Comparative Studies of Different Mesoscale Convection Parameterization Schemes in the Simulation of Mei-Yu Front Heavy Rain

2010 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 132-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ping Fan ◽  
Luo Zhe-Xian
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Li jun ◽  
Du jun ◽  
Liu yu ◽  
Xu jianyu

<p>1.Introduction</p><p>A key issue in developing the ensemble prediction technique is the recognition of uncertain factors in numerical forecasting and how to use appropriate perturbation techniques to reflect these uncertain processes and improve ensemble prediction levels.Plenty of corresponding perturbation techniques have been developed. Such as Initial uncertainty and model uncertainty,In addition to the influence of IC and model uncertainty ,precipitation is closely related to terrain.The influence of terrain on the heavy rain includes the following three aspects:(1) The terrain has significant effect on the climatic distribution of precipitation.(2)The windward slope and leeward slope and other dynamic effects generated by terrain impact the triggering and intensity of precipitation.(3)The thermal effect is triggered by the heating of land surface of terrain at different height and latent heat release when airflow rises ,and this thermal action makes mountain precipitation closely related to terrain distribution .What are the terrain uncertainties in the model?(1)Different vertical coordinate systems lead to significant differences in terrain treatment(2)The conversion from real terrain to model terrain is closely associated with the resolution of the model and different terrain interpolation schemes, and it affects the simulation results of precipitation .(3)Measuring error of real terrain, etc.In this report, A terrain perturbation scheme (ter) has been firstly incorporated into an ensemble prediction system (EPS) and preliminarily tested in the simulation of the extremely heavy rain event occurred on 21 July, 2012 in Beijing, along with other three perturbation schemes.</p><p>2.Case,data and schemes</p><p>(1)Case: Based on the extremely heavy rain case in Beijing on July 21,2012, maximum precipitation center more than 400mm.(2)Data: GEPS of NCEP were used as initial background fields and lateral boundary condition , surface and upper-level observation of GTS,Rain gauge etc.(3)Model: WRFv4.3, 9km horizontal resolution ,511*511 grid point, 51 vertical layers,KF Eta,WSM6,etc(4)Experiments schemes: Four different perturbation schemes were used in the experiments and six members in each experiment. Sch_1(IC) considered the IC uncertainty ,the parameterization schemes were same but IC/LBC came from different GEPS members. Sch_2(phy) considered the Phy uncertainty ,the IC/LBC were same but PHY schemes were comprised of different parameterization schemes. Sch_3-4(ter and icter) considered the terrain uncertainty ,the second aspect of terrain uncertainty was considered in this study. Two different model terrain smoothing schemes and 3 terrain interpolation schemes were used to reflect the forecast error caused by terrain height. Icter is the mixed scheme of ter and ic.</p><p>3.Preliminary test and results</p><p>(1)Precipitation is closely related to terrain, terrain uncertainties have significant effect on the intensity and falling area of precipitation.(2) Only a simple terrain perturbation can produce a significant forecast spread , and its ensemble mean forecast is also improved compared with control forecast. for this case, it has a slightly positive contribution to the spread and probability forecast of precipitation on the basis of not impacting the quality of ensemble mean forecast.(3) In this case, the magnitude of spread generated by the terrain perturbation scheme is significantly smaller than that generated by the initial perturbation and physics process perturbation schemes.</p>


2012 ◽  
Vol 140 (10) ◽  
pp. 3278-3299 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.-W. Bao ◽  
S. G. Gopalakrishnan ◽  
S. A. Michelson ◽  
F. D. Marks ◽  
M. T. Montgomery

Abstract A series of idealized experiments with the NOAA Experimental Hurricane Weather Research and Forecasting Model (HWRFX) are performed to examine the sensitivity of idealized tropical cyclone (TC) intensification to various parameterization schemes of the boundary layer (BL), subgrid convection, cloud microphysics, and radiation. Results from all the experiments are compared in terms of the maximum surface 10-m wind (VMAX) and minimum sea level pressure (PMIN)—operational metrics of TC intensity—as well as the azimuthally averaged temporal and spatial structure of the tangential wind and its material acceleration. The conventional metrics of TC intensity (VMAX and PMIN) are found to be insufficient to reveal the sensitivity of the simulated TC to variations in model physics. Comparisons of the sensitivity runs indicate that (i) different boundary layer physics parameterization schemes for vertical subgrid turbulence mixing lead to differences not only in the intensity evolution in terms of VMAX and PMIN, but also in the structural characteristics of the simulated tropical cyclone; (ii) the surface drag coefficient is a key parameter that controls the VMAX–PMIN relationship near the surface; and (iii) different microphysics and subgrid convection parameterization schemes, because of their different realizations of diabatic heating distribution, lead to significant variations in the vortex structure. The quantitative aspects of these results indicate that the current uncertainties in the BL mixing, surface drag, and microphysics parameterization schemes have comparable impacts on the intensity and structure of simulated TCs. The results also indicate that there is a need to include structural parameters in the HWRFX evaluation.


