Verification of LAMI: QPF over northern Italy and vertical profiles

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
QPF verification of the 4 model versions at 7 km res. (COSMO-I7, COSMO-7, COSMO-EU, COSMO-ME) with the 2 model versions at 2.8 km res. (COSMO- I2, COSMO-IT)
Advertisements

VERIFICATION Highligths by WG5. 9° General MeetingAthens September Working package/Task on “standardization” The “core” Continuous parameters: T2m,
QPF verification of DWD-LM and LAMI model using high resolution non-GTS data in Piedmont region and Northern Italy Working Group 5: Verification and Case.
For the Lesson: Eta Characteristics, Biases, and Usage December 1998 ETA-32 MODEL CHARACTERISTICS.
452 Precipitation. Northwest Weather = Terrain + Ocean Influence.
Verification of DWD Ulrich Damrath & Ulrich Pflüger.
MOS Developed by and Run at the NWS Meteorological Development Lab (MDL) Full range of products available at:
Rapid Update Cycle Model William Sachman and Steven Earle ESC452 - Spring 2006.
MOS Performance MOS significantly improves on the skill of model output. National Weather Service verification statistics have shown a narrowing gap between.
Ensemble Post-Processing and it’s Potential Benefits for the Operational Forecaster Michael Erickson and Brian A. Colle School of Marine and Atmospheric.
COSMO General Meeting Zurich, 2005 Institute of Meteorology and Water Management Warsaw, Poland- 1 - Verification of the LM at IMGW Katarzyna Starosta,
COSMO General Meeting – Moscow Sept 2010 Some results from operational verification in Italy Angela Celozzi - Federico Grazzini Massimo Milelli -
Verification Precipitation verification (overestimation): a common view of the behaviour of the LM, aLMo and LAMI Francis Schubiger and Pirmin Kaufmann,
SEASONAL COMMON PLOT SCORES A DRIANO R ASPANTI P ERFORMANCE DIAGRAM BY M.S T ESINI Sibiu - Cosmo General Meeting 2-5 September 2013.
We carried out the QPF verification of the three model versions (COSMO-I7, COSMO-7, COSMO-EU) with the following specifications: From January 2006 till.
Latest results in verification over Poland Katarzyna Starosta, Joanna Linkowska Institute of Meteorology and Water Management, Warsaw 9th COSMO General.
The latest results of verification over Poland Katarzyna Starosta Joanna Linkowska COSMO General Meeting, Cracow September 2008 Institute of Meteorology.
Modification of GFS Land Surface Model Parameters to Mitigate the Near- Surface Cold and Wet Bias in the Midwest CONUS: Analysis of Parallel Test Results.
Tamas Kovacs Hungarian Meteorological Service Climatology Division Seasonal forecast and an outlook for Winter 2013/14 in Hungary Tamas Kovacs - 10th Session.
Operational ALADIN forecast in Croatian Meteorological and Hydrological Service 26th EWGLAM & 11th SRNWP meetings 4th - 7th October 2004,Oslo, Norway Zoran.
2006(-07)TAMDAR aircraft impact experiments for RUC humidity, temperature and wind forecasts Stan Benjamin, Bill Moninger, Tracy Lorraine Smith, Brian.
Verification Verification with SYNOP, TEMP, and GPS data P. Kaufmann, M. Arpagaus, MeteoSwiss P. Emiliani., E. Veccia., A. Galliani., UGM U. Pflüger, DWD.
PP QPF Workshop, Langen, 8 March 2007 Simulations of the Piedmont test case: PP QPF WP 3.2 M. Milelli*, E. Oberto*, A. Parodi** *ARPA Piemonte,
U. Damrath, COSMO GM, Athens 2007 Verification of numerical QPF in DWD using radar data - and some traditional verification results for surface weather.
General Meeting Moscow, 6-10 September 2010 High-Resolution verification for Temperature ( in northern Italy) Maria Stefania Tesini COSMO General Meeting.
ITSC-1227 February-5 March 2002 Use of advanced infrared sounders in cloudy conditions Nadia Fourrié and Florence Rabier Météo France Acknowledgement G.
Validation of Satellite-derived Clear-sky Atmospheric Temperature Inversions in the Arctic Yinghui Liu 1, Jeffrey R. Key 2, Axel Schweiger 3, Jennifer.
Overview of WG5 activities and Conditional Verification Project Adriano Raspanti - WG5 Bucharest, September 2006.
Verification A first attempt to WP Preliminary results of one test case Matteo Buzzi, Pirmin Kaufmann, Dominique Ruffieux, Francis Schubiger MeteoSwiss.
VERIFICATION Highligths by WG5. 2 Outlook Some focus on Temperature with common plots and Conditional Verification Some Fuzzy verification Long trends.
Progress in Radar Assimilation at MeteoSwiss Daniel Leuenberger 1, Marco Stoll 2 and Andrea Rossa 3 1 MeteoSwiss 2 Geographisches Institut, University.
10th COSMO General Meeting, Cracow, Poland Verification of COSMOGR Over Greece 10 th COSMO General Meeting Cracow, Poland.
Comparison of LM Verification against Multi Level Aircraft Measurements (MLAs) with LM Verification against Temps Ulrich Pflüger, Deutscher Wetterdienst.
Latest results in the precipitation verification over Northern Italy Elena Oberto, Marco Turco, Paolo Bertolotto (*) ARPA Piemonte, Torino, Italy.
Forecast Pressure. Pressure Observations ASOS is the best…the gold standard Ships generally the worst.
Centro Nazionale di Meteorologia e Climatologia Aeronautica Common Verification Suite Zurich, Sep 2005 Alessandro GALLIANI, Patrizio EMILIANI, Adriano.
Use of radar data in the HIRLAM modelling consortium
Studies with COSMO-DE on basic aspects in the convective scale:
Current verification results for COSMO-EU and COSMO-DE at DWD
Moving from Empirical Estimation of Humidity to Observation: A Spatial and Temporal Evaluation of MTCLIM Assumptions Using Regional Networks Ruben Behnke.
HIRLAM mesoscale report
5Developmental Testbed Center
Dan Petersen Bruce Veenhuis Greg Carbin Mark Klein Mike Bodner
Recent changes in the ALADIN operational suite
Impact of the vertical resolution on Climate Simulation using CESM
Model Post Processing.
(Elena Oberto, Massimo Milelli - ARPA Piemonte)
Improving weather forecasts using surface observations:
Daniel Leuenberger1, Christian Keil2 and George Craig2
Forecast Pressure.
MOS Developed by and Run at the NWS Meteorological Development Lab (MDL) Full range of products available at:
Forecast Pressure.
Post Processing.
COSMO General Meeting 2009 WG5 Parallel Session 7 September 2009
Verification Overview
Thomas Gastaldo, Virginia Poli, Chiara Marsigli
Matthias Raschendorfer 2007
Item Taking into account radiosonde position in verification
Simulations of the Piedmont test case:
Deterministic (HRES) and ensemble (ENS) verification scores
Christoph Gebhardt, Zied Ben Bouallègue, Michael Buchhold
2007 Mei-yu season Chien and Kuo (2009), GPS Solutions
Validation for TPW (PGE06)
T 2m and QPF LAMI verification Jan - Mar 2003 Patrizio Emiliani
MOS What does acronym stand for ?
Verification Overview
Ulrich Pflüger & Ulrich Damrath
Latest Results on Variational Soil Moisture Initialisation
A climatology of freezing precipitation over the Ukraine and Moldova
Short Range Ensemble Prediction System Verification over Greece
Presentation transcript:

