1 / 27

Evaluations of AMDAR Observations using Co-Located Radiosonde and Inter-Aircraft Comparisons

Evaluations of AMDAR Observations using Co-Located Radiosonde and Inter-Aircraft Comparisons. Lee Cronce 1 , Ralph Petersen 1 , Erik Olson 1 , Wayne Feltz 1 , David Helms 2 and Randy Baker 3

efrem
Télécharger la présentation

Evaluations of AMDAR Observations using Co-Located Radiosonde and Inter-Aircraft Comparisons

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Evaluations of AMDAR Observationsusing Co-Located Radiosonde andInter-Aircraft Comparisons Lee Cronce1, Ralph Petersen1, Erik Olson1, Wayne Feltz1, David Helms2 and Randy Baker3 1 Cooperative Institute for Meteorological Satellite Studies (CIMSS), University of Wisconsin – Madison 2 NOAA, National Weather Service, Office of Science and Technology, Silver Spring, Maryland 3 United Parcel Service, Louisville, Kentucky

  2. AMDAR data have helped improve NWP for over 10 years 250 hPa 24-hr forecasts vector Wind Error (m/s) 10 m/s 1996 2001 2006 1982 1987 1992 most recent Measurements of Temperature, Wind, and Moisture

  3. Measuring Moisture from Commercial Aircraft • Efforts underway for over a decade • Research instruments not appropriate for “day-to-day”, “real world” application • Initial experiments were made using a “stand-alone” Temperature/Relative Humidity sensor called the Water Vapor Sensing System (WVSS-I) • Used humidity sensors “similar” to those used on radiosondes • Test results showed: • Substantial Biases and RMS values that exceeded WMO specification • Systems became contaminated by everyday airport “gunk”, e.g. de-icer, dirt on runways, etc.

  4. Measuring Moisture from Commercial Aircraft • Newer system was developed • Second-generation Water Vapor Sensing System (WVSS-II) measures Mixing Ratio(specific humidity) directly • Uses a laser-diode system to measure number of water molecules passing sensor • Instruments Tested on UPS 757s • Used by UPS for fog forecasting • Final tests in 2009-2010 • Re-engineered electronics • Improved mechanics • New installations for Southwest Airlines Evaluations of AMDAR Observations using Co-Located Radiosonde and Inter-Aircraft Comparisons provide the basis for most of the results shown here

  5. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN • Most recent independent • ground-truth assessments • of the WVSS-II systems • have been conducted for • three periods: • - November 2009 • - May - June 2010 • - August 2010 • The WVSS-II humidity data (along with aircraft temperature) were compared with radiosonde and ground based remote sensing systems. • Between 15 and 20 different UPS B757 aircraft provided WVSS-II data • - Data available via GTS • Radiosonde observations were made at the UPS hub in Rockford, Illinois, where about 20-25% of the WVSS-II equipped planes land/take off daily (Monday - Thursday).

  6. WVSS-II Validation Experiment Ground-Based Instrumentation • Vaisala DigiCORA III RS-92 GPS Sounding System (Use of night-time only radiosondes eliminated issue of ~8% dry in RS-92 TPW during mid-day observations) • VAISALA Surface PTU Station • GPS Receiver • Atmospheric Emitted Radiance Interferometer (AERI) • VAISALA 25K Ceilometer http://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/aeribago/

  7. Comparisons between Ascent/Descent WVSS-II/AMDAR Measurements with Co-Located Radiosonde Measurements

  8. 2009-2010 Validation Results Direct Sounding Inter-comparisons Direct Data Comparison: Aircraft data generally fell between bounding radiosonde reports

  9. 2009-2010 Validation Results Direct Sounding Inter-comparisons Direct Data Comparison: Aircraft data generally fell between bounding radiosonde reports Large variability within moist regimes led to large specific humidity differences

  10. 2009-2010 Validation Results Summary of Direct Specific Humidity Inter-comparisons All SH data All Levels Spring SH data All Levels Differences showed: Aircraft data and radiosonde reports agreed quite well Overall small positive WVSS-II bias Few moist outliers from one case in 10-12 g/kg range – good for moister data

  11. 2009-2010 Validation Results Direct Specific Humidity Inter-comparisons by Relative Humidity Bins All observations – All Levels Differences showed: Small positive bias across all RH ranges Random errors average ~0.5-0.7 g/kg Higher random errors near 20-25% RH and approaching saturation

