This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
1
Les règles générales
WWOSC 2014
16-21 August, Montréal, Canada
Didier Ricard1, Sylvie Malardel2, Yann Seity1
Julien Léger1, Mirela Pietrisi
1. CNRM-GAME, METEO-France, Toulouse
2. ECMWF, Reading
Sensitivity of short-range forecasting with the AROME model to a modified semi-Lagrangian scheme and high resolution.
2
AROME (Seity et al., 2011): operational fine-scale NWP model used at METEO-France since 2008 In 2008: 2.5-km horizontal resolution, 41 vertical levels
Domain 1500 km * 1300 km (600*512 points)
Current version: 2.5-km horizontal resolution, 60 vertical levels
Domain 1875 km * 1800 km (750*720 pts)
In 2015: 1.3-km horizontal resolution, 90 vertical levels
Domain 1996 km * 1872 km (1536*1440 pts)
1 – Introduction
Next version: 1.3 km 90
3
Dynamics package:• Nonhydrostatic model based on a fully compressible system• Spectral model, A grid • Semi-Lagrangian scheme
Tri-linear interpolation for computation of trajectories (origin point) quasi-cubic interpolations for calculating advected variables at origin point
• Time scheme 2 Time Levels semi-implicit scheme with SETTLS option (operational version) ICI (iterative centred implicit) scheme (Predictor-corrector scheme)
• 4th order spectral diffusion and gridpoint SLHD on hydrometeors
Characteristics of the AROME model
Physics package:• one moment mixed-phase microphysical scheme: 5 hydrometeor classes • 1D Turbulence scheme: pronostic TKE equation with a diagnostic mixing length (Bougeault
Evaluation of the AROME model at convective scale for preparing the next operational version
Test of a modified SL scheme at 2.5-km horizontal grid spacing during several periods (in particular between 15 July - 15 September 2013)
Comparison between AROME forecasts at 1.3-km and 2.5-km horizontal resolutions during June-November 2012 for days with thunderstorms
1 – Introduction
5
Motivation
Evaluation on a 2-month period (15 July 2013 - 15 September 2013) including deep convection with important effects of divergence
• Bias for precipitation: too much precipitation
sometimes too strong outflows under convective cells (with a strong diffusion)• Convection:
small-scale processes dominated by divergent modes strong interaction between physics and dynamics excessive behaviour: lack of conservation of SL scheme is suspected
• Solution: more conservative SL schemes (CISL, finite volume …) complex to implement expensive for operational use
• Simpler alternative approach (proposed by S. Malardel): taking into account expansion/contraction of atmospheric parcels associated to each gridpoint small modifications of the SL interpolation weights as a function of deformation
2 – Test of a modified Semi-Lagrangian scheme
6
COMAD scheme (Malardel and Ricard, in review, QJ)
2 – Test of a modified Semi-Lagrangian scheme
t+1
Departure or origin point
t
* Computation of the trajectories: no modification
O
7
COMAD scheme (Malardel and Ricard, in review, QJ)
2 – Test of a modified Semi-Lagrangian scheme
t+1
t
dx
L
* Computation of the trajectories: no modification
* Computation of the value of variables at the origin point modification of the SL interpolation weights
For example, with linear interpolations (2D and regular grid):
Configuration:• for stability: ICI scheme (instead of 2TL SI scheme)• time step: 45s (instead of 60s)• initial conditions: dynamical adaptation from 2.5km 3DVAR Analysis• LBC: from operational AROME• better representation of the orography at 1.3km
Comparison to observations using a tracking algorithm (Morel et al., 2002) to detect convective cells (2 thresholds > 30 dBZ and > 40 dBZ) size, number, intensity maximum of convective cells
Simulated reflectivities at 1500 m 21 June 12UTC
2.5km: 76 cells > 40 dBZ
5dbZ
10
15
20
30
50
40
33
5dbZ
10
15
20
30
50
40
3 – Evaluation of AROME at kilometric resolution
Characteristics of convective cells
Simulated reflectivities at 1500 m 21 June 12UTC
2.5km: 76 cells > 40 dBZ
Comparison to observations using a tracking algorithm (Morel et al., 2002) to detect convective cells (2 thresholds > 30 dBZ and > 40 dBZ) size, number, intensity maximum of convective cells
Comparison to observations using a tracking algorithm (Morel et al., 2002) to detect convective cells (2 thresholds > 30 dBZ and > 40 dBZ) size, number, intensity maximum of convective cells
35
3 – Evaluation of AROME at kilometric resolution
Characteristics of convective cells > 40 dBZ - 21 June
1.3 km vs 2.5km:o more cellso more numerous small cellso fewer large cells o more realistic
