1 / 41

Presented by Yong-Run Guo 17 June 2010

CWB project review: Task#1 Support for the WRFVar component of the CWB operational system (OP2) and improve the performance of WRFVar V3. Presented by Yong-Run Guo 17 June 2010. 1.1 Support for the WRFVar component of CWB operational system 1.2 Improve the performance of WRFVar V3

ted
Télécharger la présentation

Presented by Yong-Run Guo 17 June 2010

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. CWB project review: Task#1Support for the WRFVar component of the CWB operational system (OP2) and improve the performance of WRFVar V3 Presented by Yong-Run Guo 17 June 2010

  2. 1.1 Support for the WRFVar component of CWB operational system • 1.2 Improve the performance of WRFVar V3 • 1.3 Improve the GPSRO data assimilation for CWB regional application • 1.4 Training and technical consultation • Deliverables: • 1, Observation operators, tangent linear and adjoint coding training. (done during visiting CWB, 7-19 March 2010) • 2, CV3 outer-loop (working) • 3, Report on assimilation of GPSRO data with WRFVar.

  3. 1.1 Support for WRFVar component of CWB operational system • Reviewed Maxine’s report on OP211 tests: LBC --- NCEP analysis, mp_zero_out=0, etc. • Maxine e-mail: Single obs tests with CV3 outer-loop, sent NCAR/TN-435+STR to Maxine on length-scale fitting formulation. • OP211 officially operate on 1 April 2010 • The version of WRFVar is not provided by me on 29 January 2010 (?) • The length-scales for domain2 (15km) and domain3 (5km) are not tuned. • Study the geopotential height problem closely working with WRF modeling group. • Did not any new input from WRF modeling group • Found the xb%Psfc calculation in WRFVar incorrect: • grid%xb%psfc(i,j) = grid%mub(i,j)+grid%p(i,j,kts)+grid%p_top (X) • grid%xb%psfc(i,j) = grid%psfc(i,j) (OK, directly from FG)

  4. 1.2 Improve the performance of WRFVar V3 • 1.2.1 Implementation of outer-loop with CV3 BES • Single obs --- GPSRO tests with CV3 BES and 5 outer-loops: • REF = 10 Nunit, ERR= 2.5 Nunit, Location = (111, 64,20) Out# Int#. J Jb Jo 1 0.100E-01 0 8.000 0.000 8.000 0.000 1 0.100E-01 1 3.699 1.989 1.711 0.000 2 0.100E-01 0 3.704 1.989 1.715 0.000 2 0.100E-01 1 3.704 1.973 1.731 0.000 2 0.100E-01 2 3.704 1.979 1.725 0.000 3 0.100E-01 0 3.704 1.979 1.725 0.000 3 0.100E-01 1 3.704 1.978 1.726 0.000 3 0.100E-01 2 3.704 1.978 1.726 0.000 4 0.100E-01 0 3.704 1.978 1.726 0.000 4 0.100E-01 1 3.704 1.978 1.726 0.000 4 0.100E-01 2 3.704 1.978 1.726 0.000 5 0.100E-01 0 3.704 1.978 1.726 0.000 5 0.100E-01 1 3.704 1.978 1.726 0.000 5 0.100E-01 2 3.704 1.978 1.726 0.000 After the 3rd outer-loop, J, Jb, and Jo are not changed.

  5. W-E cross-section for U, P, q, and q Outer-loop_01 – first guess Outer-loop 02 – Oter-loop_01 P U U P q q q q

  6. W-E cross-section for U, P, q, and q Outer-loop_03 – Oter-loop_2 Outer-loop 04 – Oter-loop_03 U P U P q q q q

  7. W-E cross-section for U, P, q, and q Outer-loop_05 – Oter-loop_4 U P q q

  8. 1.2 Improve the performance of WRFVar V3 • 1.2.1 Implementation of outer-loop with CV3 BES • 2009060818Z case with CV3 BES and 3 outer-loops: Cost function Norm of gradient The namelist.input file from CWB OP211. The observations used in each of outer-loops are different, so the final cost function from the 3rd outer-loop is larger than that from the 1st loop. We may consider to use the different quality check tolerances for the different loops.

