What is in our head…. Spatial Modeling Performance in Complex Terrain Scott Eichelberger, Vaisala.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Minimum temperature mapping in complex terrain for fruit frost warning Jin I. Yun Kyung Hee University Suwon, Korea.
Advertisements

Matthew Hendrickson, and Pascal Storck
 Provides natural ventilation and usually cools buildings/people because it accelerates the rate of heat transfer  Speed and direction change throughout.
Dynamical Downscaling of surface wind circulations in the Northeast of the Iberian Peninsula Pedro A. Jiménez (UCM-CIEMAT) J. Fidel González-Rouco (UCM)
Cold Fronts and their relationship to density currents: A case study and idealised modelling experiments Victoria Sinclair University of HelsinkI David.
Coupled NMM-CALMET Meteorology Development for the CALPUFF Air Dispersion Modelling in Complex Terrain and Shoreline Settings Presented at: European Geoscience.
Wind Atlas for Egypt: measurements, micro- and mesoscale modelling Niels G. Mortensen, Jake Badger & J. Carsten Hansen Wind Energy Department Risø National.
1 Kalman filter, analog and wavelet postprocessing in the NCAR-Xcel operational wind-energy forecasting system Luca Delle Monache Research.
Precipitation in the Olympic Peninsula of Washington State Robert Houze and Socorro Medina Department of Atmospheric Sciences University of Washington.
Professor Paul Bates SWOT and hydrodynamic modelling.
Presented by : Maryline Mallet Other members involved in this project : Yves Gagnon, Gérard Poitras, René Thibault Development of the Wind Atlas for the.
Nesting. Eta Model Hybrid and Eta Coordinates ground MSL ground Pressure domain Sigma domain  = 0  = 1  = 1 Ptop  = 0.
Daniel P. Tyndall and John D. Horel Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Utah Salt Lake City, Utah.
Brian Ancell, Cliff Mass, Gregory J. Hakim University of Washington
1 Modelled Meteorology - Applicability to Well-test Flaring Assessments Environment and Energy Division Alex Schutte Science & Community Environmental.
Paul Bates SWOT and hydrodynamic modelling. 2 Flooding as a global problem According to UNESCO in 2004 floods caused ….. –~7k deaths –affected ~116M people.
The Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics RegCM3 sensitivity to driving data, resolution and large scale circulation forcing over the.
LiDAR analysis at a site with simple terrain Alex Clerc, Lee Cameron Tuesday 2 nd September
Ensemble Post-Processing and it’s Potential Benefits for the Operational Forecaster Michael Erickson and Brian A. Colle School of Marine and Atmospheric.
The Global Digital Elevation Model (GTOPO30) of Great Basin Location: latitude 38  15’ to 42  N, longitude 118  30’ to 115  30’ W Grid size: 925 m.
Chapter 13 – Weather Analysis and Forecasting. The National Weather Service The National Weather Service (NWS) is responsible for forecasts several times.
SODAR: Uses and Acceptance Laura Tabor Wind Engineering Intern EAPC Wind Energy Services August 7, 2009.
Regional Climate Modeling in the Source Region of Yellow River with complex topography using the RegCM3: Model validation Pinhong Hui, Jianping Tang School.
Forecasting and Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP) NOWcasting Description of atmospheric models Specific Models Types of variables and how to determine.
School of something FACULTY OF OTHER THE SENSITIVITY OF A 3D STREET CANYON CFD MODEL TO UNCERTAINTIES IN INPUT PARAMETERS James Benson*, Nick Dixon, Tilo.
Improving WAsP predictions in (too) complex terrain
STEPS: An empirical treatment of forecast uncertainty Alan Seed BMRC Weather Forecasting Group.
Verification and Case Studies for Urban Effects in HIRLAM Numerical Weather Forecasting A. Baklanov, A. Mahura, C. Petersen, N.W. Nielsen, B. Amstrup Danish.
Quantifying the uncertainty in spatially- explicit land-use model predictions arising from the use of substituted climate data Mike Rivington, Keith Matthews.
Model Construction: interpolation techniques 1392.
June 16th, 2009 Christian Pagé, CERFACS Laurent Terray, CERFACS - URA 1875 Julien Boé, U California Christophe Cassou, CERFACS - URA 1875 Weather typing.
