1 / 21

Comparing RUC20 Precipitation Forecasts to NEXRAD Radar-Derived Precipitation Totals

Comparing RUC20 Precipitation Forecasts to NEXRAD Radar-Derived Precipitation Totals. Holly A. Anderson Dynamical Weather Prediction April 23, 2008. Lightning Cessation at KSC.

illiana-hunter
Download Presentation

Comparing RUC20 Precipitation Forecasts to NEXRAD Radar-Derived Precipitation Totals

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. Comparing RUC20 Precipitation Forecasts to NEXRAD Radar-Derived Precipitation Totals Holly A. Anderson Dynamical Weather Prediction April 23, 2008

  2. Lightning Cessation at KSC Melbourne, FL WSR-88D lowest elevation angle (0.5°) plan-view with cross-section. White dots are source sparks for Lightning Detection And Ranging (LDAR) lightning flashes. Red dashes (pluses) are negative (positive) National Lightning Detection Network (NLDN) cloud-to-ground (CG) lightning strike points.

  3. How does NWP fit in? • Rapid Update Cycle (RUC) analysis data at a 20km resolution is used to compute the radar reflectivities at meteorologically-significant isotherms, such as the melting level and -10°C. • RUC data is also used to compute other parameters that help simulate the “near storm” environment. Clockwise from top left: K-Mean cluster based on 30-dBZ reflectivity, reflectivity at the 0°C isotherm, reflectivity at the -20°C isotherm, and reflectivity at the -10°C isotherm.

  4. Forecasting Lightning Cessation • Using the RUC20 analysis data to compute the near-storm environment, and using radar-derived parameters, I hope to develop a scheme to forecast the last lightning flash of a thunderstorm. Melbourne WSR-88D radar-derived five-minute precipitation with NLDN CG strikes overlaid.

  5. Comparing RUC20 to Observed Precipitation • Since I use RUC20 analysis data in my personal research, I decided to look into the RUC20 model, its specifications, and particularly its performance in forecasting precipitation. • For this project, I will compare the RUC20 precipitation forecasts to quality-controlled NEXRAD radar-derived precipitation totals. • Comparing the two datasets will demonstrate how the RUC20 model performs at predicting precipitation.

  6. RUC20 Convective Parameterization • The RUC20 uses the Grell and Devenyi (2001) ensemble approach to parameterize convection: • Based on the Grell (1993) scheme but uses an ensemble of various closure assumptions: • ∂CAPE/∂t • Removal of total CAPE (Kain and Fritsch, 1992) in a specified time period • Low-level horizontal moisture convergence • Low-level mass flux at cloud base • A total of 108 closure assumptions are used in the Grell/Devenyi convective scheme. • For more information, see the RUC20 - NWS Technical Procedures Bulletin at ruc.noaa.gov/ppt_pres/RUC20-tpb.pdf.

  7. Data Sources • RUC20 Model Forecasts • 00Z analysis • 6-hour forecast • 12-hour forecast • NEXRAD Stage-IV Precipitation Totals • Quality-controlled NEXRAD-derived data serves as “ground truth” observation. • Dates chosen: • March 31, 2008 • April 20, 2008

  8. RUC20 3-Hourly Accumulated Precipitation – F06 [1st Day]

  9. NEXRAD-Derived Precipitation Totals [1st Day]

  10. Differences between RUC20 and NEXRAD [1st Day]

  11. RUC-20 3-Hourly Accumulated Precipitation – F12 [1st Day]

  12. NEXRAD-Derived Precipitation Totals [1st Day]

  13. Differences between RUC20 and NEXRAD [1st Day]

  14. RUC20 3-Hourly Accumulated Precipitation – F06 [2nd Day]

  15. NEXRAD-Derived Precipitation Totals [2nd Day]

  16. Differences between RUC20 and NEXRAD [2nd Day]

  17. RUC20 3-Hourly Accumulated Precipitation – F12 [2nd Day]

  18. NEXRAD-DerivedPrecipitation Totals [2nd Day]

  19. Differences between RUC20 and NEXRAD [2nd Day]

  20. How did the RUC20 compare? • The RUC20 does a promising job of predicting the orientation and general areas of expected precipitation. • The RUC20 appears to over-forecast the spatial extent of precipitation. The “blobs” of predicted precipitation are much larger than the observed. • The RUC20 appears to under-forecast the actual amount of precipitation, especially in areas of heavy lines of convection.

  21. How does this affect my lightning cessation research? • This study reconfirms the fact that no model is perfect. • Luckily, for my research, I derive precipitation totals from observational NEXRAD data, since my thunderstorm cases are archived. • Right now, I don’t have to use RUC20 forecast data to predict precipitation. • However, when I develop the forecasting scheme, I may find myself utilizing RUC20 (or perhaps RUC13) data to predict future areas of precipitation that could be associated with lightning.

More Related