Environmental Software and Modelling Group WRF-UCM AND CMAQ VERY HIGH RESOLUTION SIMULATIONS (200 M SPATIAL RESOLUTION) OVER.

Environmental Software and Modelling Group http://artico.lma.fi.upm.es

WRF-UCM AND CMAQ VERY HIGH RESOLUTION SIMULATIONS (200 M SPATIAL RESOLUTION) OVER LONDON (UK), ATHENS (GREECE),

GLIWICE (POLAND), HELSINKI (FINLAND) AND FLORENCE (ITALY): COMPARISON WITH OBSERVATIONAL DATA

R. San José1, J. L. Pérez1, E. Magliulo2 and N. Crysoulakis3

1Environmental Software and Modelling Group Computer Science School – Technical University of Madrid (UPM)

Campus de Montegancedo – 28660 Madrid (Spain) http://artico.lma.fi.upm.es

2CNR ISAFoM P.O. Box S. Sebastiano (Na) – Italy.

3Foundation for Research and Technology – Hellas (FORTH) IACM, 100 N. Plastira Str., Vassilika Vouton, P.O. Box 1385, GR-71110, Hereklion, Crete, Greece.

Contribution to:

10th Annual CMAS Conference Friday Center, UNC-Chapel Hill

OCTOBER, 24-26, 2011, Friday Center for Continuing Education, 100 Friday Center Dr

Chapel Hill, NC 27517, United States


BRIDGE EU PROJECT: sustainaBle uRban plannIng Decision support accountinG for urban mEtabolism

WRF-UCM: London (UK), Gliwice (Poland) and Helsinki (Finland).

CMAQ: Athens (Greece) and Florence (Italy).

OBJECTIVES:

High resolution simulations of meteorology and pollution over five european cities

Comparison with urban meteorological and pollution data sets (fluxes and concentrations)


BRIDGE UPM SIMULATIONS

- METEOROLOGICAL & ENERGY DATA:

MODEL: WRF/UCM 0.2 KM & 5.4 KM. RESOLUTION

CASES: BASE RUN & 3 ALTERNATIVES BY CITY (Ath, Flo,Hel,Gli, Lon)

PERIODS: 2008 FULL YEAR & SUMMER (jul-ago-sep) 2010 (base run)

BOUNDARY & INITIAL CONDITIOS TO 200 m RESOLUTION ( Athens & Florence ACASA)

CLIMATE SCENARIOS (End of May)

- AIR POLLUTION

MODEL: EMIMO-CMAQ 0.2 KM & 3.0 KM. RESOLUTION

CASES: BASE RUN & 3 ALTERNATIVES BY CITY (Athens, Florence)

PERIODS: 2008 FULL YEAR & SUMMER (jul-ago-sep) 2010 (base run)

- GHG EMISSION (CO2,CH4 anthropogenic & biogenic)

MODEL: EMIMO 0.2 KM RESOLUTION

CASES: BASE RUN & 3 ALTERNATIVES BY CITY (Ath, Flo,Hel,Gli, Lon)

PERIODS: 2008 FULL YEAR


BRIDGE UPM SIMULATIONS

LEVEL 2:

28*28 grid cells

0.2 km. resolution

Lower left corner

(-2700, -2700)

WRF/UCM meteorological model: 3-D non-hydrostatic prognostic model that simulates mesoscale atmospheric circulations. UCM Take the urban geometry into account in its surface energy budgets and wind shear calculations. Radiative, thermal, moisture effects and canopy flow model are accounted for in the UCM.

LEVEL 1:

37*37 grid cells

5.4 km. resolution

Lower left corner

(-121500, -121500)

Global model data: GFS


WRF/UCM meteorological model: 3-D non-hydrostatic prognostic model that simulates mesoscale atmospheric circulations. UCM Take the urban geometry into account in its surface energy budgets and wind shear calculations. Radiative, thermal, moisture effects and canopy flow model are accounted for in the UCM.

CMAQ is a three-dimensional Eulerian (i.e., gridded) atmospheric chemistry and transport modeling system that simulates ozone, acid deposition, visibility, and fine particulate matter throughout the troposphere. Designed as a one-atmosphere model, CMAQ can address the complex couplings among several air quality issues simultaneously across spatial scales ranging from local to hemispheric.