AWS Truewind Methodology Timeline of AWS Truewind participation Key points Wind resource modeling Estimation of plant output Validation and adjustment.
A METHODOLOGY FOR ESTIMATING WIND FARM PRODUCTION THROUGH CFD CODES. DESCRIPTION AND VALIDATION Daniel Cabezón, Ignacio Martí CENER, National Renewable.
Ensemble Prediction with Perturbed Initial and Lateral Boundary Conditions over Complex Terrain Jinhua Jiang, Darko Koracin, Ramesh Vellore Desert Research.
. Outline  Evaluation of different model-error schemes in the WRF mesoscale ensemble: stochastic, multi-physics and combinations thereof  Where is.
How well can we model air pollution meteorology in the Houston area? Wayne Angevine CIRES / NOAA ESRL Mark Zagar Met. Office of Slovenia Jerome Brioude,
Southern California February 9, 2002 MISR mesoscale climate dynamics in Southern California Sebastien Conil Alex Hall IRI, April 4, 2006.
Types of Models Marti Blad Northern Arizona University College of Engineering & Technology.
Due to the financial impact of statements derived from wind atlases, their verification is of high importance. Different wind atlases – reanalysis data.
11th EMS & 10th ECAM Berlin, Deutschland The influence of the new ECMWF Ensemble Prediction System resolution on wind power forecast accuracy and uncertainty.
Page 1© Crown copyright Modelling the stable boundary layer and the role of land surface heterogeneity Anne McCabe, Bob Beare, Andy Brown EMS 2005.
A study on the spread/error relationship of the COSMO-LEPS ensemble Purpose of the work  The spread-error spatial relationship is good, especially after.
Assimilation of radar observations in mesoscale models using approximate background error covariance matrices (2006 Madison Flood Case) 1.
References Conclusions Objectives DYNAMICAL DOWNSCALING OF WIND RESOURCES IN COMPLEX TERRAIN OF CROATIA Stjepan Ivatek-Šahdan, Kristian Horvath and Alica.
Evaluating Local-scale CO 2 Meteorological Model Transport Uncertainty for the INFLUX Urban Campaign through the Use of Realistic Large Eddy Simulation.
NOAA Northeast Regional Climate Center Dr. Lee Tryhorn NOAA Climate Literacy Workshop April 2010 NOAA Northeast Regional Climate.
1 James D. Doyle and Clark Amerault Naval Research Laboratory, Monterey, CA James D. Doyle and Clark Amerault Naval Research Laboratory, Monterey, CA Sensitivity.
ESSL Holland, CCSM Workshop 0606 Predicting the Earth System Across Scales: Both Ways Summary:Rationale Approach and Current Focus Improved Simulation.
Scanning LiDAR in Offshore Wind
Upflow correction method
Results from the Offshore Wind Accelerator (OWA) Power Curve Validation using LiDAR Project Lee Cameron, Alex Clerc, Peter Stuart, Simon Feeney, Ian Couchman.
1Weidinger, T., 2Costa, A. A., 3Lajos, T., 4Kiss, Á.,
European Wind Energy Conference and Exhibition 2009, Marseille, France
Radar/Surface Quantitative Precipitation Estimation
WindNinja Model Domain/Objective
mesoscale climate dynamics
Data management: 10 minute data, 8760 hours Data Q/C, error checking
S.Alessandrini, S.Sperati, G.Decimi,
Stefano Grassi WindEurope Summit
Reducing Uncertainty of Near-shore wind resource Estimates (RUNE) using wind lidars and mesoscale models EMS 2015, Sofia, Bulgaria, Coastal meteorology.
Update 2.2: Uncertainty in Projected Flow Simulations
Lidar Measurement Accuracy under Complex Wind Flow in Use for Wind Farm Projects Matthieu Boquet, Mehdi Machta, Jean-Marc Thevenoud
Validation of mesoscale generalisation procedure for the WRF model
University of Washington Center for Science in the Earth System
Alex Gallagher and Dr. Robert Fovell
Alexey Gusev, Victor Shatalov, Olga Rozovskaya, Nadejda Vulyh
REGIONAL AND LOCAL-SCALE EVALUATION OF 2002 MM5 METEOROLOGICAL FIELDS FOR VARIOUS AIR QUALITY MODELING APPLICATIONS Pat Dolwick*, U.S. EPA, RTP, NC, USA.
Wind Energy Potential in Europe: 2020 – 2030
Rapid Adjustment of Forecast Trajectories: Improving short-term forecast skill through statistical post-processing Nina Schuhen, Thordis L. Thorarinsdottir.
CFARS - Science Working Group Update
Presentation transcript:

