YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • AMS
    • Monthly Weather Review
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • AMS
    • Monthly Weather Review
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Response of the NMC MRF Model to Systematic-Error Correction within Integration

    Source: Monthly Weather Review:;1992:;volume( 120 ):;issue: 002::page 345
    Author:
    Saha, Suranjana
    DOI: 10.1175/1520-0493(1992)120<0345:ROTNMM>2.0.CO;2
    Publisher: American Meteorological Society
    Abstract: We describe an extensive nudging (within-integration correction) experiment with a large and sophisticated atmospheric model. The model is an R30 version of the National Meteorological Center (NMC) T80 operational global medium-range forecast model. The purpose is to combat the systematic-error growth right from the start of the integration process by adding artificial sources and sinks (the corrections) of heat, momentum, and mass. The corrections derived from 30 antecedent 24-h integrations (by subtracting the forecasts from their verifying initial conditions) are applied to 30 subsequent independent 5-day forecasts from 1 July 1988 to 30 July 1988. Verification statistics over these 30 5-day forecasts are computed for the control cases, the nudged cases, and for forecasts corrected after the fact. The main results show that the nudging process, when carefully designed, does not lead to any technical problems and the model accepts the applied corrections quite faithfully. Both nudging and after-the-fact corrected forecasts have greatly reduced systematic errors. In terms of forecast accuracy, nudging is, on the whole, not better than after-the-fact correction. However, for forecast lead times beyond 10 days, where after-the-fact corrections are currently not possible, nudging is an attractive alternative. The physical process most affected by the nudging process is precipitation. In the nudged model atmosphere without the traditional ?cold bias,? both large-scale and convective precipitation is reduced detrimentally relative to the control runs, possibly due to tuning of the model.
    • Download: (1.374Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Response of the NMC MRF Model to Systematic-Error Correction within Integration

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4202748
    Collections
    • Monthly Weather Review

    Show full item record

    contributor authorSaha, Suranjana
    date accessioned2017-06-09T16:08:39Z
    date available2017-06-09T16:08:39Z
    date copyright1992/02/01
    date issued1992
    identifier issn0027-0644
    identifier otherams-61914.pdf
    identifier urihttp://onlinelibrary.yabesh.ir/handle/yetl/4202748
    description abstractWe describe an extensive nudging (within-integration correction) experiment with a large and sophisticated atmospheric model. The model is an R30 version of the National Meteorological Center (NMC) T80 operational global medium-range forecast model. The purpose is to combat the systematic-error growth right from the start of the integration process by adding artificial sources and sinks (the corrections) of heat, momentum, and mass. The corrections derived from 30 antecedent 24-h integrations (by subtracting the forecasts from their verifying initial conditions) are applied to 30 subsequent independent 5-day forecasts from 1 July 1988 to 30 July 1988. Verification statistics over these 30 5-day forecasts are computed for the control cases, the nudged cases, and for forecasts corrected after the fact. The main results show that the nudging process, when carefully designed, does not lead to any technical problems and the model accepts the applied corrections quite faithfully. Both nudging and after-the-fact corrected forecasts have greatly reduced systematic errors. In terms of forecast accuracy, nudging is, on the whole, not better than after-the-fact correction. However, for forecast lead times beyond 10 days, where after-the-fact corrections are currently not possible, nudging is an attractive alternative. The physical process most affected by the nudging process is precipitation. In the nudged model atmosphere without the traditional ?cold bias,? both large-scale and convective precipitation is reduced detrimentally relative to the control runs, possibly due to tuning of the model.
    publisherAmerican Meteorological Society
    titleResponse of the NMC MRF Model to Systematic-Error Correction within Integration
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume120
    journal issue2
    journal titleMonthly Weather Review
    identifier doi10.1175/1520-0493(1992)120<0345:ROTNMM>2.0.CO;2
    journal fristpage345
    journal lastpage360
    treeMonthly Weather Review:;1992:;volume( 120 ):;issue: 002
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian