1 / 39

TAVE OUTLINE

Explore the thorough validation experiment conducted at the Memphis airport using advanced instrumentation and datasets. Preliminary results, logistics, setups, and future improvements are detailed.

micahscott
Download Presentation

TAVE OUTLINE

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. TAMDAR AERIBAGO Validation Experiment (TAVE) - MemphisWayne Feltz, Erik Olson, John Short, Sarah Bedka, Kristopher Bedka, Tim Wagner, and Scott CulticeUniversity of Wisconsin - Madison SSEC/CIMSS

  2. TAVE OUTLINE • TAVE Experiment Description • TAVE Dataset Overview • Preliminary Validation Results • Future Analysis and Deployment • Preliminary RUC vs Aircraft Validation

  3. TAVE LOGISTICS • Location: Memphis airport at Air National Guard • Dates/Timing: 23 February - 08 March 2005 • Weather: Dry, cool, two periods of rainfall, very little in the way of high dewpoint events/convection • Data: Made available in near real-time, netcdf format from anonymous ftp server • Radiosondes - 49 total launches • 12 Tail Numbers with TAMDAR instrumentation (excluding the 3 with bad sensors) Web site: http://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/tamdar/

  4. Memphis Airport Location

  5. Memphis ANG Deployment

  6. Memphis ANG Deployment

  7. AERIBAGO INSTRUMENTATION • Vaisala DigiCORA III RS-92 GPS Sounding System • Atmospheric Emitted Radiance Interferometer (AERI) • GPS Receiver • VAISALA Surface PTU Station • VAISALA 25K Ceilometer • http://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/aeribago/

  8. Instrument Summary • Radiosondes - Vertical temperature and water vapor, Vaisala RS-92 radiosondes, 20 preparation time, 1 1/2 hour flight time, realtime monitoring capability • Surface Station - Vaisala sensors, one minute, p, t, q, v, u, tested and calibrated for accuracy at SSEC • AERI - Vertical temperature and water vapor profiles to three kilometers at ten minute resolution within PBL • GPS - Integrated total water vapor at half hourly time resolution must be at a stationary location for at least ten days • Vaisala Ceilometer - Cloud base heights every ten seconds

  9. TAVE AERIBAGO SETUP

  10. Vaisala DigiCORA-III ReceiverRS-92SGP Capable

  11. Radiosonde Profile vs TAMDAR

  12. GPS Receiver

  13. Vaisala Surface Station

  14. Vaisala Ceilometer

  15. Atmospheric Emitted RadianceInterferometer (AERI)

  16. AERI Thermodynamic Retrievals

  17. Other Datasets Collected • TAMDAR/ACARS Profiles from MADIS and converted to netcdf over Memphis • RUC Analysis Profiles over Memphis • Satellite, radar, and surface imagery • GOES pwv, profiles • All Available at: • ftp://ftp.ssec.wisc.edu/validation/exper/tamdar/data/

  18. PreliminaryTAMDAR Thermodynamic Validation

  19. TAVE Validation Datasets

  20. Radiosonde Schedule Saab 340s arrive / depart in the following groups (local time): 7:35 - 7:55 Arrive 9:20 - 9:55 Depart 12:36 - 1:15 Arrive 14:15 - 15:00 Depart 17:25 - 18:00 Arrive 19:10 - 19:50 Depart TAVE Radiosonde Launch Time Slots: 8:30, 10:15, 14:15, 17:00, and 19:00 Local time Up to 5 Launches per day Careful attention was paid to keep the radiosonde out of sun and allowing sensor to acclimate to outside environment for several minutes before launch

  21. Radiosonde Launch Procedure

  22. Radiosonde Ascent Rate 5,000 ft, reached 5 minutes after launch. 1000 ft/min ascent rate. 10,000 ft, reached 12 minutes after launch. 800 ft/min ascent rate. 24,000 ft, reached 30 minutes after launch. 700 ft/min ascent rate. 30,000 ft, reached 43 minutes after launch. 500 ft/min ascent rate. These balloons are smaller and lighter than the ones the NWS launches at 00Z and 12Z at numerous sites across the US.