  9. Increment between outer-loop_01 and first guess At k = 20, h = 0.55 V U -3 m/s to 3m/s -4 m/s to 4m/s q q -1.5o to 1.5o -1.6 g/kg to 0.6 g/kg

  10. Increment between outer-loop_02 and outer-loop_01 At k = 20, h = 0.55 V U -0.3 m/s to 0.5 m/s -0.4 m/s to 0.8 m/s q q -0.075o to 0.225o -o.44 g/kg to 0.04 g/kg

  11. Increment between outer-loop_03 and outer-loop_02 At k = 20, h = 0.55 V U -0.2 m/s to 0.2 m/s -0.2 m/s to 0.2 m/s q q -0.075o to 0.225o -o.325 g/kg to -0.025 g/kg

  12. W-E cross-section of (loop_03&loop_02) for q and q This is corresponding to a GPSRO profile, especially the data at the high levels (?). Ted may pay intensive attention to this: operator? Quality control? q q

  13. 1.2 Improve the performance of WRFVar V3 (Cont.) • 1.2.2 Tuning for CV3 BES • Read the related paper for CV3 BES: • Derber et al., 1999: A reformulation of the background error covariance in the ECMWF global data assimilation system. Tellus, 51A, 195-221. • Bannister, 2008: A reviw of forecast error covariance statistics….., Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc., 134, 1951-1970. • Hayden and Purser, 1995: Recursive filter objective analysis of meteorological fields: Applications to NESDIS operational processing. J. Appl. Meteor., 14, 3-15. • …………………………………………………………………………………… • Review the CV3 related code in WRFVar • Read in CV3 BES: “da_setup_be_ncep_gfs.inc” • Use CV3 BES in “da_transform_vtox.inc” • It may not be easy to complete this sub-task in this year because we need to understand both of the principle and codes developed by Jim Purser, NCEP.

  14. Flowchart of “da_setup_be_ncep_gfs.inc” da_setup_be_ncep_gfs da_chgvres ZROOTS (da_rf_cv3.f90) LAGUER (da_rf_cv3.f90) RFDPAR1 RFDPAR2 RFDPARV (da_rf_cv3.f90) LINMM (da_mat_cv3.f90) LDUM UDLMM (da_mat_cv3.f90) da_rfz0 (da_rfz_cv3.f90) RF0V RFHV (da_rfz_cv3.f90) DSBVR (da_mat_cv3.f90)

  15. Flowchart of “da_transform_vtox.inc” da_transform_vtox 1 da_apply_be da_apply_rf 3 1 2 2 da_transform_bal da_apply_rf_1v da_transpose_z2x da_transpose_x2y da_transpose_y2z smoothx smoothy (da_rf_cv3.f90) da_rfz (da_rfz_cv3.f90) RF0XY RFHX RFHY (da_rf_cv3.f90) RFX RFY (da_rf_cv3.f90) RF0V RFHV (da_rfz_cv3.f9) ZERM (da_mat_cv3.f90)

  16. 1.2 Improve the performance of WRFVar V3 (Cont.) • 1.2.3 Technical consultation on improving the utilization of operational available observations • Eric Chiang and I carefully reviewed the WRFVar surface data (U10, V10, T2, and Q2) assimilation code: da_sfc_wtq.inc and WRF code: module_sf_sfclay/SFCLAY1D • In the cold-start, we can repeated the WRF’s U10, V10, T2, and Q2 in WRFVar because UST, QFX, HFX, PBLH, etc. are all initialized with 0.0. • However, the values of these parameters are updated after U10, V10, T2, and Q2 calculation in WRF and written out in wrfout file, which used as FG by WRFVar. For example, in WRF, the UST is updated after U10,…, were obtained: • UST(I) = 0.5*UST(I) + 0.5*KARMAN*WSPD(I)/PSIX • Moreover, some of parameters, such as MOL (surface heat flux factor), ZNT (roughness), are not included in WRF historic file wrfout. So it is impossible to get the same U10, V10, T2, and Q2 in WRFVar in the cycling runs.