Time evolution of cell number Surface distribution
radar
1.3kmradar
1.3km
2.5km2.5km
36
3 – Evaluation of AROME at kilometric resolution
Characteristics of convective cells > 30dBZ and > 40 dBZ - 48 days
Over the 48 days at the peak of convection, 1.3 km vs 2.5km:o more realistico more numerous small and medium cells o fewer large cells
Surface distribution > 30dBZ Surface distribution > 40dBZ
radar
1.3km
2.5km
radar
1.3km
2.5km
37
Conclusion
• Increase of horizontal grid spacing (1.3km versus 2.5km): more realistic number of cells more numerous small cells, fewer large cells reduction of precipitation amount better fuzzy scores (for precipitation, brightness temperature, downdrafts …)
• Use of the modified SL scheme (COMAD versus original SL scheme) less intense convective cells improvement of QPF, less amount better fuzzy scores for precipitation test on other periods: June 2012, January 2013 (frontal precipitation)
Test of the modified SL scheme at 1.3km
38
39
2 – Test of a modified Semi-Lagrangian scheme
Fuzzy scores: 15 July - 15 September 2013
Brier Skill Scores for brightness temperature 10.8 m (forecast range 18 UTC)
For peak of convection: better scores in particular for lower temperature thresholds better representation of the high clouds
Neighbourhood 20 km
Temperature thresholds (K)
Neighbourhood 52 km
Temperature thresholds (K)
COMAD
OPER SL
40
2 – Test of a modified Semi-Lagrangian scheme
1-31 January 2013
Mean 24-h precipitation over the forecast domain
Less impact on frontal precipitation
COMAD
OPER SL
41
2 – Test of a modified Semi-Lagrangian scheme
1-31 January 2013
Mean 24-h precipitation over the forecast domain
Less impact on frontal precipitationVariation between 1 and –5 %
42
2 – Test of a modified Semi-Lagrangian scheme
Fuzzy scores: 1-31 January 2013
Brier Skill Scores for 24-h precipitation (06UTC-06UTC)
RR24 > 0.2mm RR24 > 5 mm
RR24 > 10 mm RR24 > 20mm
Neighbourhood (km) Neighbourhood (km)
Neighbourhood (km) Neighbourhood (km)
COMAD
OPER SL
43
2 – Test of a modified Semi-Lagrangian scheme
1-30 June 2012
Mean 24-h precipitation over the forecast domain
Less precipitation amount
OPER
MODIFSL
44
2 – Test of a modified Semi-Lagrangian scheme
1-30 June 2012
Mean 24-h precipitation over the forecast domain
Less precipitation amountReduction between –1 and –25 %
45
2 – Test of a modified Semi-Lagrangian scheme
1-30 June 2012
24-h precipitation distribution for all gridpoints of the forecast domain
Smaller frequencies of moderate and heavy precipitation
COMAD
OPER SL
46
2 – Test of a modified Semi-Lagrangian scheme
Fuzzy scores: 1-30 June 2012
Brier Skill Scores for 24-h precipitation (forecast range 30h) Better scores for all thresholds and all neighbourhoods
OPER
MODIFSLRR24 > 0.2mm RR24 > 1 mm
RR24 > 10 mm RR24 > 20mm
Neighbourhood (km) Neighbourhood (km)
Neighbourhood (km) Neighbourhood (km)
47
2 – Test of a modified Semi-Lagrangian scheme
Fuzzy scores: 1-30 June 2012
Brier Skill Scores for brightness temperature 10.8 m (forecast range 18 UTC)
For peak of convection: better scores in particular for lower temperature thresholds better representation of the high clouds
OPER
MODIFSLNeighbourhood 20 km
Temperature thresholds (K)
Neighbourhood 120 km
Temperature thresholds (K)
48
2 – Test of a modified Semi-Lagrangian scheme
Example: 30 June 2012
Running variance (100 km * 100 km) of wind at 10 m (m/s)², 18 UTC 30 June
Less intense convective cells Less intense downdrafts
COMADOPER SL
49
2 – Test of a modified Semi-Lagrangian scheme
Example: 30 June 2012
Running variance (100 km * 100 km) of downdrafts at 10 m (m/s)², 18 UTC 30 June
Less intense convective cells Less intense downdrafts
COMADOPER SL
50
2 – Test of a modified Semi-Lagrangian scheme
Example: 30 June 2012
Running variance (100 km * 100 km) of 925 hPa ϴv at 10 m (K)², 18 UTC 30 June
Less intense convective cells Less intense downdrafts
COMADOPER SL
51
3 – Evaluation of AROME at kilometric resolution
Characteristics of convective cells > 40 dbZ - 21 June
Time step impact:o 30s: slightly more cells, in particular small cellso 60s: slightly less cells in particular small cells
Time evolution of cell number Surface distribution
52
3 – Evaluation of AROME at kilometric resolution
Characteristics of convective cells > 40 dbZ - 21 June
Diffusion impact:o Without spectral diffusion: sightly more cellso Spectral diffusion constant on vertical: weak impact o Without SLHD: more cells
Time evolution of cell number Surface distribution