EMIMO model produces emissions from biogenic and anthropogenic sources including traffic and terciary sector sources for the specific required spatial resolution, hourly emission data for different inorganic pollutants. The VOC’s are splitted according to the chemical mechanism

WP4: UPM MODELLING TOOLS


-Physics Options used in WRF:

• Cumulus Parameterization:

GRELL-DEVENYI ENSEMBLE SCHEME (Grell, G. A., and D. Devenyi, 2002: A generalized approach to parameterizing convection combining ensemble and data assimilation techniques. Geophys. Res. Lett., 29(14), Article 1693. )

• PBL Scheme and Diffusion:

Yonsei University (YSU) PBL (Hong, S.-Y., Dudhia, J., 2003. Testing of a new non-local boundary layer vertical diffusion scheme in numerical weather prediction applications. In: Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Numerical Weather Prediction, Seattle, WA. )

• Explicit Moisture Scheme :

LIN et al.SCHEME microphysics (Lin, Y.L., R. D. Farley, and H. D. Orville, 1983: Bulk parameterization of the snow field in a cloud model. J. Appl. Meteor., 22, 1065-1092 )

WRF/NOAH/UCM. UPM SETUP


-Physics Options used in WRF-UHI:

•Radiation Schemes:

Rapid Radiative Transfer Model (RRTM) longwave radiation (E.J. Mlawer, S.J. Taubman, P.D. Brown, M.J. Iacono and S.A. Clough, Radiative transfer for inhomogeneous atmospheres: RRTM, a validated correlated-k model for the longwave, J. Geophys. Res. 102 (D14) (1997), pp. 16663–16682 )

Simple cloud-interactive shortwave radiation scheme Dudhia radiation ( Dudhia, Numerical study of convection observed during the winter monsoon experiment using a mesoscale two-dimensional Model, J. Atmos. Sci. 46 (1989), pp. 3077–3107)



(Chen, F., Kusaka, H., Tewari, M., Bao, J.-W., Kirakuchi, H., 2004. Utilizing the coupled WRF/LSM/Urban modeling system with detailed urban classification to simulate the urban heat island phenomena over the greater Houston area. In: Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Urban Environment, 22–26 August 2004, Vancouver, BC, Canada.)

Land surface model: NOAH/UCM (UCM only 0.2 Km resolution)



EMISSIONS-EMIMO .UPM SETUP

- Annual European emission inventory : 7Km spatial Resolution (TNO)

- Main pollutants: SO2,NOx,CO,VOC,NH3,PM10,PM25

- SNAP activities (S1-S10)

- Projection to Lambert Conformal Conic domain.

- European Temporal Profiles (country, activities)

- VOC splitting EMIMO

- Vertical distribution by activities

- Top-Down approach (7 KM TO 0.2 KM) based on surrogates:

•Traffic activities Traffic information (BRIDGE)

• Rest of activities -> Land use & Buildings density


GHG Emissions (CO2,CH4). WRF/UCM-EMIMO off-line (UPM).

- EMIMO uses a Top-Down approach (5 Min TO 0.2 Km) based on surrogates:

Traffic activities Traffic information Rest of activities -> 3 Urban Land uses &

Buildings density (no more high resolution data received)

- Anthropogenic Annual European emission inventory: CarboEurope GHG (IER) (http://carboeurope.ier.uni-stuttgart.de )

* 5 Min. Resolution.

* Pollutants: CH4,CO2,CO,N20

* Snap activities (S1-S10)

* Projection to Lambert Conformal Conic domain.

* Temporal Profiles (country, activities)

EMISSIONS-EMIMO: UPM SETUP


-CCTM Options in CMAQ

- Advection scheme: global mass-conserving scheme (Yamartino 1993 )Yamartino, R. J., 1993: Nonnegative, conserved scalar transport using grid-cell-centered, spectrally constrained Blackman cubics for applications on a variable-thickness mesh. Mon. Wea.Rev. 121, 753-763.