  17. SURFCAE PHYSICS in WRF ZNT, HFX, QFX, UST,ZNT, etc. Chs, Cqs2,… U10, V10, T2, Q2,UST,ZNT,… HFX,QFX ZNT, HFX, QFX,etc. Hpbl,..

  18. 1.2 Improve the performance of WRFVar V3 (Cont.) • 1.2.3 Technical consultation on improving the utilization of operational available observations • Practical implementation (Eric Chiang is continuing to work on it) • Background values of U10, V10, T2, and Q2, which usually are calculated from the non-linear observation operator, are directly read from FG, i.e. WRF historic file: wrfout. This can make these variavbles same in input and output files from WRFVar in case of no data being assimilated. • The tangent linear and adjoint code will still use the WRFVar algorithm, i.e. not use the HFX, QFX, PBLH, UST, etc from WRF historic file.

  19. 1.3 Improve the GPSRO data assimilation for CWB regional application • Single GPSRO tests • Pressure increments problem: • Refractivity: q is the specific humidity g is the water vapor mixing ratio Remarks: Because the q variance at the high level, such as k=37, is close to zero, so the moisture contribution to m’d must be from changes at the low levels.

  20. Single REF tests with CV3(W-E cross-section of increments) At level 20 (about 5-km) At level 37 (about 15-km) U V U V q q q q Remarks: Because the q variance at the high level (=37) is close to zero, so the moisture contribution to m’d must be from changes at the low levels.

  21. 1.3 Improve the GPSRO data assimilation for CWB regional application (Cont.) • Single GPSRO tests without pressure perturbation • To consider the refractivity N is only a function of T and q, but not P, which is regarded as a parameter. • Redeveloped the tangent-linear and adjoint code without P perturbation: • da_transform_xtogpsref_lin.inc.nop • da_transform_xtogpsref_adj.inc.nop • Remarks: • Without P-perturbation in N operator, the T increments at k=20 and 37, and q increment at k=20 are almost same as before, but q increment at k=37 is total deferent from before. • The wind increments are little bit differences from before because there is amost no Psfc increment.

  22. Single REF tests without P perturbation (W-E cross-section of increments) At level 20 (about 5-km) At level 37 (about 15-km) P U P U q q q q

  23. 1.3 Improve the GPSRO data assimilation for CWB regional application (Cont.) • Single GPSRO with 5 outer-loop tests (see 1.2.1) • GPSRO tests for 2009060818Z case • As mentioned in 1.2.1, the assimilation of GPSRO caused the significant q (maximum=-2.8o) and q (maximum=-0.16 g/kg) increments even in the 3rd loops within the W-E cross section. • The experiment without GPSRO was conducted to see what happened. • Remarks: • Without assimilation of GPSRO data, the extremely large q and q increments are disappeared in the 3rd outer-loop. Definitely the assimilation of GPSRO within the CWB domain is an unsolved problem and need further study. For the multiple outer-loops runs, the problem may be more serious. I suggest to do the experiments without GPSRO data for multiple outer-loops run.

  24. W-E cross-section of (loop_03-loop02) for q and q This is corresponding to a GPSRO profile, especially the data at the high levels (?). Ted may pay intensive attention to this: operator? Quality control? q q

  25. Increment between outer-loop_01 and first guess At k = 20, h = 0.55 V U -3 m/s to 3m/s -4 m/s to 4m/s q q -1.5o to 1.5o -1.6 g/kg to 0.6 g/kg

  26. Increment (without GPSRO) between outer-loop_01 and first guess At k = 20, h = 0.55 V U -4 m/s to 4m/s -4 m/s to 4m/s q q -1.8o to 1.0o -2.8 g/kg to 0.0 g/kg

  27. Increment between outer-loop_02 and outer-loop_01 At k = 20, h = 0.55 V U -0.3 m/s to 0.5 m/s -0.4 m/s to 0.8 m/s q q -0.075o to 0.225o -o.44 g/kg to 0.04 g/kg

  28. Increment (without GPSRO) between outer-loop_02 and 01 At k = 20, h = 0.55 V U -0.16 m/s to 0.08 m/s -0.16 m/s to 0.12 m/s q q -0.14o to 0.1o -0.003 g/kg to 0.007 g/kg

