A Comparison of Multiscale GSI-Based EnKF and 3DVar Data Assimilation Using Radar and Conventional Observations for Midlatitude Convective-Scale Precipitation Forecasts

Abstract

GSI-based data assimilation (DA) system, including three-dimensional variational assimilation (3DVar) and ensemble Kalman filter (EnKF), is extended to the multiscale assimilation of both meso- and synoptic-scale observation networks and convective-scale radar reflectivity and velocity observations. EnKF and 3DVar are systematically compared in this multiscale context to better understand the impacts of differences between the DA techniques on the analyses at multiple scales and the subsequent convective-scale precipitation forecasts.Averaged over 10 diverse cases, 8-h precipitation forecasts initialized using GSI-based EnKF are more skillful than those using GSI-based 3DVar, both with and without storm-scale radar DA. The advantage from radar DA persists for ~5 h using EnKF, but only ~1 h using 3DVar.A case study of an upscale growing MCS is also examined. The better EnKF-initialized forecast is attributed to more accurate analyses of both the mesoscale environment and the storm-scale features. The mesoscale location and structure of a warm front is more accurately analyzed using EnKF than 3DVar. Furthermore, storms in the EnKF multiscale analysis are maintained during the subsequent forecast period. However, storms in the 3DVar multiscale analysis are not maintained and generate excessive cold pools. Therefore, while the EnKF forecast with radar DA remains better than the forecast without radar DA throughout the forecast period, the 3DVar forecast quality is degraded by radar DA after the first hour. Diagnostics revealed that the inferior analysis at mesoscales and storm scales for the 3DVar is primarily attributed to the lack of flow dependence and cross-variable correlation, respectively, in the 3DVar static background error covariance.