- Vertical Difussion: Asymmetric Convective Model (ACM2) (Pleim and Chang, 1992) Pleim, J.E. and J. Chang, 1992: A non-local closure model for vertical mixing in the convective boundary layer. Atmos. Envi., 26A, 965-981

- CB05 chemical mechanism (Yarwood et al. 2005). G. Yarwood, S. Rao, M. Yocke and G. Whitten, Updates to the Carbon Bond Chemical Mechanism: CB05 Final report to the US EPA, RT-0400675

- Euler Backward Solver (EBI) solver (Hertel et al. 1993) O. Hertel, R. Berkowicz, J. Christensen and Ø Hov, Test of two numerical schemes for use in atmospheric transport-chemistry models, Atmospheric Environment 27 (1993), pp. 2591–2611

- CMAQ Aerosol : The 3rd generation modal CMAQ aerosol model

CMAQ. UPM SETUP


LIMITATIONS & ACCURACY

-WRF/UCM model uses a parameterization of physical processes to understand the meteorology of the urban boundary layer over urbanized surfaces.

- In order to parameterize the physical processes, it requieres the urban morphology. Not individual structures (buildings) are resolved, introducing sub-grid scale variation.

- WRF/UCM uses 3 categorical urban land surface types, each with distinct physical and thermal characteristics.

- Taking into account the sensitivity of urban meteorology to the uncertainties in the parameterized urban morphology, we can understand the limitation of the system. -The reliability of the CMAQ simulation result s is subject to the quality of the emission and meteorological inputs

- Emission data is limited by the input data: global emission data, temporal profiles, information to down scaling…


LIMITATIONS & ACCURACY

The uncertainty for modelling is defined as the maximum deviation of the measured and calculated concentration levels for 90% of individual monitoring points, over the period considered, by the limit value (or target value in the case of ozone), without taking into account the timing of the events. The fixed measurements that have to be selected for a comparison with modelling results shall be representative of the scale covered by the model.

AIR POLLUTION MODELLING UNCERTAINTY 2008/50/CE

PERIOD SO2, NO2, NO, CO

BENZENE PM10/PM25 OZONE

Hourly 50% - - 50%

8-hour averages

50% - - 50%

Daily averages

50% - - -

Annual averages

30% 50% 50% -


Temperature 2M (K)

Latent Heat Flux (w/m2)

Sensible Heat Flux (w/m2)

Ground Heat Flux (w/m2)

Rain (mm)

Surface Pressure (Pa)

WRF/UCM. UPM. FLORENCE. BASE CASE 5.4 Km res


WRF/UCM. UPM. FLORENCE. BASE CASE (0.2 km spatial resolution)

2008 yearly average

Total plant transp Direct soil evap.Canopy water evap.

Ground Heat Flux Sensible Heat Flux Surface Runoff 2m. Temperature

Latent Heat Flux


2008 yearly average



Latent Heat Flux

WRF/UCM. UPM. ATHENS. BASE CASE


2008 yearly average



Latent Heat Flux

WRF/UCM. UPM. HELSINKI. BASE CASE


2008 yearly average



Latent Heat Flux

WRF/UCM. UPM. GLIWICE. BASE CASE


2008 yearly average



Latent Heat Flux

WRF/UCM. UPM. LONDON. BASE CASE


MEASUREMENTS. FLORENCE

- Eddy covariance (EC) flux station

- Observatorio Ximeniano (43°47’ 70 N, 11°15’ E)

- A mast of 3 m on a roof and at 33m above the street level

- Meteorological variables : Every 15’ Wind, Relativity Humidity, Temperature, Solar Radiation, Rain

-Turbulent fluxes: Every 30’ Sensible Heat Flux; Latent Heat Flux; U star (U*)

- Common periods: 01/04/2008 – 01/05/2008 01/07/2010 – 31/08/2010

- Air pollution SO2-NO2-CO (hourly mean) for a network of 5 air quality monitoring stations.


MEASUREMENTS & WRF/UCM. FLORENCEXimeniano 01/04/2008 – 01/05/2008 0.2 Km resolution

Short Wave Radiation Sensible Heat FluxAir Temperature


MEASUREMENTS & WRF/UCM. FLORENCEXimeniano 01/07/2010 – 31/08/2010

Air Temperature

Air Temperature 5.4 Km. Air Temperature 0.2 Km.



Short Wave Radiation 5.4 Km Short Wave Radiation 0.2 Km



Air Temperature

Sensible Heat Flux 5.4 Km. Sensible Heat Flux 0.2 Km.



U star (U*) 5.4 Km. U star (U*) 0.2 Km.



Wind Speed 5.4 Km. Wind Speed 0.2 Km.