2005 ◽  
Vol 18 (14) ◽  
pp. 2724-2743 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Venkata Ratnam ◽  
K. Krishna Kumar

Abstract In this study the fifth-generation Pennsylvania State University–National Center for Atmospheric Research (PSU–NCAR) Mesoscale Model (MM5) version 3.5.2 was used to simulate the Indian summer monsoon during the two contrasting years of 1987 and 1988, a dry year and a wet year, respectively. Three different convection parameterization schemes of Betts–Miller–Janjic, Kain–Fritsch, and Grell were used to study the sensitivity of monsoon to cumulus effects. The model was integrated for a period of 6 months, starting from three different initial conditions of 0000 UTC on 1, 2, and 3 May of each year using the NCEP–NCAR reanalysis data as input. The 6-hourly reanalysis data were used to provide the lateral boundary conditions, and the observed weekly Reynolds sea surface temperature, linearly interpolated to 6 h, was used as the lower boundary forcing. The results show that all three cumulus schemes were able to simulate the interannual and intraseasonal variabilities in the monsoon with reasonable accuracy. However, the spatial distribution of the rainfall and its quantity were different in all the schemes. The Grell scheme underestimated the rainfall in both the years. The Kain–Fritsch scheme simulated the observed rainfall well during July and August, the peak monsoon months, of the year 1988 but overestimated the rainfall in June and September of 1988 and throughout the monsoon season of 1987. The Betts–Miller–Janjic scheme simulated less rainfall in the drought year of 1987 and overestimated the rainfall in June and July of 1988. The circulation patterns simulated by the Betts–Miller–Janjic and Kain–Fritsch schemes are comparable to the observed patterns.


MAUSAM ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 579-590
Author(s):  
A. P. DIMRI ◽  
U. C. MOHANTY ◽  
M. AZADI ◽  
L. S. RATHORE

