) PBL / turbulenceMellor Yamada Janjic Land SurfaceNOAH RadiationRRTM (SW & LW)
1 km deterministic run, total precip (mm) for 24 h ending 00Z 14 January model (obs)
1 km deterministic run, total precip (mm) for 24 h ending 12Z 13 March model (obs) Getting the radar obs for verification has become problematic …
HiResWindow Upgrade Overview May 2014 Timeframe 7 Current prodPlanned upgrade Model code versionARW & NMM WRFv3.1+ (early 2010 version) ARW WRFv3.5 NMMB August 2013 version Horizontal grid spacing 4 km WRF-NMM 5.15 km WRF-ARW 3.0 - 3.6 km NMMB 3.5 - 4.2 km WRF-ARW Vertical levels3540 (finer resolution in pbl) Initial conditionsNAM/GFSRAP/GFS (retain diversity wrt NAM nest) Microphysics (ARW)WSM3WSM6 (more sophisticated and appropriate for sub-10 km grid spacing) Microphysics (NMMB)FerrierFerrier/Aligo - special HiresW version (enhances convective storm performance) Radiation (NMMB)GFDLRRTM (more physically realistic parameterization; NAM also making this switch)
HiResWindow Upgrade Overview ~May 2014 Timeframe 8 8 18Z 06Z 00Z,12Z 06Z,18Z 00Z,12Z Domains and run times + Guam 00Z,12Z currentfuture 06Z,18Z 00Z,12Z 06Z,18Z 00Z,12Z + Guam 00Z,12Z All Runs: 4 km WRF-NMM 5.15 km WRF-ARW Alaska: 3 km NMMB 3.5 km WRF-ARW CONUS: 3.6 km NMMB 4.2 km WRF-ARW HI/Guam/PR : 3 km NMMB 3.8 km WRF-ARW
NMMB Warm Season Retrospective QPF Improved Bias 9 June 1-19, 2013 24 h precip verification over eastern CONUS Para CONUS NMMB Ops East CONUS WRF-NMM 8 bias=1 1 Equitable Threat Score Frequency Bias
E. CONUS QPF: Combined Feb+Jun 2013 Retro Cases + Dec/13-Feb/14 Real Time 00-24 hr + 12-36 hr + 24-48 hr Periods 10 Para NMMBOpnl WRF-NMM Equitable Threat Score Frequency Bias 1 2 Equitable Threat Score 1 2 Frequency Bias Opnl WRF-ARWPara WRF-ARW
Diffuse convective signals in opnl WRF-NMM are a perennial complaint of SPC NMMB Exhibits More Intense Convective Signals, More In Line With Observations 11 operational WRF-NMM parallel NMMB Model and observed 1 km AGL radar, 09Z 27 April 2011 obs para NMMB shows stronger, sharper line
ARW Too Exhibits More Intense Convective Signals, More In Line With Observation 12 para WRF-ARW better w/: linear convection in eastern KS capturing isolated nature of cells over KS/NE. operational WRF-ARW parallel WRF-ARW obs Modeled and observed 1 km AGL radar, 00Z 20 May 2011 Although seen in this case, diffuse convective signals NOT a consistent problem of WRF-ARW
13 Model and observed 1 km AGL radar, 00Z 22 December 2013 BLIND TEST: Which is WRF-ARW and Which is NMMB parallel ????? parallel ?????
14 Model and observed 1 km AGL radar, 00Z 22 December 2013 NMMB on the left and ARW on the right parallel NMMB parallel WRF-ARW
15 Model and observed 1 km AGL radar, 00Z 22 December 2013 More intense convective signals, more in line with observations operational WRF-NMM parallel NMMB Much sharper and more intense leading edge in para, position also better
16 Model and observed 1 km AGL radar, 00Z 22 December 2013 More intense convective signals, more in line with observations operational WRF-ARW parallel WRF-ARW Stronger radar signal (40+ dbZ, yellow/ orange/red) packed in a narrower band in para, more like obs.
Subject: Re: [Owles_participants] Beautiful vortex now! Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 10:16:18 -0500 From: David Zaff – NOAA Federal CC: FYI this is the 2nd time the 1.3 WRF [sic] picked up one of these features... Attached is from the 36hr forecast from yesterdays 12Z run - note the mesolow over the east end of the lake. It's about 3 hrs too slow, but it's there.
Subject: Fire weather [OWLes Runs of NAM FireWx] Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 08:19:53 -0700 From: Jim Steenburgh [University of Utah] To: Geoff DiMego From today's call: "Kudos to the 1.3 km fire weather nest which does a nice job of picking up on mesolows. This model has been doing phenomenal for this winter." – Dave Zaff, NWS Buffalo. Nice work!