MEASUREMENTS & WRF/UCM. FLORENCE

Ximeniano 01/07/2010 – 31/08/2010

0.2 KM WSPD TEMP SWDOWN HFX UST

Observed mean 1.60298.43 268.79

75.24 0.28

Calculated mean/Observed mean 1.64 1.00 1.02 1.21 1.39

Observed STD 0.85 4.61 314.2668.14 0.18

Calculated STD/Observed STD 1.59 0.87 1.05 1.58 1.18

Bias 1.02 -0.52 6.0715.50 0.11

Absolute Bias 1.32 1.62 66.9646.09 0.17

R2 0.10 0.82 0.84 0.65 0.32

RMSE 1.69 2.01 130.7368.20 0.22

RMSE/Observed Mean 1.05 0.01 0.49 0.91 0.78

PERCENTAGE within +/- 50 38.73100.00 77.73

35.72

48.02

5.4 KM WSPD TEMP SWDOWN HFX UST

Observed mean 1.60298.43 268.79

75.24 0.28


Observed STD 0.85 4.61 314.2668.14 0.18


Bias 1.05 -0.34 30.0045.52 0.18

Absolute Bias 1.33 1.36 63.8456.83 0.19

R2 0.25 0.87 0.88 0.80 0.59

RMSE 1.88 1.77 125.4786.25 0.23


PERCENTAGE within +/- 50 45.70100.00 79.10

38.52

34.29


MEASUREMENTS & WRF/UCM. FLORENCEXimeniano 05/07/2010 – 15/07/2010 0.2 Km.

TEMP SWDOWN HFX UST

Calculated mean/Observed mean 1.00 0.98 1.14 1.47

Calculated STD/Observed STD 0.85 1.02 1.54 1.23

Bias -1.15 -6.26 11.69 0.12

Absolute Bias 1.55 64.48 38.56 0.15

R2 0.87 0.87 0.79 0.44

RMSE 1.88 121.24 54.02 0.18

RMSE/Observed Mean 0.01 0.41 0.65 0.71

PERCENTAGE within +/- 50 100.00 80.42 45.83 47.92

U* TEMPERATURE SOLAR RAD. SENSIBLE HF.


MEASUREMENTS & WRF/UCM. FLORENCEXimeniano 21/08/2010 – 31/08/2010 0.2 Km.

U* TEMPERATURE SOLAR RAD. SENSIBLE HF.

TEMP SWDOWN HFX UST

Calculated mean/Observed mean 1.00 0.92 1.05 1.20

Calculated STD/Observed STD 0.92 1.00 1.55 1.05

Bias -0.54 -20.06 4.11 0.06

Absolute Bias 1.68 49.54 42.20 0.16

R2 0.77 0.89 0.76 0.31

RMSE 2.06 104.97 57.85 0.22

RMSE/Observed Mean 0.01 0.41 0.76 0.69

PERCENTAGE within +/- 50 100.00 82.50 33.33 57.50


MEASUREMENTS & WRF/UCM-EMIMO-CMAQ FLORENCEA

VE

RA

GE

ST

01/01/2008 – 31/12/2008 0.2 Km

resolu

tion


MEASUREMENTS & WRF/UCM-EMIMO-CMAQ FLORENCEM

OS

SE

& G

RA

MS

CI 02/07/2010 – 28/09/2010 0.2 K

m


01/01/2008 – 31/12/2008 AVG st 0.2 km RESOLUTION SO2 NOX CO

Observed mean 1.44 111.33 710.74

Calculated mean/Observed mean 2.04 1.11 1.00

Observed STD 0.91 76.71 362.49

Calculated STD/Observed STD 2.68 1.13 1.34

Bias 1.50 12.69 -2.87

Absolute Bias 1.94 65.50 337.68

R2 0.02 0.17 0.19

RMSE 2.88 89.74 463.52

RMSE/Observed Mean 2.00 0.81 0.65

PERCENTAGE within +/- 50 35.71 50.76 63.28

MEASUREMENTS & WRF/UCM-EMIMO-CMAQ FLORENCE


MEASUREMENTS. HELSINKI

Kumpula tower

( UTM x: 217563.71715305414, y: 2763551.490601992, heigth from sea level: 57 m) Outside of the domain 0.2 Km resolution. Comparation with 5.4 Km resolution.

The weather station is situated on the roof of one of the University of Helsinki buildings.

