Slide 1
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
ECMWF – ESA Liaison Meeting
3 March 2011
ESA-funded projects
Slide 2
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
ESA Support
Support of ERS/Envisat/Cryosat-2: Data monitoring and assimilation
• Wind speed, wave height• Temperature, trace gases
Support of EarthCARE: Potential of radar/lidar forNWP
• Clouds, precipitation, aerosols
Support of SMOS: Data monitoring/assimilation• Soil moisture
Support of ADM: Level-2 processing/assimilation• Wind
Support of Galileo: Optimal radio-occultation constellation
• Temperature, moisture, pressure
Slide 3
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
ESA Support
Support of ERS/Envisat/Cryosat-2: Data monitoring and assimilation
• Wind speed, wave height• Temperature, trace gases
Support of EarthCARE: Potential of radar/lidar forNWP
• Clouds, precipitation, aerosols
Support of SMOS: Data monitoring/assimilation• Soil moisture
Support of ADM: Level-2 processing/assimilation• Wind
Support of Galileo: Optimal radio-occultation constellation
• Temperature, moisture, pressure
Slide 4
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Da
ta R
ec
ep
tio
n
(%)
Time, in hours, from the major synoptic time
Average Received during a 6-hour Time Window, 1 Jan. - 31 Dec. 2010
Envisat
Jason-2
Jason-1
6-hour time window
DC
ED
~ 68%
~ 81%
Operational altimeter data reception at ECMWF
Envisat - Altimeter
Slide 5
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
Global comparison between altimeter and ECMWF wave model (WAM) first-guess SWH values
(From 02 February 2010 to 01 February 2011)
Jason-1Jason-2Envisat
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14WAM Wave Heights (m)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
EN
VIS
AT
W
ave
H
eig
hts
(m
)
SYMMETRIC SLOPE
CORRELATION
SCATTER INDEX
STANDARD DEVIATION
BIAS (ENVISAT - WAM)
MEAN ENVISAT
MEAN WAM
ENTRIES
STATISTICS
REGR. CONSTANT
REGR. COEFFICIENT
1 . 0026
0 . 9786
0 . 1051
0 . 2733
- 0 . 0163
2 . 5851
2 . 6014
1 125908
- 0 . 0587
1 . 0163
1510501005001000500010000100000
0 .9983
0 .9791
0 .1044
0 .2826
-0 .0032
2 .7041
2 .7073
142 5055
0 .0637
0 .9753
1. 0 397
0. 9 738
0. 1 200
0. 3 232
0. 1 140
2. 8 078
2. 6 939
138 2997
0. 1 072
1. 0 025
Envisat - Altimeter
Slide 6
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
• Triple Collocation (1 August 2009 – 31 July 2010) 3 data sets:• Model, Envisat, Buoys• Model, Jason-2, Buoys• Model, Jason-1, Buoys
• Model:• For SWH: Wave model hindcast (i.e. a stand-alone
wave model run without data assimilation, forced by consistent wind fields).
• For wind speed: NWP model day-1 forecast.
• Errors are assumed to be linear and independent from each other.
• Note: Jason-1 suffered from several periods of instability during 2009 especially between March and May 2009.
Envisat - Altimeter
Slide 7
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
Monthly Significant Wave Height (SWH) Errors (3-month running averages)
08-20
09
09-20
09
10-20
09
11-
20
09
12-20
09
01-20
10
02-20
10
03-20
10
04-20
10
05-20
10
06-20
10
07-20
100.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
Rela
tive S
WH
E
rror
Jason-2EnvisatJason-1Model HindcastBuoys
Envisat - Altimeter
Slide 9
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
Operability of Envisat products to ECMWF in 2010
GO
MO
SS
CIA
MA
CH
Y
SCIAM. GOMOS
2006 89.0% 96.1%
2007 83.1% 94.7%
2008 80.7% 96.4%
2009 81% 97.1%
2010 83% 96.3%
2006 -6% +0.2%
2009 +2% -0.8%
Percentage of data received on time to be included in DCDA
Envisat – GOMOS/SCIAMACHY
Slide 10
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
1JAN
4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 3FEB
6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 2MAR
5 8 11 14 17 20 23 26 29 1APR
4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 1MAY
4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 3JUN
6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30
-85-75-65-55-45-35-25-15
-55
1525354555657585
Latit
ude
-85-75-65-55-45-35-25-15-551525354555657585
1JUL
4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 3AUG
6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 2SEP
5 8 11 14 17 20 23 26 29 2OCT
5 8 11 14 17 20 23 26 29 1NOV
4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 1DEC
4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31
-85-75-65-55-45-35-25-15
-55
1525354555657585
Latit
ude
-85-75-65-55-45-35-25-15-551525354555657585
1JAN
4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 3FEB
6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 2MAR
5 8 11 14 17 20 23 26 29 1APR
4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 1MAY
4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 3JUN
6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30
-85-75-65-55-45-35-25-15
-55
1525354555657585
Latit
ude
-85-75-65-55-45-35-25-15-551525354555657585
1JUL
4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 3AUG
6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 2SEP
5 8 11 14 17 20 23 26 29 2OCT
5 8 11 14 17 20 23 26 29 1NOV
4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 1DEC
4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31
-85-75-65-55-45-35-25-15-55
1525354555657585
Latit
ude
-85-75-65-55-45-35-25-15-551525354555657585
SCIAMACHY – GOME-2
SCIAMACHY – OMI
Envisat – SCIAMACHY
Slide 12
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
• GOMOS data was available in 2010, except in November after an orbit change.
