1

Summary of Stream 2 Diagnostics

Mark DeMariaNOAA/NESDIS/StAR

November 8, 2010 Miami, FL

2

ADD Team Members • Co-Leads

– Ed Rappaport (NHC) and Mark DeMaria (NESDIS)• NCEP/NHC

– W. Hogsett, R. Pasch, C. Sisko, J. Franklin• NCEP/EMC

– V. Tallapragada, J. O’Connor, Bob Tuleya, S. Trahan• NWS/OST

– N. Surgi• NESDIS and CIRA

– J. Knaff, K. Musgrave, B. McNoldy, L. Grasso• OAR/HRD

– S. Gopal, R. Rogers, S. Goldenberg , T. Quirno• OAR/ESRL

– M. Fiorino, P. McCaslin• DTC and TCMT

– L. Nance, B. Brown• NRL

– Y. Jin, B. Sampson, A. Schrader • FSU

– T. Krishnamurti, M. Biswas

3

ADD FY10 Milestones •Develop Stream 1.5 concept of operations 6.1.1

•NHC, TCMT, NESDIS

•Synthetic satellite imagery 6.2.1•NESDIS, EMC, HRD and NRL

•Develop first HFIP model output products for NHC 6.3.1•NHC

•Develop capability to use aircraft data in model diagnostic routines 6.4.1•HRD

•Diagnostic Studies 6.4.2•NESDIS, EMC, NHC, HRD, ESRL, NRL, NCAR, SUNYA

•ATCF Upgrades for HFIP 6.5.1•NRL

•Establish first generation HFIP data service 6.6.1•TCMT

•Run SHIPS/LGEM off other models besides GFS 6.7.1

•NESDIS, ESRL and NRL

•Develop statistical analysis system for assessing source of model errors 6.8.1•FSU, EMC

4

ADD Team Diagnostic Formats and Software

• NHC Product Tools– Input: GRIB, NetCDF Software: HPLOT, ATCF, N-AWIPS, grads,

Fortran• NESDIS/CIRA

– Input: GRIB, McIDAS, ASCII Software: Fortran, IDL• HRD Diapost

– Input: Binary Software: Fortran, grads, java, GWT• ESRL

– Input: GRIB Software: python and grads• EMC

– Input: GRIB Software: HPLOT, Fortran, grads• NRL

– Input: IEEE Binary Software: Fortran• NCAR/SUNYA

– Input: NetCDF Software: Fortran, NCL, Matlab• FSU

– Input: ? Software: ?

5

Classification of Diagnostic Systems• Basic

– Can be run after model is completed– Can include comparison with model analyses– e.g.,HWRF post-processing system

• Advanced– Needs info every time step– Must run with model – e.g., FSU statistical error source analysis

• Data Comparison– Requires data and model input– e.g., comparison with aircraft or satellite– Might be basic or advanced – Close relationship with verification

6

Example of Basic Diagnostics:Model Inter-comparison of Large-Scale Parameters

HWRF, GFDL, COAMPS-TC

Vertical Shear SST 250 hPa T

Track Max Wind Land/Ocean Success

Ground “truth”: Working best track, GFS analyses, Reynolds SST analyses

HWRF GFDL COAMPS-TC

Inner grid mean condensate mixing ratio Inner grid mean condensate mixing ratioInner grid mean condensate mixing ratio

Control microphysics Schmidt microphysics Thompson microphysics

Example of Basic Diagnostics: Comparison of Condensate Profiles COAMPS-TC 72-h forecast for Celia: DTG = 2010061912

Pres

sure

8

Example of Advanced Diagnostic:FSU Error Source Assessment

• Start with closed system of full model equations

• Regress each term to tendency errors– “Observed” tendency from

sequence of verifying analyses• Can identify systematic errors

in dynamics and physics

Fig 1: Deep convective heating (10-4 K/sec) for Hurricane Celia, 2010 (9mn forecast – 18z 22 June) from the HWRF model output (upper panel) and the corresponding error term (10-5 K/sec).

9

21:44Z Aug 28

23:03Z Aug 28

09:39Z Aug 29

11:58Z Aug 29

21:00Z Aug 29

22:13Z Aug 29

00:44Z Aug 30

11:17Z Aug 30

13:40Z Aug 30

21:23Z Aug 30

22:31Z Aug 30

23:33Z Aug 30

HRD Tangential Wind Cross Sections from Doppler RadarExample of Data Comparison Diagnostic:

10

Example of Data Comparison Diagnostic:HWRF Synthetic – Real GOES Comparison

GOES Channel 3 (Water Vapor)

6 hr Images 0 to 126 hr at 6 hr for Hurricane Earl starting 29 Aug 2010 at 18 UTC

11

Transitions from Stream 2 to Stream 1

• Adapt stream 2 capabilities to system for operational HWRF– Pre-implementation model tests– Real time monitoring

• Tools for NHC Forecasters• Goal for FY11– Develop stream 1 basic and data comparison

diagnostics for EMC

12

0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72 78 84 90 96 102 108 114 120 1260

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Water Vapor Band (6.7 µm) ErrorsMAE - AlexBias - AlexMAE - EarlBias - Earl

Forecast Hour

Brig

htne

ss T

empe

ratu

re E

rror

(K)

Example output for HWRF Pre-Implementation Tests

Example NHC Diagnostics• NHC has developed a system to compare vortex structure among the models in real time.

– Output is posted on internal webpage and products are hard-coded.

• Results from the 2010 season have brought to light some important issues with the current models, e.g. the vortex initialization.

13Above: South-north (top) and West-East (bottom) vertical cross sections from the GFS (left), HWRF (middle), and GFDL (right). Vorticity is contoured. Note the differences in the vortex structure among the models.

GFS HWRF GFDL

Schematic of Basic Model Diagnostics System

14

Selection of Sample and

Tests

Read Model Forecasts

ATCF A-decks, Tier 2 data, Full model grib

fields

Routine Data Comparison:

ATCF variables, Synthetic geo imagery,

SST, Large-scale variables

ATCF B-Decks, GOES imagery, SST,

verifying analyses

Intermittent Data

Comparison:Various model

parameters

Aircraft data, radar, polar satellite data, in

situ , ocean

Basic Model Diagnostics Diagnostic Reports