Spatial Modeling Performance in Complex Terrain Scott Eichelberger, Vaisala

What is in our head…

What is in our head… Linearized Flow Model Flow = mean + perturbation Sheltering Obstructions Surface Roughness Terrain Variability

Complex Terrain Expectations Over-predict when moving downhill

Complex Terrain Expectations Over-predict when moving downhill Under-predict when moving uphill

Complex Terrain Expectations Over-predict when moving downhill Under-predict when moving uphill Based on these expected errors, best practice is to bracket the wind resource with measurements

Using High Performance Computing to run Numerical Weather Prediction Models

Using High Performance Computing to run Numerical Weather Prediction Models

NWP Model Setup WRF Version 3.5.1 Nested grids: 40.5km, 13.5km, 4.5km, 1.5km, and 500m Reanalysis data: MERRA Terrain data: SRTM 90m Landuse data: GlobCover 300m Time-Varying Microscale Model to final 90m resolution

NWP Model Setup 4.5km resolution 1.5km resolution 500m resolution

NWP Model Setup 4.5km resolution 1.5km resolution 500m resolution All modeling done in the time domain – preserving the weather pattern variability

Site Description Domain Size (25km x 35km) 15 met towers 80m top anemometer height ~2 years of overlapping data across towers Max 1.6 m/s difference between wind speeds at met towers Max 265m difference between elevations at met towers

Site Description Domain Size (25km x 35km) 15 met towers 80m top anemometer height ~2 years of overlapping data across towers Max 1.6 m/s difference between wind speeds at met towers Max 265m difference between elevations at met towers Almost no correlation between elevation and mean wind speed values

Wind Speed vs Elevation Upstream topography blocks wind flow upsetting typical relationship

Round Robin Validation Raw model results are calibrated using a single met tower

Round Robin Validation Raw model results are calibrated using a single met tower Spatial validation is tested by comparing the calibrated data to the observed data at the remaining met towers

Round Robin Validation Raw model results are calibrated using a single met tower Spatial validation is tested by comparing the calibrated data to the observed data at the remaining met towers Process is repeated for each individual met tower

Round Robin Validation Statistics   n 210 Observed RMSE 5.5% Theory RMSE 5.7% A systematic method for quantifying flow model uncertainty in wind resource assessment – Alex Clerc et al.

Elevation Delta vs Error Mesoscale modeling results show no significant relationship between elevation delta and error

Wind Speed Delta vs Error Mesoscale modeling results show no significant relationship between wind speed delta and error

Geographic distribution of bias Weighted Mast Prediction Error (%) Nearest Mast Prediction Error (%) Weighted Predictive Distance (km) Nearest Predictive Distance (km) M1 1.4% -2.3% 14.40 8.52 M2 -4.1% 5.2% 10.30 0.91 M3 0.8% 1.1% 13.45 1.53 M4 7.4% 4.5% 13.40 3.97 M5 4.4% 9.0% 11.25 5.14 M6 1.7% -0.9% 8.84 1.63 M7 6.1% 9.79 1.95 M8 -3.4% -4.6% 11.32 M9 1.5% 2.0% 12.67 M10 -6.7% 11.78 M11 -3.0% 6.2% 9.57 M12 -2.0% 10.58 1.65 M13 -2.4% 13.64 5.82 M14 0.5% 0.0% 9.20 3.21 M15 2.5% 8.30 RMSE 3.8% 4.1% Average 11.23 3.17 Bias 0.3%

Geographic distribution of bias Weighted Mast Prediction Error (%) Nearest Mast Prediction Error (%) Weighted Predictive Distance (km) Nearest Predictive Distance (km) M1 1.4% -2.3% 14.40 8.52 M2 -4.1% 5.2% 10.30 0.91 M3 0.8% 1.1% 13.45 1.53 M4 7.4% 4.5% 13.40 3.97 M5 4.4% 9.0% 11.25 5.14 M6 1.7% -0.9% 8.84 1.63 M7 6.1% 9.79 1.95 M8 -3.4% -4.6% 11.32 M9 1.5% 2.0% 12.67 M10 -6.7% 11.78 M11 -3.0% 6.2% 9.57 M12 -2.0% 10.58 1.65 M13 -2.4% 13.64 5.82 M14 0.5% 0.0% 9.20 3.21 M15 2.5% 8.30 RMSE 3.8% 4.1% Average 11.23 3.17 Bias 0.3% Weighted mast predictions show much better error characteristics than using the nearest mast only, despite the average predictive distance being substantially higher.

What does this mean? You can have “reasonable” predictive uncertainties at distances of >10 km One should distribute measurements in a way that looks for mesoscale wind regime features, not necessarily bracketing the resource Mesoscale models and a good measurement campaign can be leveraged to significantly improve spatial modeling uncertainty – even in complex terrain

Scott Eichelberger scott.eichelberger@vaisala.com Thank you Scott Eichelberger scott.eichelberger@vaisala.com