• The quality was stable, in particular:
• Temperature: Good agreement in the Stratosphere (+/- 1%), but larger biases found in the Mesosphere where the T profiles are relaxed to a climatology.
• Ozone: first-guess and analysis departures are within -5 and +20% in the Stratosphere, but larger in the Mesosphere (>50% in places). The standard deviations of the departures are >15% at all levels.
• Water vapour: still show a poor level of agreement with the ECMWF analyses, one to four orders of magnitude difference between obs and fg/an.
• Impact of the ENVISAT orbit change: negligible on average, but the O3
data seem to have a larger noise in December 2010 than they had until October 2010 to be confirmed during 2011.
-90 -80 -70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90Latitude [ deg ]
-100-90-80-70-60-50-40-30-20-10
0102030405060708090
100
OBS
-FG
[ D
U ]
All DataEXP = 0001 ; Period = 2010060100 to 2010063018GOMOS on ENVISAT, Ozone, Layer 11 (20-40 hPa)
Scatterplot of FG Departures versus Latitude
1
2
5
10
20
50
75
100
200
500
750
1000
2000
5000
7500
10000
y mean = -2.02 y stdev = 12.76
Latitude min = -74.41 max = 12.30FG min = 38.80 max = 99.93OBS min = 0.00 max = 137.75
Maximum number per bin = 43Total number = 1274
-90 -80 -70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90Latitude [ deg ]
-100-90-80-70-60-50-40-30-20-10
0102030405060708090
100
OBS
-FG
[ D
U ]
All DataEXP = 0001 ; Period = 2010120100 to 2010123118GOMOS on ENVISAT, Ozone, Layer 11 (20-40 hPa)
Scatterplot of FG Departures versus Latitude
1
2
5
10
20
50
75
100
200
500
750
1000
2000
5000
7500
10000
y mean = -6.53 y stdev = 15.85
Latitude min = -49.95 max = 56.92FG min = 52.77 max = 97.59OBS min = 27.13 max = 178.85
Maximum number per bin = 42Total number = 2704
Dec 2010Jun 2010
Envisat – GOMOS
Slide 15
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
MIPAS L1(5.02) radiances: O3(MLS(v2.2))-O3(An)
Res
idu
als
Exp-CTRL Exp-MIPAS
-2
-1
0
1
2
mg/k
g
-90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90Latitude
100.00
10.00
1.00
0.10
0.01
Pre
ssure
, hP
a
-2
-1
0
1
2
mg/k
g
-90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90Latitude
100.00
10.00
1.00
0.10
0.01
Pre
ssure
, hP
a
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
mg/k
g
-90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90Latitude
100.00
10.00
1.00
0.10
0.01
Pre
ssure
, hP
a
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
mg/k
g
-90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90Latitude
100.00
10.00
1.00
0.10
0.01
Pre
ssure
, hP
a
Std
dev
Envisat – MIPAS L1
Slide 18
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
• CryoSat-2 mission will be generating an ocean product called “Fast Delivery Ocean Level 2 (FDM)” while operating in Low Resolution Mode (LRM) on a “best-effort” basis ⇒ FDM not released yet.
• CNES is developing a prototype processor (for Sentinel-3) which they used to generate an independent experimental ocean product.
• CNES product was verified: very high quality!
• FDM as a fully supported operational product would be highly appreciated!