  29. Increment between outer-loop_03 and outer-loop_02 At k = 20, h = 0.55 V U -0.2 m/s to 0.2 m/s -0.2 m/s to 0.2 m/s q q -0.075o to 0.225o -o.325 g/kg to -0.025 g/kg

  30. Increment (without GPSRO) between outer-loop_03 and 02 At k = 20, h = 0.55 V U -0.14 m/s to 0.14 m/s -0.1 m/s to 0.14 m/s q q -0.06o to 0.04o -o.0009 g/kg to 0.0001 g/kg

  31. With GPSRO Without GPSRO W-E cross section of the q and q increment between outer-loop_03 and outer-loop_02 through the point (111,64) The strange increments are disappeared without assimilation of GPSRO Operator? Observation error? Quality control? q q q q

  32. 1.4 Training and technical consultation • 1.4.1 Consultation on CWB ZTD data assimilation • Yating Tsai conducted a set of the experiments for SoWMEX case, 2008060100~2008060600 with OP211 • CV3-CTRL • CV3-PWV • CV3-ZTD • CV5-PWV • CV5-ZTD • Preliminary conclusions: • Ground-based data assimilation has the positive impact on the short-range QPF. • PWV assimilation is better than ZTD assimilation • CV5 is better than CV3 because CV3 BES has not been tuned for 5-km domain3, but CV5 has the special BES for 5-km domain3.

  33. 1.4.2 Provide guidance to CWB visitors at UCAR • Eric Chiang: surface observation operator: da_sfc_wtq.inc • Elmy Chen: • ported the OP211 to NCAR IBM (blueifre.ucar.edu) • NCAR IBM: power6, xlf version 12 compiler • CWB IBM : power5, xlf version 10 compiler • After 3 days cycling the differences are significant. • EC-bogus experiments • Suggestions on the work plan (GPSRO??) • Paper for Outer-loop

  34. 2010-02-24_00Z Cold-start VAR_OUT Diff (NCAR-CWB) = -0.0001~0.0002m, ±0.001⁰C Diff = -0.0001~0.00045m, ±0.001⁰C GH interval = 0.005, T interval = 0.0005 850hPa 500hPa

  35. 2010-02-24_00Z Cold-start WRF_input (DFI output) – 自DFI之後差異變大 Diff (NCAR-CWB) = -0.008~0.015m, ±0.1⁰C Diff = -0.016~0.017m, ±0.1⁰C GH interval = 0.1 , T interval = 0.05 850hPa 500hPa

  36. 2010-02-26_18Z 6hr forecast WRF_OUT (from 3 days cycling: 2010022400Z to 2010022618Z) Diff (NCAR-CWB) = -9.68~2.52m, ±2.0⁰C Diff = -14.1~4.18m, ±1.5⁰C GH interval = 4.0 , T interval = 0.05 850hPa 500hPa

  37. EC Bogus experiments • Using EC bogus the RMSE become smaller at U, V, T during the whole period especially at wind field. • The performance of using EC bogus is still better even for 24hr forecast. • Although the values are very similar, using EC bogus have smaller RMSE at average. • The result of verification against observations is consistent with verification against model (EC and NCEP) analysis.

  38. 1.4.3 Technical consultation on general data assimilation issues CWB will perform a month-long experiment with the NCEP GSI system 1.4.4 Provide WRFVar training course at CWB: 3 presentations WRFVar code development: Tangent linear and adjoint code WRFVar code development: Observation operators for GPSRO, GPSZTD, and surface observations, 2-m T, Q, 10-m wind, and Psfc Formulation for wrf_to_xb and xa_to_wrf: Diagnose the pressure and geopotential height

  39. Future work plan for 2010 CWB project • Continue to support for the WRFVar component of CWB operational system: to provide the update version of WRFVar 3.2 for OP22 • Provide the consultation for surface data assimilation • Attempt to understand the usage of the recursive filter in CV3 • Read more paper: Purser et al. (2003) • Read the CV3 related codes and write a note to document the details of CV3 codes • Develop the code for outer-loops with the variable CV3 tuning factors, and conduct the preliminary tests • Assist Ted Iwabuchi to improve the GPSRO data assimilation

  40. END THANK YOU

More Related