  23. Profiles Comparison Examples

  24. Profiles Comparison Examples

  25. Profiles Comparison Examples

  26. Excluded Tail Numbers Tail numbers: 5580, 5598 - bad relative humidity information 5552 - bad temperature information

  27. Radiosonde vs TAMDAR Trajectories Dashed - Descending Solid - Ascending Black lines - State Boundaries

  28. Profile Examples

  29. Statistics for Ascent/DescentTemperature

  30. Statistics for Ascent/DescentRelative Humidity

  31. Statistics for All Matches

  32. Future Validation Improvements • Validation quality of radiosonde water vapor measurements by correlating with Bago surface sensor and AERI radiance intercomparison • TAMDAR sensor QC should be looked at with more scrutiny, maybe rh1 or rh2 should be used instead of rh once consensus between TAMDAR sensor indicates good rh1 or rh2 data • Validation matches should be screened in the vertical as a function of horizontal distance between sensor to help account for horizontal variability of the water vapor

  33. Future Validation ImprovementsContinued • Temperature from ACARS measurements within +/- 30 minutes should be included on rms/bias plots • Time criteria can be tightened with more matches from future deployment • Wind validation using GPS winds from radiosondes vs TAMDAR/ACARS measurements

  34. TAVE Summary • Preliminary Validation is underway • TAVE Data Available: http://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/tamdar • More extensive validation will be presented at Virginia meeting in September • Next Deployment possible in May or July/August in Memphis

  35. Comparison of TAMDAR and non-TAMDAR with RUC 1 hr forecast Ralph Petersen CIMSS Source statistical data provided by Bill Moninger – FSL http://acweb.fsl.noaa.gov/ruc_acars/ Data from weekly ‘fit’ statistics from Mid-January - Mid-March 2005

  36. Comparison of TAMDAR and non-TAMDAR with RUC 1 hr forecast Bias Temperature (oC) Standard Deviation WMO Temperature Requirements for Regional NWP (RMS) - 0.5 oC, Minimum Acceptable 3.0 oC Source statistical data provided by Bill Moninger - FSL Data from Mid-January - Mid-March 2005

  37. Comparison of TAMDAR and non-TAMDAR with RUC 1 hr forecast Bias Speed (m s-1) Standard Deviation WMO Wind Requirements for Regional NWP (RMS) - 1 m s-1, Minimum Acceptable 5 m s-1 Source statistical data provided by Bill Moninger - FSL Data from Mid-January - Mid-March 2005

  38. Comparison of TAMDAR and non-TAMDAR with RUC 1 hr forecast Bias Relative Humidity (%) Standard Deviation WMO Moisture Requirements for Regional NWP (RMS) - 5%, Minimum Acceptable 20% Source statistical data provided by Bill Moninger - FSL Data from Mid-January - Mid-March 2005

  39. Summary of Comparison of TAMDAR and non-TAMDAR with RUC 1 hr forecast Evaluations performed between TAMDAR and all other aircraft - Need to separate reports from similar parts of atmosphere - Need to view in combination with Rawinsonde Co-Locations - Need to have more Q/C information - WMO criteria used here to exclude outliers - May have been too conservative Two data sets show notably different characteristics - Temperature - More TAMDAR outliers (> WMO Specs) and different (cold) bias - Wind - More TAMDAR outliers and Bias ( 3x ) and Standard Deviation larger - Moisture - No WVSS-II comparison made yet - Bias increases as RH increases - RMS near WMO limits (careful since we are comparing to model forecast/analysis) Issue – Who will manage, maintain and distribute TAMDAR Q/C info? - Currently, WMO requires NWS to do this for other aircraft data.

More Related