1 / 24

An Assessment of CMAQ with TEOM Measurements over the Eastern US

An Assessment of CMAQ with TEOM Measurements over the Eastern US. Michael Ku, Chris Hogrefe, Kevin Civerolo, and Gopal Sistla. PM Model Performance Workshop, February 10-11, 2004, RTP, NC. Model Simulations. MM5 – 108/36/12 km two-way nesting. SMOKE – 1996 CSA emission inventory.

noma
Télécharger la présentation

An Assessment of CMAQ with TEOM Measurements over the Eastern US

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. An Assessment of CMAQ with TEOM Measurements over the Eastern US Michael Ku, Chris Hogrefe, Kevin Civerolo, and Gopal Sistla PM Model Performance Workshop, February 10-11, 2004, RTP, NC

  2. Model Simulations • MM5 – 108/36/12 km two-way nesting. • SMOKE – 1996 CSA emission inventory. • CMAQ – 12 km domain only; both CB-IV and RADM2; IC/BC used background values. • Simulation Period – July 2 – August 1, 1999

  3. TEOM Measurements 21 sites include SLAMS, USDOE, NEOPS, and SEARCH.

  4. TEOM Measurements

  5. Modeling Domain and TEOM Sites

  6. Model Evaluation • Examine the Model Error • Examine the Model skill -- Compare the spatial structures -- Compare the temporal patterns

  7. Statistics: Hourly Data

  8. Comparison at each site

  9. Statistics: Daily Averaged Data

  10. CMAQ (CB-IV) predicts slightly higher daily averaged values than CMAQ (RADM2).

  11. CMAQ (CB-IV) underpredicted low-end and overpredicted high end of the daily averaged values.

  12. CMAQ (RADM2) underpredicted low-end and overpredicted high end of the daily averaged values.

  13. Compare Spatial Structures • Calculate Cross-correlation coefficients of TEOM • measurements and CMAQ outputs at the TEOM • sites. The calculations yield a 21x21 symmetric • matrix of correlation coefficients which represent • the correlation of the sites with each other. • If CMAQ produces similar correlation coefficients • matrix with TEOM, the CMAQ is able to capture • the TEOM measured spatial structures.

  14. The similarity of the two contour plots indicates that CMAQ (CB-IV) is able to capture the spatial pattern of the TEOM measured data

  15. Compare Temporal Patterns • Hourly time series • Synoptic components • Diurnal variation

  16. Hourly time series: Examples of good comparison

  17. Hourly time series: Examples of poor comparison

  18. Examine the Synoptic Components • KZ filter is used to extract the Synoptic Components from TEOM measurements and CMAQ predicted data. • Compare the Synoptic Components for data averaged over three regions: Iowa, Northeast, and SEARCH.

  19. Iowa Region

  20. Northeast Region

  21. SEARCH

  22. Diurnal variation: Examples of good hourly time series comparison.

  23. Diurnal variation: Examples of poor hourly time series comparison.

  24. SUMMARY • CMAQ overpredicted TEOM measurements at high end and underpredicted at low end. • CMAQ captured the spatial pattern of the TEOM measurements. • TEOM measurements and CMAQ predictions show no typical diurnal variation. • CMAQ performed well in capturing the average synoptic temporal pattern in the northeast region, but failed to capture the temporal pattern in the other two regions. • Analysis should be expanded to include PM speciation data.

More Related