Radiation , Temperature, Wind.

The fluxes of sensible heat, are measured with the eddy covariance technique on top of the tower.

Common periods: 01/01/2008 – 31/12/2008 01/07/2010 – 30/09/2010


MEASUREMENTS & WRF/UCM. HELSINKIKumpula 01/01/2008 – 31/12/2008 5.4 Km

Short Wave Radiation Sensible Heat FluxAir Temperature


MEASUREMENTS & WRF/UCM. HELSINKIKumpula 01/01/2008 – 31/12/2008 5.4 Km

U Wind component Wind speedV Wind component


5.4 KM TEMP U VWSPD SWDOWN HFX

Observed mean 280.62 1.00 0.59 4.48 109.55 30.60

Calculated mean/Observed mean 1.00 0.83 0.83 1.04 1.17 1.03

Observed STD 6.89 3.54 3.16 1.98 194.24 76.23

Calculated STD/Observed STD 0.98 0.76 0.75 1.19 1.11 1.22

Bias -0.14 -0.17 -0.10 0.20 18.13 1.05

Absolute Bias 0.94 1.76 1.27 1.34 62.44 43.49

R2 0.97 0.54 0.76 0.35 0.72 0.54

RMSE 1.26 2.42 1.60 1.99 117.02 63.59

RMSE/Observed Mean 0.00 2.42 2.72 0.45 1.07 2.08

PERCENTAGE within +/- 50 100.00 30.46 31.60 79.77 18.56 13.66

MEASUREMENTS & WRF/UCM. HELSINKIKumpula 01/01/2008 – 31/12/2008


MEASUREMENTS. ATHENS

- Data on air pollutants (CO, NO2, NO, SO2, O3)

- Several stations close to the case study area. Geoponike and Peristeri inside of the domain with 0.2 Km resolution

- Hourly values for a whole year period are given.

- Meteorological measurements are outside of the domain.

- Common period : 01/01/2008 – 31/12/2008


MEASUREMENTS & WRF/UCM-EMIMO-CMAQ. ATHENSA

VE

RA

GE

ST

, GE

OP

ON

IKI, P

ER

IST

ER

I

01/01/2008 – 31/12/2008 0.2 Km

resolu

tion


MEASUREMENTS & WRF/UCM-EMIMO-CMAQ ATHENSA

VE

RA

GE

ST

, GE

OP

ON

IKI, P

ER

IST

ER

I DA

ILY

AV

G

01/01/2008 – 31/12/2008 0.2 Km

resolu

tion


MEASUREMENTS. GLIWICE (POLAND)

- Measurement point: 50º17’38.27”N 18º40´53.83”E

- Meteo parameters: Wind, air temperature, realtive humidity, total radiation, atmospheric pressure.

- Turbulent flux measurements will be performed by UBAS starting from January 2010 : Sensible heat flux, U start

- Common period: 10/07/2010 – 30/09/2010


10/07/2010 – 30/09/2010

Air Temperature 5.4 Km

MEASUREMENTS & WRF/UCM. GLIWICE (POLAND)

Air Temperature 0.2 Km


10/07/2010 – 30/09/2010

Short wave radiation 5.4 Km

MEASUREMENTS & WRF/UCM. GLIWICE

Short wave radiation 0.2 Km


10/07/2010 – 30/09/2010

Long wave radiation 5.4 Km


Long wave radiation 0.2 Km


10/07/2010 – 30/09/2010

Sensible heat flux 5.4 Km


Sensible heat flux 0.2 Km


10/07/2010 – 30/09/2010

Friccion velocity 5.4 Km


Friccion velocity 0.2 Km


10/07/2010 – 30/09/2010

Wind Speed 5.4 Km.


Wind Speed 0.2 Km.


MEASUREMENTS & WRF/UCM.