Hkkjrh; {ks= esa ’khr _rq ds nkSjku if’peh fo{kksHkksa ¼MCY;w-Mh-½ dh egRoiw.kZ fo’ks"krkvksa dks izfr:fir djus ds fy, isu LVsV ;wfuoflZVh&us’kuy lsUVj Qksj ,V~eksLQsfjd fjlpZ ¼ih-,l-;w-&,u-lh-,-vkj-½ la;qDr jkT; vejhdk ds xSj ty LFkSfrd :ikUrj ds rkSj ij eslksLdsy ekWMy ¼,e- ,e- 5½ dk mi;ksx fd;k x;k gSA   bl v/;;u esa  nks xzgh; ifjlhek Lrj i)fr;ksa uker%&CySdknj ,oa gkSax&iSu rFkk pkj laogu izkpyhdj.k i)fr;ksa uker% dqvks] xzsy] dSufÝz’k ,oa csV~l&feYyj ds 60 fd- eh- ds {kSfrt foHksnu ekWMy dk mi;ksx djds vkB lqxzkfgrk iz;ksx fd, x, gaSA blesa {kSfrt foHksnu ekWMy rFkk LFkykÑfr ds egRo ds nks dkjdksa&30 fd-eh-] 60 fd-eh- ,oa 90 fd- eh- ds {kSfrt foHksnu ekWMy ftlesa ,d fLFkfr esa LFkykÑfr ij fopkj ugha fd;k x;k gS rFkk nwljh esa lkekU; LFkykÑfr ij fopkj fd;k x;k gS] ds vk/kkj ij N% iz;ksx djds v/;;u fd;k x;k gSA bl v/;;u ds fy, nks lfØ; if’peh fo{kksHkksa dk p;u fd;k x;k gS ftlds dkj.k if’peh fgeky; {ks= esa Hkkjh o`f"V gqbZA izFke v/;;u ds fy, 18 tuojh ls 21 tuojh] 1997 rd dh vof/k ds nkSjku ds if’peh fo{kksHk dk p;u fd;k x;k gS rFkk nwljs iz;ksx ds fy, 20 tuojh ls 25 tuojh] 1999 dh vof/k ds nkSjku ds if’peh fo{kksHk dk p;u fd;k x;k gSA blesa vkjafHkd rFkk lhekar fLFkfr;ksa ds fy, us’kuy lsUVj QkWj bu~okbjWuesUV fizMhD’ku&us’kuy lsUVj QkWj ,V~eksLQsfjd fjlpZ ¼,u- lh-  b- ih-&,u- lh- , - vkj-½ la;qDr jkT; vejhdk }kjk iqufoZ’ysf"kr vkaadM+ksa dk mi;ksx fd;k x;k gSA   bl v/;;u ls ;g irk pyk gS fd gkSax&iSu vkSj csV~l feYyj dh Øe’k% xzgh; ifjlhek Lrj rFkk es?k laogu izkpyhdj.k i)fr ds la;kstu dk izn’kZu  mi;ksx dh xbZ vU; la;kstu i)fr;ksa ds rqyuk esa lcls vPNk jgk gSA vkn’kZ HkkSfrdh ¼ekWMy fQftDl½ vU; la;kstu i)fr;ksa dh rqyuk esa bl la;kstu ds }kjk leqnz ry dk nkc T;knk lgh izfr:fir djus esa l{ke jgh  gSA blds vykok LFkykÑfr jfgr {ks= esa if’peh fo{kksHk dk izfr:i.k lkekU; LFkykÑfr esa izfr:fIkr if’peh fo{kksHk dh rqyuk esa de o"kkZ dh ek=k dks n’kkZrk gSA tc blesa lkekU; LFkykÑfr dks ’kkfey fd;k x;k rks fgeky; {ks= ds vkl&ikl Hkkjh o"kkZ gqbZA o"kkZ ds {ks=ksa ds ,dhÑr ekWMy lR;kfir fo’ys"k.k ds vuq:Ik ik, x, gaSA o"kkZ {ks=ksa ds  lqxzkfgrk v/;;u ls irk pyk gS fd NksVs izHkko& {ks= ¼30 fd-eh-½ ds izfr:fir ekWMy vPNs ifj.kke nsrs gSaA       ”                                                              A non-hydrostatic version of the Penn State University - National Center for Atmospheric Research (PSU-NCAR), US, Mesoscale Model (MM5) is used to simulate the characteristic features of the Western Disturbances (WDs) occurred over the Indian region during winter. In the present study sensitivity eight experiments are carried out by using two planetary boundary layer schemes, viz., Blackadar and Hong-Pan, and four convection parameterization schemes, viz., Kuo, Grell, Kain-Fristch and Betts-Miller, with 60 km horizontal model resolution. And also the role of horizontal model resolution and topography is studied by carrying out six experiments based on two factors: horizontal model resolution of 30 km, 60 km and 90 km with assumed no topography and normal topography. For this study two active WDs are chosen which yielded extensive precipitation over western Himalayas. WD from 18 to 21 January 1997 is chosen for study one and WD from 20 to 25 January 1999 is chosen for experiment two. National Center for Environmental Prediction – National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCEP-NCAR), US, reanalyzed data is used for initial and boundary conditions.                It is found that the performance of combination of the Hong-Pan and Betts-Miller as planetary boundary layer and cloud convection parameterization schemes respectively is best compared to the other combinations of schemes used in this study. The model physics could able to simulate sea level pressure better with this combination as compared to the combinations with other schemes. Further, WD simulations with assumed no topography shows lesser amount of precipitation compared to WD simulations with normal topography. When normal topography is included, intense localized of precipitation was observed along the Himalayan range. Model integrations of precipitation fields are found close to the corresponding verification analysis. Sensitivity studies of precipitation field shows that finer domain (30 km) of the model simulation gives better results.


Author(s):  
Sridhara Nayak ◽  
Suman Maity

In this study, we explored the performance of the cumulus convection parameterization schemes of Regional Climate Modeling System (RegCM) towards the Indian summer monsoon (ISM) of a catastrophic year through various numerical experiments conducted with different convection schemes (Kuo, Grell amd MIT) in RegCM. The model is integrated at 60KM horizontal resolution over Indian region and forced with NCEP/NCAR reanalysis. The simulated temperature at 2m and the wind at 10m are validated against the forced data and the total precipitation is compared with the Global Precipitation Climatology Centre (GPCC) observations. We find that the simulation with MIT convection scheme is close to the GPCC data and NCEP/NCAR reanalysis. Our results with three convection schemes suggest that the RegCM with MIT convection scheme successfully simulated some characteristics of ISM of a catastrophic year and may be further examined with more number of convection schemes to customize which convection scheme is much better.


Author(s):  
Xu Zhang ◽  
Jian-Wen Bao ◽  
Baode Chen ◽  
Wei Huang

AbstractCoarse-grained results from a large-eddy simulation (LES) using the Weather Research and Forecast Model (WRF) were compared in this study with the WRF simulations at a typical convection-permitting horizontal grid spacing of 3 km for an idealized case of deep moist convection. The purpose of this comparison is to identify major differences at the subgrid process level between two widely-used deep convection parameterization schemes in the WRF model. It is shown that there are considerable differences in subgrid process representations between the two schemes due to different parameterization formulations and underlying assumptions. The two schemes not only differ in trigger function, subgrid cloud model, and closure assumptions but also disagree with the coarse-grained LES results in terms of vertical mass flux profiles. Thus, it is difficult to discern which scheme is more advantageous over the other at the subgrid process level. The conclusions from this study highlight the importance of establishing benchmarks using observations and LES to develop and evaluate convection parameterization schemes suitable for models at convection-permitting resolution.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document