1 / 30

Introducing the Lokal-Modell LME at the German Weather Service

Introducing the Lokal-Modell LME at the German Weather Service. Jan-Peter Schulz Deutscher Wetterdienst COSMO General Meeting 2005. The expansion of the LM domain has been requested by the following (internal) DWD customers:. LME: LM Europe. Aviation consulting Sea traffic consulting

barr
Download Presentation

Introducing the Lokal-Modell LME at the German Weather Service

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. Introducing the Lokal-Modell LMEat the German Weather Service Jan-Peter Schulz Deutscher Wetterdienst COSMO General Meeting 2005

  2. The expansion of the LM domain has been requested by the following (internal) DWD customers: LME: LM Europe • Aviation consulting • Sea traffic consulting • Particle dispersion modelling

  3. Modifications from LM to LME • Number of grid points per layer enhanced from 325 x 325 to 665 x 657, mesh size unchanged at 7 km x 7 km

  4. LME: LM Europe • Model Configuration Grid spacing: 0.0625° (~ 7 km) 665 x 657 grid points per layer 40 vertical layers Timestep: 40 sec Daily runs at 00, 12, 18 UTC, +78h • Boundary Conditions Interpolated GME forecasts with ds ~ 40 km and 40 layers (hourly) Hydrostatic pressure at lateral boundaries • Data Assimilation Nudging analysis scheme Variational soil moisture analysis SST analysis at 00 UTC Snow depth analysis every 6 hrs Model Domain of LME

  5. Modifications from LM to LME • Number of grid points per layer enhanced from 325 x 325 to 665 x 657, mesh size unchanged at 7 km x 7 km • Number of layers increased from 35 to 40. Lowest model layer now 10 m above ground (before: 34 m) • Coordinate system rotated differently. LME grid points do not exactly match with LM grid points (important for post processing). • Forecast period enhanced from 48h to 78h • New multi-layer soil model with solution of heat conduction equation, inclusion of the effects of freezing/melting of soil water and improved snow model • Planned operational introduction: 28 September 2005

  6. Configuration of the New Multi-Layer Soil Model

  7. Multi-Layer Soil Model In order to demonstrate the capabilities of the new multi-layer soil model the following forecasts were carried out: 24 November 2004, 00 UTC + 24h. 1. Without freezing/melting of soil water 2. With freezing/melting of soil water The grid point Essen (Germany) is considered. Shown are the soil temperature T_SO, the soil water content W_SO and the soil ice content W_SO_ICE.

  8. Variational Soil Moisture Analysis (SMA) The SMA is active in LME since 3 May 2005, 00 UTC. Before switching on the SMA in LME the verification results for 2-m temperature were of lower quality for LME than for LM. Meanwhile, the verification results for LME improved continuously, as expected, and have reached the level of the LM results.

  9. Behaviour of the SMA (07 June 2005) Moisture increment by SMA Upper soil layers Lower soil layers 2-m temperature forecast error

  10. Behaviour of the SMA (07 June 2005) Solar net radiation at the ground Total cloud cover

  11. Behaviour of the SMA (07 June 2005) Moisture change (increment) during the model forecast Upper soil layers Lower soil layers Solar net radiation at the ground

  12. Experiments at DWD Comparison of operational weather forecasts of LM and LME.

  13. LM LME

  14. LME GME March 2005, 00 UTC forecasts LME domain (land and sea)

  15. Verification results There is positive trend in the simulated precipitation amount during the forecasts of LME which is not present in LM or the global model GME. Furthermore, when comparing LME and GME it turns out that evaporation over sea is considerably higher in LME. Therefore, an LME experiment has been carried out where evaporation over sea is reduced by adjusting one parameter in the surface layer scheme.

  16. Kinetic Energy

  17. Kinetic Energy

  18. Conclusions • LM and LME give generally very similar forecasts on the LM domain. • But in some cases the LME solution deviates from the LM solution and the weather given by the driving model. LME is more able to develop its own weather regime in the interior of the model domain. • Objective verification shows some advantages for LME gusts, but some disadvantages for mean sea level pressure and 2-m temperature. The latter can be explained by the fact that the SMA was not active in LME in this period.

  19. Conclusions • There is a positive trend in the simulated precipitation amount during the forecasts of LME. • This trend can be substantially reduced by reducing evaporation over sea. By this, atmospheric water vapour content is decreased which leads to less intense cyclogenesis. This improves the negative bias in surface pressure. • Atmospheric kinetic energy is increasing during LME forecasts. This may be a hint that sub-grid scale orographic effects still need to be considered in LME (like in GME).

More Related