GLIWICE

10/07/2010 – 30/09/2010

5.4 KM HFX UST WSPD SWDOWN GLW TEMP

Observed mean 41.11 0.23 1.86 160.59

356.66 290.70


Observed STD 62.39 0.12 0.98 227.97 34.05 5.73


Bias42.54 0.26 2.72 41.70 -18.24 0.61

Absolute Bias 51.87 0.27 2.77 79.52 21.53 1.22

R2 0.63 0.28 0.42 0.77 0.60 0.92

RMSE79.05 0.31 3.38 138.91 30.26 1.75


PERCENTAGE within +/- 50 16.83

18.81 16.14 60.50

100.00 100.00

0.2 KM HFX UST WSPD SWDOWN GLW TEMP

Observed mean 41.11 0.23 1.86 160.59

356.66 290.70


Observed STD 62.39 0.12 0.98 227.97 34.05 5.73


Bias 4.75 0.12 1.49 -16.34 -4.35 -0.09

Absolute Bias 35.29 0.18 1.86 84.61 22.44 1.53

R2 0.50 0.07 0.04 0.62 0.41 0.88

RMSE57.20 0.24 2.50 152.69 31.79 2.02


PERCENTAGE within +/- 50 21.45

44.59 38.00 57.84

100.00 100.00


MEASUREMENTS. LONDON

- Physical Meteorology is collected at KSK (King’s Strand King’s) (0.1161W,51.51146N)

- The data are available at 15 min time intervals

- Data used: Wind, Air temperature, Pressure, Short and Long wave radiation

- Common periods: 01/10/2008 – 31/12/2008 01/07/2010 – 30/09/2010

- Air temperature from Marylebone & Martins. *London Air Quality Network. Common period: 01/01/2008 – 31/12/2008


MEASUREMENTS & WRF/UCM. LONDON

KSK 01/10/2008 – 31/12/2008

Air temperature 5.4 Km Air temperature 0.2 Km



KSK 01/10/2008 – 31/12/2008

Short wave radiation 5.4 Km Short wave radiation 0.2 Km



KSK 01/10/2008 – 31/12/2008

Long wave radiation 5.4 Km Long wave radiation 0.2 Km



KSK 01/10/2008 – 31/12/2008

Wind Speed 5.4 Km Wind Speed 0.2 Km



LONDON

01/10/2008 – 31/12/2008

5.4 km PSFCWSPD10 SWDOWN GLW T2

Observed mean 100912.93 3.15 47.42

311.05

281.67


Observed STD 1201.02 1.16 96.55 38.99 3.78


Bias 240.43 0.52 1.70 -14.99 0.41

Absolute Bias 240.43 0.97 26.37 26.28 1.05

R2 1.00 0.61 0.73 0.45 0.91

RMSE 247.26 1.26 56.42 37.80 1.31


PERCENTAGE within +/- 50 100.00 78.67 70.55100.00

100.000.2 km PSFC

WSPD10 SWDOWN GLW T2

Observed mean 100912.93 3.15 47.42

311.05

281.67


Observed STD 1201.02 1.16 96.55 38.99 3.78


Bias -331.67 7.05 -1.68 -21.40 0.39

Absolute Bias 346.81 7.52 28.64 35.83 0.93

R2 0.98 0.04 0.63 0.19 0.88

RMSE 364.92 10.81 63.43 47.17 1.39



100.00



KSK 01/07/2010 – 30/09/2010

Air temperature 5.4 Km Air temperature 0.2 Km



Short wave radiation 5.4 Km Short wave radiation 0.2 Km

KSK 01/07/2010 – 30/09/2010



Long wave radiation 5.4 Km Long wave radiation 0.2 Km

KSK 01/07/2010 – 30/09/2010



Wind Speed 5.4 Km Wind Speed 0.2 Km

KSK 01/07/2010 – 30/09/2010



LONDON

01/07/2010 – 30/09/2010

5.4 Km. PSFCWSPD10 SWDOWN GLW T2

Observed mean 100950.59 3.78 156.75

348.51

289.46


Observed STD 572.41 1.02 205.52 36.07 3.15


Bias 234.08 -0.67 23.88 -13.81 1.33

Absolute Bias 234.08 1.08 74.47 23.93 1.47

R2 1.00 0.30 0.72 0.48 0.88

RMSE 237.23 1.36 134.68 31.49 1.79



100.000.2 Km PSFC

WSPD10 SWDOWN GLW T2

Observed mean 100950.59 3.78 156.75

348.51

289.46


Observed STD 572.41 1.02 205.52 36.07 3.15


Bias -299.31 6.23 27.14 -18.80 0.33

Absolute Bias 299.49 7.14 95.92 31.83 0.89

R2 0.97 0.00 0.59 0.28 0.87

RMSE 315.71 9.44 170.23 40.26 1.30



100.00





MEASUREMENTS & WRF/UCM. FLORENCEXimeniano 01/07/2010 – 31/08/2010 Short Wave Radiation 0.2 Km