Cryosat-2
0 2 4 6 8 10 12Buoy Sig. Wave Height (m)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Cry
oS
at
Sig
. W
ave
H
eig
ht
(m)
SYMMETRIC SLOPE
CORRELATION
SCATTER INDEX
STANDARD DEVIATION
BIAS (CRYOSAT - BUOY)
MEAN CRYOSAT
MEAN BUOY
ENTRIES
STATISTICS
REGR. CONSTANT
REGR. COEFFICIENT
0.94920.96060.1530
0.4189
-0.1661
2.5718
2.7379
3427
-0.0095
0.9428
15
153050
100300500
100030000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14WAM Model Sig. Wave Height (m)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Cry
oS
at
Sig
. W
ave
H
eig
ht
(m)
SYMMETRIC SLOPECORRELATION
SCATTER INDEX
STANDARD DEVIATIONBIAS (CRYOSAT - WAM)
MEAN CRYOSAT
MEAN WAMENTRIES
STATISTICS
REGR. CONSTANTREGR. COEFFICIENT
0.94490.9768
0.1031
0.2594-0.1761
2.3415
2.5176157237
-0.13680.9844
15
1050
100500
10005000
10000100000
Cryosat vs WAM Cryosat vs Buoys
Slide 19
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
Global comparison between altimeter and ECMWF wave model (WAM) first-guess SWH values
28
O
ct
04
N
ov
11
N
ov
18
N
ov
25
N
ov
02
D
ec
09
D
ec
16
D
ec
23
D
ec
30
D
ec
06
Ja
n
13
Ja
n
2 0 1 0
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
SD
D
(m
)
ENVISATCryoSat
SDD
Bias
2 0 1 1
Alt
.-Mo
del B
ias
Cryosat-2
Slide 21
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
ESA Support
Support of ERS/Envisat/Cryosat-2: Data monitoring and assimilation
• Wind speed, wave height• Temperature, trace gases
Support of EarthCARE: Potential of radar/lidar forNWP
• Clouds, precipitation, aerosols
Support of SMOS: Data monitoring/assimilation• Soil moisture
Support of ADM: Level-2 processing/assimilation• Wind
Support of Galileo: Optimal radio-occultation constellation
• Temperature, moisture, pressure
Slide 22
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
EarthCARE
Project: Quantitative Assessment of the Operational Value of Space-Borne Radar and Lidar Measurements of Cloud and Aerosol Profiles (QuARL)
1st Project (concluded) 2nd Project (under review) FutureGeneral Studies Support To Science Element EarthCARE?
Model validation - clouds - aerosols
Radar : Radar+Lidar : Radar+LidarSimulator SimulatorMonitoring demonstrator Experimental monitoring Operational monitoringExperimental assimilation Experimental assimilation Operational assimilationAssimilation strategies
based on Cloudsat/Calipso data based on Cloudsat/Calipso data based on EarthCARE dataMain conclusions:• Model validation with profiling cloud/aerosol lidar/radar is fundamental for future
parameterization developments with significant impact on cloud-aerosol-radiation interaction
• Unique verification source of already assimilated data affected by clouds/aerosols• Assimilation experiments show beneficial impact – but localized
Slide 23
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
REF_AT
62 N 60 N 58 N 56 N 54 N 52 N 50 N 48 N 46 N 44 N 42 N 40 N 38 N 36 N 34 N 32 N 30 NLat
100W 99 W 98 W 97 W 96 W 95 W 94W 93 W 92 W 91 W 90 W 89W 88W 87 WLon
1.1
1.9
3.0
4.3
5.9
7.6
9.3
10.9
12.5
Hei
gh
t (k
m)
-24 - -21 -21 - -18 -18 - -15 -15 - -12 -12 - -9 -9 - -6 -6 - -3 -3 - 0 0 - 3 3 - 6 6 - 9 9 - 12 12 - 15 15 - 18Observation
REF_AT
62 N 60 N 58 N 56 N 54 N 52 N 50 N 48 N 46 N 44 N 42 N 40 N 38 N 36 N 34 N 32 N 30 NLat
100W 99 W 98 W 97 W 96 W 95 W 94W 93 W 92 W 91 W 90 W 89W 88W 87 WLon
1.1
1.9
3.0
4.3
5.9
7.6
9.3
10.9
12.5
Hei
gh
t (k
m)
-24 - -21 -21 - -18 -18 - -15 -15 - -12 -12 - -9 -9 - -6 -6 - -3 -3 - 0 0 - 3 3 - 6 6 - 9 9 - 12 12 - 15 15 - 18