  12. Spring 2010 Validation Results Direct Temperature and Specific Humidity Inter-comparisons All Spring Data Only Differences from radiosondes showed: Warm temperature bias at all levels Large temperature variability Random SH differences average ~ ± 0.5 g/kg

  13. 2009-2010 Validation Results Specific Humidity (Excludes cases with large time and vertical radiosonde differences) Systematic Differences: WVSS-II Biases at low levels of 0.1 to +0.4 g/kg from surface to 850 hPa. ±0.2 g/kg above Random Differences (Including Dry/Moist Environments): Differences between aircraft data and radiosonde reports generally showed variability of 0.3 to 0.7 g/kg from the surface to 600 hPa – decreases aloft. StdDev slightly larger than 1-hour variability between bounding radiosonde reports (gray shading). Note: Fewer inter-comparisons near 800 hPa and above 700 hPa. Greater time and space separation above 650 hPa.

  14. 2009-2010 Validation Results Specific Humidity (Excludes cases with large time and vertical radiosonde differences) -- Ascents Only -- Systematic Differences: WVSS-II Biases at low levels of 0.1 to +0.5 g/kg from surface to 850 hPa. 0.0-0.3 g/kg above Random Differences (Including Dry/Moist Environments): Differences between aircraft data and radiosonde reports generally showed variability of 0.3 to 0.7 g/kg from the surface to 800 hPa – >0.6 g/kg between 800 and 600 hPa - decreases aloft. StdDev slightly larger than 1-hour variability between bounding radiosonde reports except between 800-600 hPa (gray shading).

  15. 2009-2010 Validation Results Specific Humidity (Excludes cases with large time and vertical radiosonde differences) -- Descents Only -- Systematic Differences: WVSS-II Biases at low levels of 0.0 to +0.3 g/kg from surface to 700 hPa -0.2 g/kg above Random Differences (Including Dry/Moist Environments): Differences between aircraft data and radiosonde reports generally showed variability of 0.4 to 0.7 g/kg from the surface to 750 hPa – 0.4-0.6 g/kg aloft. StdDev slightly larger than 1-hour variability between bounding radiosonde reports except above 750 hPa (gray shading).

  16. 2009-2010 Validation Results AMDAR Temperature Systematic Differences: Aircraft Temperature Biases at low levels of 0.2 to +0.7°C. from surface to 700 hPa. Net neutral above that level Random Differences : Differences between aircraft data and radiosonde reports generally showed variability of 0.8 to +1.5°C from the surface to 850 hPa. Above 850 hPa, SdtDev stabilizes to about 1.0°C Differences larger than 1-hour variability between bounding radiosonde reports (gray shading).

  17. 2009-2010 Validation Results Relative Humidity (From WVSS-II Humidity & AMDAR Aircraft Temperature) Systematic Differences: WVSS-II RH Biases were very small positive (0 – ±3%) from surface to 650 hPa. Random Differences (Including Dry/Moist Environments): Differences between aircraft data and radiosonde reports generally showed variability of 5 to 8% from the surface to 750 hPa. Above 750 hPa, RH StdDev increases as number of matches decreases and space/time distance increases. Differences slightly larger than 1-hour variability between bounding radiosonde reports (gray shading).

  18. Comparisons between WVSS-II/AMDAR Measurements from Different Aircraft

  19. AMDAR Measurement Inter-Comparison Specific Humidity Variability amongst WVSS-II Observations RMS calculated for: Time ranges of 0-15, 0-30 and 0-60 minutes Distance ranges of 0-20, 0-40 and 0-60 km RMS Differences show (ALL reports, Including Dry/Moist Environments): 0-15 minute / 0-20 km variability of <0.20 g/kg Variability nearly doubled for 0-60 time window Variability increased for larger distance separations: 30% increase for short time windows 10% increase for longer time windows

  20. AMDAR Measurement Inter-Comparison Specific Humidity Variability amongst WVSS-II Observations RMS calculated for: Time ranges of 0-15, 0-30 and 0-60 minutes Distance ranges of 0-20, 0-40 and 0-60 km RMS Differences show (ALL reports,Including Dry/Moist Environments): WVSS-II observations from different aircraft and instruments agree extremely well with one another Atmospheric Variability: - Smaller increases over distance, but larger for time spacing