1) http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/mmbpll/colorado_floods/ : some powerpoint I made for the Colorado floods from last September. The file "Total_Forecast_QPF_Colorado.ppt: has a couple of slides of the 36-h QPF from the ops fire weather nest. One of these runs has been saved at http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/mmbpll/colorado_floods/ http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/mmbpll/firewx.2013091106/ http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/mmbpll/firewx.2013091106/ 2) http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/mmbpll/moorefigs/ : Runs for the May 2013 Moore tornado (tests with and without microphysics species advection with the parallel NAM for the 4 km and 1.33 km nests) 3) Zubrick asked me to save some fire weather runs from the February 12-13 DC snow event, at http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/mmbpll/firewx_dcsnow_feb2 014/. I'm not sure what use they could be since I don't have a good feel for how well it did.http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/mmbpll/moorefigs/ http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/mmbpll/firewx_dcsnow_feb2 014/
NMMB Model Changes For NAM Upgrade ~June 2014 Timeframe 23 Replace legacy GFDL radiation with RRTM Modified Gravity Wave Drag/Mountain Blocking –More responsive to subgrid-scale terrain variability –Target : Improve synoptic performance without adversely impacting 10-m wind forecasts New version of Betts-Miller-Janjic convection –Moister convective profiles, convection triggers less –Target : Improve QPF bias from 12-km parent Ferrier-Aligo microphysics Modified treatment of snow cover/depth –Use forecast rime factor in land-surface physics –Target : Reduce snow depth in marginal winter conditions w/complex precipitation type Reduce roughness length for 5 vegetation types –Target : Improved 10-m wind in eastern CONUS
NMMB Model Upgrades Targeting NAM Nests 24 Current NAM nests –4 km CONUS, 6 km Alaska, 3 km Hawaii/Puerto Rico, “Placeable” FireWx 1.33 km (CONUS) or 1.5 km (Alaska) nest. –CONUS/AK/HI/PR nests used as input to NAM Downscaled (NDFD) grids –All have “reduced” convective triggering –All run to 60-h except 36-h for fire weather nest Nests in NAM upgrade; no change in resolution –All nests, except Alaska, will run with explicit convection –Measures to improve severe storm signatures: Extensive modifications to microphysics (Ferrier-Aligo) Reduce 2 nd order diffusion in nests (improves vertical storm structure in cases suggested by SPC) Separate microphysics species advection for all nests except 6 km Alaska
Seasonal QPF ETS (top)/Freq. Bias (bottom) : Ops (red) vs Pll (dashed blue) NAM 12 km over CONUS 25 Green Line : Bias=1.0 Fall 2013 9/1 – 11/30/13 Winter 2013 12/1/13-2/28/14 Bias increased in Fall
26 Ops NAM (solid), Parallel NAM(dashed line) 24h,48h,72h forecast ETS at 0.25”/day 12 mo. Running Mean 2007-2013 April 2012 DC Derecho rerun: 18z cycle 28 June, 2012 4 km CONUS nest4 km CONUS nest and 1.33 km Fire Wx nest1.33 km Fire Wx nest
CFSv3 Convective Allowing Data Assimilation – ARW Convective Allowing Data Assimilation – NMMB 3D URMA / RUA / AoR ARW HRRRE members CONUS and Alaska NMMB HRRRE members CONUS, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico NMMB Storm Scale Ensemble members within CONUS and/or Alaska GDAS GFS GEFS Hurricane NAMext S R E F S R E F S R E F S R E F RTOFS Projected End State of 2 petaflop WCOSS
T R A D E S P A C E DECISIONS MADE TO MAKE THINGS FIT 28
Start of WCOSS Phase1 Current End of WCOSS Phase 1 ~2015 End of WCOSS-era 2 petaflop Machine SREF continental scale WRF-ARW, WRF-NMM, NMMB WRF-ARW & NMMB 7 each = 21 members 16 km 13 each = 26 members ~15 km 13 each = 26 members ~15 km (parent) 35 levels 6 hourly to 84 hr 40-60 levels NARRE-TL run hourly to 18 hr 6 hourly to 84 hr 50-60 levels NARRE run hourly to 18 hr 6 hourly to 84 hr Product streams for all scales will need to be added, consolidated, repurposed & renamed. Products may have later delivery times. Convection-Allowing-Scale Irregular suite of guidance 3-6km [HiResWindows & NAM nests] ~6 hourly to 48/60 hr for CONUS, Alaska, HI, PR Single hrly 3 km HRRR +NAM nest Run to 15 hr for CONUS Upgrade irregular suite to ~3 km 6 hrly to 48 hr + 6 hrly NCASE-TL run to 36 hr for CONUS, Alaska, HI, PR HRRRE Multiple hrly 3 km run to 24hr for: And 6 hrly 5 km ext. to 48 hr for: CONUS, Alaska, Hi, PR Storm Scale Single placeable sub-nest 1.33-1.5 km Run 6 hourly to 36 hr Single placeable/movable sub-nest 1-1.5 km Run 6 hourly to 36 hr Multiple placeable/movable sub-nests ~1 km Run hourly to 18 hr Mesoscale Ensembles Replace Regional Deterministic Guidance 29 WILL BE A MAJOR CHALLENGE
3 km CONUS Run to 18 hr 30 12 km parent* Run to 18 hr 3 km PR-Hisp Run to 18 hr 3 km Hawaii Run to 18 hr 1 km FireWx Run to 18 hr 3 km Alaska Run to 18 hr 1 km FireWx Run to 18 hr Every NMMB-based member of the hourly HRRRE will have this makeup Every ARW-based member of the hourly HRRRE will have this makeup * Parent may be replaced by global or global ensembles if performance warrants
Every NMMB-based member of SREF (extensions of HRRRE members) will have this makeup Every ARW-based member of SREF (extensions of HRRRE members) will have this makeup 5 km CONUS Run from 18 to 48 hr 31 15 km parent* Run from 18 to 84 hr 5 km Hawaii Run from 18 to 48 hr 5 km PR-Hisp Run from 18 to 48 hr 5 km Alaska Run from 18 to 48 hr * Parent may be replaced by global ensembles if performance warrants
Besides the NAMRR, be looking for … 4D EnVar for the NCEP GFS Daryl Kleist NOAA/NWS/NCEP Environmental Modeling Center Global Climate and Weather Modeling Branch Data Assimilation Team With acknowledgements to John Derber (EMC), Dave Parrish (EMC), Jeff Whitaker (NOAA/ESRL), Kayo Ide (UMD), Ricardo Todling (NASA/GMAO), and many others http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/annualreviews/NCEPmodelReview-2013.html 32