REF_AT
62 N 60 N 58 N 56 N 54 N 52 N 50 N 48 N 46 N 44 N 42 N 40 N 38 N 36 N 34 N 32 N 30 NLat
100W 99 W 98 W 97 W 96 W 95 W 94W 93 W 92 W 91 W 90 W 89W 88W 87 WLon
1.1
1.9
3.0
4.3
5.9
7.6
9.3
10.9
12.5
Hei
gh
t (k
m)
-24 - -21 -21 - -18 -18 - -15 -15 - -12 -12 - -9 -9 - -6 -6 - -3 -3 - 0 0 - 3 3 - 6 6 - 9 9 - 12 12 - 15 15 - 18
15 – 18
REF_AT
62N
60N
58N
56N
54N
52N
50N
48N
46N
44N
42N
40N
38N
36N
34N
32N
30N
Lat100
W99
W98
W97
W96
W95
W94
W93
W92
W91
W90
W89
W88
W87
WLon
1.1
1.9
3.0
4.3
5.9
7.6
9.3
10.9
12.5Height (km)
-24 - -21-21 - -18
-18 - -15-15 - -12
-12 - -9-9 - -6
-6 - -3-3 - 0
0 - 33 - 6
6 - 99 - 12
12 - 1515 - 18
-24 – -21
-21 – -18
-18 – -16
-16 – -12
-12 – -9
-9 – -6
-6 – -3
-3 – 0
0 – 3
3 – 6
6 – 9
9 – 12
12 – 15
Model First-Guess
Analysis
1D-Var Assimilation of Cloudsat Radar Reflectivities (dBZ)
EarthCARE
Slide 24
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
EarthCARE1D-Var Assimilation of Calipso lidar Backscatter Coefficients (km-1 sr-1)
Observation
Model First-Guess
Analysis
Slide 25
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
EarthCARE
1D+4D-Var Assimilation of Cloudsat Radar Reflectivities (dBZ)
GOES-12 EXP-CTRL
IR-Imagery GOES-12
IR-Imagery
NEXRAD EXP-CTRL
Radar rainfall Radar rainfall
Slide 26
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
ESA Support
Support of ERS/Envisat/Cryosat-2: Data monitoring and assimilation
• Wind speed, wave height• Temperature, trace gases
Support of EarthCARE: Potential of radar/lidar forNWP
• Clouds, precipitation, aerosols
Support of SMOS: Data monitoring/assimilation• Soil moisture
Support of ADM: Level-2 processing/assimilation• Wind
Support of Galileo: Optimal radio-occultation constellation
• Temperature, moisture, pressure
Slide 27
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
L1C-NRT BUFR product
Convert to L1C-NRT ECMWF BUFR product
Pre-process data:• Consistency checks
• Parallel data thinning per angular bins
ESAC
MARS ECFS
Store in ECMWF archives
Computations in model space (gp_model)
Get SMOS data in grid point• call smos_process
Forward model (CMEM) physics interface routines
call callpar
Back to observation space call smos_update
BUFR files
Mapping and load data to ODB tables
ODB data
passivemonitoring ofNRT TB overland & sea call smos_screen
CMEM interface
call mwave_screen RTTOV interface
Tatm
ε
Distribution per processor and grid point
Acquisition, quality control, thinning, etc.
Collocation, screening, forward modelling, first-guess departures, etc.
SMOS - Monitoring
Slide 29
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
TBxx:
Std of obs
1-7 Oct 2010
80°S80°S
70°S 70°S
60°S60°S
50°S 50°S
40°S40°S
30°S 30°S
20°S20°S
10°S 10°S
0°0°
10°N 10°N
20°N20°N
30°N 30°N
40°N40°N
50°N 50°N
60°N60°N
70°N 70°N
80°N80°N
160°W
160°W 140°W
140°W 120°W
120°W 100°W
100°W 80°W
80°W 60°W
60°W 40°W
40°W 20°W
20°W 0°
0° 20°E
20°E 40°E
40°E 60°E
60°E 80°E
80°E 100°E
100°E 120°E
120°E 140°E
140°E 160°E
160°E
Fg_departure0 - 5 5 - 10 10 - 15 15 - 20 20 - 25
25 - 30 30 - 35 35 - 40 40 - 200
SMOS - Monitoring
Standard deviation of Observations 1-7 October 2010
Slide 30
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
3 months of data (28 Nov 2010-28 Feb 2011)
Radiances at
10˚ incidence angle
Stability test (calibration event) 6 days
Thermal instability science data is degraded
12 January Hardware problem is solved (thermal control is restored, BUT, calibration of algorithm
parameters need re-calibration.
