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

    Next-Day Convection-Allowing WRF Model Guidance: A Second Look at 2-km versus 4-km Grid Spacing

    Source: Monthly Weather Review:;2009:;volume( 137 ):;issue: 010::page 3351
    Author:
    Schwartz, Craig S.
    ,
    Kain, John S.
    ,
    Weiss, Steven J.
    ,
    Xue, Ming
    ,
    Bright, David R.
    ,
    Kong, Fanyou
    ,
    Thomas, Kevin W.
    ,
    Levit, Jason J.
    ,
    Coniglio, Michael C.
    DOI: 10.1175/2009MWR2924.1
    Publisher: American Meteorological Society
    Abstract: During the 2007 NOAA Hazardous Weather Testbed (HWT) Spring Experiment, the Center for Analysis and Prediction of Storms (CAPS) at the University of Oklahoma produced convection-allowing forecasts from a single deterministic 2-km model and a 10-member 4-km-resolution ensemble. In this study, the 2-km deterministic output was compared with forecasts from the 4-km ensemble control member. Other than the difference in horizontal resolution, the two sets of forecasts featured identical Advanced Research Weather Research and Forecasting model (ARW-WRF) configurations, including vertical resolution, forecast domain, initial and lateral boundary conditions, and physical parameterizations. Therefore, forecast disparities were attributed solely to differences in horizontal grid spacing. This study is a follow-up to similar work that was based on results from the 2005 Spring Experiment. Unlike the 2005 experiment, however, model configurations were more rigorously controlled in the present study, providing a more robust dataset and a cleaner isolation of the dependence on horizontal resolution. Additionally, in this study, the 2- and 4-km outputs were compared with 12-km forecasts from the North American Mesoscale (NAM) model. Model forecasts were analyzed using objective verification of mean hourly precipitation and visual comparison of individual events, primarily during the 21- to 33-h forecast period to examine the utility of the models as next-day guidance. On average, both the 2- and 4-km model forecasts showed substantial improvement over the 12-km NAM. However, although the 2-km forecasts produced more-detailed structures on the smallest resolvable scales, the patterns of convective initiation, evolution, and organization were remarkably similar to the 4-km output. Moreover, on average, metrics such as equitable threat score, frequency bias, and fractions skill score revealed no statistical improvement of the 2-km forecasts compared to the 4-km forecasts. These results, based on the 2007 dataset, corroborate previous findings, suggesting that decreasing horizontal grid spacing from 4 to 2 km provides little added value as next-day guidance for severe convective storm and heavy rain forecasters in the United States.
    • Download: (4.319Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Next-Day Convection-Allowing WRF Model Guidance: A Second Look at 2-km versus 4-km Grid Spacing

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4211242
    Collections
    • Monthly Weather Review

    Show full item record

    contributor authorSchwartz, Craig S.
    contributor authorKain, John S.
    contributor authorWeiss, Steven J.
    contributor authorXue, Ming
    contributor authorBright, David R.
    contributor authorKong, Fanyou
    contributor authorThomas, Kevin W.
    contributor authorLevit, Jason J.
    contributor authorConiglio, Michael C.
    date accessioned2017-06-09T16:32:08Z
    date available2017-06-09T16:32:08Z
    date copyright2009/10/01
    date issued2009
    identifier issn0027-0644
    identifier otherams-69560.pdf
    identifier urihttp://onlinelibrary.yabesh.ir/handle/yetl/4211242
    description abstractDuring the 2007 NOAA Hazardous Weather Testbed (HWT) Spring Experiment, the Center for Analysis and Prediction of Storms (CAPS) at the University of Oklahoma produced convection-allowing forecasts from a single deterministic 2-km model and a 10-member 4-km-resolution ensemble. In this study, the 2-km deterministic output was compared with forecasts from the 4-km ensemble control member. Other than the difference in horizontal resolution, the two sets of forecasts featured identical Advanced Research Weather Research and Forecasting model (ARW-WRF) configurations, including vertical resolution, forecast domain, initial and lateral boundary conditions, and physical parameterizations. Therefore, forecast disparities were attributed solely to differences in horizontal grid spacing. This study is a follow-up to similar work that was based on results from the 2005 Spring Experiment. Unlike the 2005 experiment, however, model configurations were more rigorously controlled in the present study, providing a more robust dataset and a cleaner isolation of the dependence on horizontal resolution. Additionally, in this study, the 2- and 4-km outputs were compared with 12-km forecasts from the North American Mesoscale (NAM) model. Model forecasts were analyzed using objective verification of mean hourly precipitation and visual comparison of individual events, primarily during the 21- to 33-h forecast period to examine the utility of the models as next-day guidance. On average, both the 2- and 4-km model forecasts showed substantial improvement over the 12-km NAM. However, although the 2-km forecasts produced more-detailed structures on the smallest resolvable scales, the patterns of convective initiation, evolution, and organization were remarkably similar to the 4-km output. Moreover, on average, metrics such as equitable threat score, frequency bias, and fractions skill score revealed no statistical improvement of the 2-km forecasts compared to the 4-km forecasts. These results, based on the 2007 dataset, corroborate previous findings, suggesting that decreasing horizontal grid spacing from 4 to 2 km provides little added value as next-day guidance for severe convective storm and heavy rain forecasters in the United States.
    publisherAmerican Meteorological Society
    titleNext-Day Convection-Allowing WRF Model Guidance: A Second Look at 2-km versus 4-km Grid Spacing
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume137
    journal issue10
    journal titleMonthly Weather Review
    identifier doi10.1175/2009MWR2924.1
    journal fristpage3351
    journal lastpage3372
    treeMonthly Weather Review:;2009:;volume( 137 ):;issue: 010
    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