Me

as

ure

men

ts s

hif

t +

1 h

ou

rM

ea

su

rem

ents

sh

ift

– 1

ho

ur

Me

as

ure

men

ts s

hif

t -2

ho

urs

Me

as

ure

men

ts s

hif

t +

2 h

ou

rs


MEASUREMENTS & WRF/UCM. FLORENCEXimeniano 09/07/2010 – 18/07/2010 : 9 days



CONCLUSIONS- Header of measurement data file describes that data from Ximeniado are “Solar Time”. Temporal Shift (+-1 & +- 2) of the data gets worse results of the comparisons.

Solar-Time

prevalent wind direction deg

gust wind direction deg

luminosity max LX

luminosity mean LX

rain_mm

pressure_station_level_hpa

diffuse solar radiation J/m2

diffuse solar radiation max W/m2

global solar radiation J/m2

01/01/2010 0:14 99 82 0 0 0 990 0 0 0

- Lineal comparations seem good, for example 9 days.

-Solar radiation measurements:

-* Time frecuency 15 minutes 1 hour average to model comparation

-* Units are J/m2 Convert to W/m2 ( solar / 900 seconds)

- Solar radiation model outputs:

-* Model outputs are instant values (1 hour)

-* Cumulus parametrization is not enough for very high resolution.


MEASUREMENTS & WRF/UCM. FLORENCEXimeniano 01/07/2010 – 31/08/2010 Short Wave Radiation 0.2 Km

Model data: Instant values 1 hour

Measurement data: 15 minutes temporal average 44-59

Model data: Instant values 1 hour

Measurement data:60 minutes temporal average 00-59

Measurement data: Average value of the last 60 minutesModel value: instant value of the hour


Marylebone & Martins*. Temperature 01/01/2008 – 31/12/2008. 0.2KM


*Lo

nd

on

Air Q

ua

lity N

etw

ork



KSK 05/11/2008 – 15/11/2008

5.4 Km 0.2 Km

WS UPWS UP

OK. Temp


MEASUREMENTS PROBLEMS. PRE FILTER PROCESS

KSK- LONDON 01/07/2010 – 30/09/2010

Air temperature Long wave radiation


LONDON TOPOGRAPHY

Virtual London 4m resolution

Bi-lineal Interpolation 200 m resolution

Nearest Neighbor

200 m resolution

170 m

77 m

132 m

113 m

170 m

70 m

USED CRASH MODEL


CONCLUSIONS (1)

- Some periods could not be evaluated because no measured data were available for the model output comparison.

- Differences between modeled and observed values were not significant and the models were able to capture trends and magnitudes (except winds).

- The models overestimated slighly the sensible heat flux

- Very good results are obtained for the Temperature and good resultsd are obtained for the Solar Radiation

- WRF/UCM is quite sensitive to the different paramenters and input data (buildings, landuse, etc..)

- Air pollution results are good, taking account the emission uncertainties.


- London complex topography produces unstable numerical conditions some days of the simulations over 0.2 kmresolution.

- Results over 5.4 Km resolution are better than over 0.2 km spatial resolution, but alternatives can only be captured with 200 meters resolution.

- A new cumulus parameterization for high resolution could be used in the future: Grell 3d ensemble cumulus scheme. Scheme for higher resolution domains allowing for subsidence in neighboring columns instead of Grell-Devenyi ensemble scheme: Multi-closure, multi-parameter, ensemble method with typically 144 sub-grid members.

- Much more investigation is needed to understand the WRF model results with super high spatial resolution model domains.

CONCLUSIONS (2)


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

1. BRIDGE EU project ENV.2007.2.1.5.1 for partial funding of this research.

2. INDRA ESPACIO S.A. for the data provided from different satellites and sources and for partially funding this research.

3. The authors thankfully acknowledge the computer resources, technical expertise and assistance provided by the Centro de Supercomputación y Visualización de Madrid (CeSVIMa) and the Barcelona Supercomputer Center (BSC).

Environmental Software and Modelling Group WRF-UCM AND CMAQ VERY HIGH RESOLUTION SIMULATIONS (200 M SPATIAL RESOLUTION) OVER.

Documents