18 February NRT processor working again normal.
SMOS - Monitoring
Slide 32
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
Data assimilation Data processing
Assimilation expt
Thinning
Noise filtering
Bias correction
T2m, RH2m
SMOS data
T2m, RH2m, SMOS
Maintenance, testing, reports, etc.
SMOS - Next
Slide 33
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
ESA Support
Support of ERS/Envisat/Cryosat-2: Data monitoring and assimilation
• Wind speed, wave height• Temperature, trace gases
Support of EarthCARE: Potential of radar/lidar forNWP
• Clouds, precipitation, aerosols
Support of SMOS: Data monitoring/assimilation• Soil moisture
Support of ADM: Level-2 processing/assimilation• Wind
Support of Galileo: Optimal radio-occultation constellation
• Temperature, moisture, pressure
Slide 34
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
ADM-AeolusThe L2B implementations HLOS wind retrieval for use in NWP
Core PDS
Stand-alone version for late- and re-processing
(ESRIN)
NWP Centres
Subroutine version for integration in data-
assimilation systems
ECMWF/IFS
For operational generation of ESA’s L2B and L2C products
To complete/refine 2011/12
Portable L2B software and documentation to ESA and NWP-SAF standards
Two releases planned for 2011“Final burst mode” + “First continuous mode”
Slide 35
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
ADM-Aeolus: ECMWF implementationOperational acquisition of inputs from ESA
ECMWF polls the ESA ftp site every 10 minutes
Additional transfers prepared for GSOV Part 2
2012
Slide 36
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
ADM-Aeolus: ECMWF implementationProcessing from Level-1B to Level-2B/2C
L2B/L2C/AuxMet data generated & stored in ECMWF’s Observation
DataBase (ODB)
Data from ODB written in ESA’s Earth Explorer
format for dissemination to PDS
Monitoring statistics on data quality are
compiled/plotted routinely
Already passed GSOV Part 1 2009, internal enhancements ongoing
Slide 37
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
• The measuring capability of the Aeolus lidar instrument has been simulated
• Real scattering measurements obtained from the LITE instrument
• ESA’s software (E2S) is used to simulate what ADM would ‘see’
• The L1B software retrieves scattering ratio on the ADM measurement resolution
ADM-Aeolus: Example
Slide 38
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
ADM Aeolus: Ongoing activities
• Adapting to continuous mode laser
• Preparing for GSOV Part 2, 2012
• Participating in cal/val expert panel
• Preparing for commissioning phase
• Scientific validation of the processing chain (especially upstream calibration) and assimilation impact of real DWL data (airborne demonstrator flown by DLR)
• Finalize the download website and license agreement for other users of the software
• Supporting other users for integration/implementation within their own NWP systems
• On standby in case EUMETSAT seeks a QRT L2B service for other users (cf KNMI option)
• Exploring greater use of Aeolus aerosol products
Slide 39
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
ESA Support
Support of ERS/Envisat/Cryosat-2: Data monitoring and assimilation
• Wind speed, wave height• Temperature, trace gases
Support of EarthCARE: Potential of radar/lidar forNWP
• Clouds, precipitation, aerosols
Support of SMOS: Data monitoring/assimilation• Soil moisture
Support of ADM: Level-2 processing/assimilation• Wind
Support of Galileo: Optimal radio-occultation constellation
• Temperature, moisture, pressure
Slide 40
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
Support of Galileo GNSS: Observing System Simulation Experiments (OSSE) to estimate the optimal radio occultation constellation number for NWP and climate research (submitted)
Galileo
Background:• GNSS radio occultation observations provide fundamental
(complementary) contribution to radiance data: NWP and Climate• Currently experienced decline in GNSS radio occultation observation
numbers hopefully compensated by COSMIC-2 (2014) and, multiple transmitter capability (GPS, Galileo) in the future.
• WMO Vision for GOS requires estimation of optimal constellation configuration
• ECMWF proposal employs ensemble-based Observing System Simulation Experiments (OSSE) for this task ensuring consistency with recently performed Observing System Experiments (OSE) using real data.
Slide 41
ESA-ECMWF bilateral meeting March 2011 PB
OSE with all (!) available GPSRO data to test saturation limit for
NWP impact
Galileo
Future constellation impact will be evaluated with Ensemble-
OSSEs (proposed to ESA under Galileo science programme)