Verification of LAMI: QPF over northern Italy and vertical profiles Elena Oberto (*), Paolo Bertolotto (*), Massimo Milelli (*) (*) ARPA Piemonte, Torino, Italy

Objectives Verification of LAMI QPF: Verification of LAMI soundings: Italian data set situation Period considered for validation: June 2002- February 2003 We compare the average value of rain over different mesh size boxes (in each box there must be at least 2 station points) Verification of LAMI soundings: Period: December 2003 - February 2003 Cesana Pariol (1545 m) Cuneo Levaldigi (386 m)

The new radiosounding of Cesana Pariol (1545 m), placed in the Olympic area, is used to compare the observed and forecasted vertical profiles (at 00UTC every day) An other radiosounding in our region is placed near Cuneo Levaldigi Airport (installed in 1999, since 1 year it is a GTS station): we perform the same vertical profile verification to have a comparison with a station in a non-mountainous area. Mean error (BIAS) and Root Mean Square Error for each level (25hPa) of the vertical profiles (00UTC LAMI run for +24h and +48h forecast time) from Dec ‘02 to Feb ‘03. Cesana Pariol (45° N 6.8° E): station point 1545 m grid point 1970 m Cuneo Levaldigi (44.5° N 7.6° E): station point 386 m grid point 387 m !

Box subdivision

Situation of data set for Italy: data used data not yet useful data soon available

Main results 24h averaged scores for QPF 6h averaged scores for QPF (diurnal cycle and seasonal trend) Soundings profiles: temperature rh dew point temperature wind velocity

BIAS: average over boxes in 24h for LAMI 00UTC

ETS: average over boxes in 24h for LAMI 00UTC

6h seasonal trend

Comments LAMI bias is always > 1; better skills for the second 24h there is no variation of results with the mesh size the diurnal cycle is evident (worst results between 18-24UTC) and is influenced by the Autumn precipitation pattern The model is systematically more humid than the reality (from our experience: GME is more humid than ECMWF) It is also colder than observations, at least in the lower layers of the atmosphere There is a general slight degrade of the results in the second 24h There are great differences in the PBL region probably due to: wrong elevation of Cesana grid point in the model orography parameterisation problems in the PBL ?

ROC diagram: average over 0.5° boxes in 24h for LAMI00-LAMI12