  21. AMDAR Measurement Inter-Comparison Approximating WVSS-II Observational Error RMS calculated for: Time (and distance) ranges of 0-15, 15-30, 30-45, and 45-60 minutes (km) ~0.16 g/kg • RMS Differences show (ALL reports,All Seasons): • Moisture Variability more than doubles from 0-15 to 30-45 minute intervals • Because the Total Variability is made up of two parts: • 1) Instrument Error and 2) Atmospheric Variability • We can project nearby results to exact co-locations ( @ΔT~0 and ΔX~0, Δq~0.16 g/kg).

  22. AMDAR Measurement Inter-Comparison Approximating AMDAR Temperature Observational Error RMS calculated for: Time (and distance) ranges of 0-15, 15-30, 30-45, and 45-60 minutes (km) Variability by Distance ~0.5oC Linear(Variability by Distance) RMS Differences show ( ALL reports, ALL Seasons ): Variability can more than double over 60 minutes and 60 kms VariableObserved Variability @ 45-60 km and 45-60 minutesDerived Variability for perfect co-locations Specific Humidity ~0.45 g/kg (both) > ~0.16 g/kg Temperature ~1.0oC (both) > ~0.5oC

  23. AMDAR Measurement Inter-Comparison Approximating AMDAR Derived Relative Humidity Error RMS calculated for: Time (and distance) ranges of 0-15, 15-30, 30-45, and 45-60 minutes (km) ~4% RMS Differences show ( ALL reports, ALL Seasons ): Variability can more than double from 0-15 to 30-45 minute intervals VariableObserved Variability @ 45-60 km and 45-60 minutesDerived Variability for perfect co-locations Specific Humidity ~0.45 g/kg (both) > ~0.16 g/kg Temperature ~1.0oC (both) > ~0.5oC Derived Relative Humidity ~11% and ~6% (respectively) > ~4%

  24. Earlier Observation Accuracy Studies • Temperature comparisons showed similar results • Wind Assessments more Complicated (Vectors) Comparison of AMDAR and time/space co-located GPS radiosonde shows better Wind performance over US – Vector RMS <3.0 m/s

  25. AMDAR Measurement Inter-Comparison Approximating AMDAR Wind Observational Error RMS calculated for: Time (and distance) ranges of 0-15, 15-30, 30-45, and 45-60 minutes (km) ~2.5 m/s RMS Differences show (ALL reports,All Seasons): Variability increases from 0-15 to 30-45 minute intervals VariableObserved Variability @ 45-60 km and 45-60 minutesDerived Variability for perfect co-locations Specific Humidity ~0.45 g/kg (both) > ~0.16 g/kg Temperature ~1.0oC (both) > ~0.5oC Derived Relative Humidity ~11% and ~6% (respectively) > ~4% Vector Wind RMS ~3.5 m/s (both) > ~2.5 m/s

  26. Summary • Tests made against raobs over wide range of moisture conditions show: •  Sensors agreed extremely closely with each other • - Overall Specific Humidity (SH) RMS ~0.5 g/kg •  Sensors agreed well with co-located radiosonde observations • - Overall SH Bias ~0.2 g/kg, SH StDev ~0.5 g/kg •  Temperature differences between raob/aircraft were small • - Overall T Bias ~0.3°C, T StDev ~0.8°C, T RMS ~0.9°C •  Relative Humidity differences due to WVSS-II were small • - Overall RH Bias ~1%, RH StDev ~8%, RH RMS ~8% •  Ascent or Descent Data (separately) show similar results • Comparison between aircraft for all variables show: • Atmospheric Variability can more than double from 0-15 to 30-45 minute intervals • For precise co-locations: • VariableObserved Variability @ 45-60 km and 45-60 minutesDerived Variability for perfect co-locations • Specific Humidity ~0.45 g/kg (both) ~0.16 g/kg • Temperature ~1.0oC (both) ~0.5oC • Derived Relative Humidity ~11% and ~6% (respectively) ~4% • Vector Wind RMS ~3.5 m/s (both) ~2.5 m/s • ALL AMDAR data Meet WMO requirements for mesoscale observations

  27. The FutureWVSS-II Installations increasing on Southwest Airlines B-373

More Related