Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Assimilation of surface chemical species observations into the Canadian GEM-MACH model using optimal interpolation Alain Robichaud, Richard Ménard ASTD/ARQD.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Assimilation of surface chemical species observations into the Canadian GEM-MACH model using optimal interpolation Alain Robichaud, Richard Ménard ASTD/ARQD."— Presentation transcript:

1 Assimilation of surface chemical species observations into the Canadian GEM-MACH model using optimal interpolation Alain Robichaud, Richard Ménard ASTD/ARQD Dorval, QC (with the collaboration of Yulia Zaitseva, CMC)

2 Page 2 – June 24, 2016 Outline Milestones Past work (historical OA: Robichaud and Ménard 2014, ACP) Methodology OA for multiple pollutants Impact of assimilating OA on AQ forecasts (24-48 hr) Issues Future Work

3 Page 3 – June 24, 2016 Milestones OA for O3 and PM2.5 (transfered to oper CMC in 2013) Historical OA available for warm season 2002-now for PM2.5 and Ozone (Robichaud and Ménard, 2014, ACP) Extending OA for NO2, NO, PM10 and SO2 (will be transfered to oper 2014-2015) (Zaitseva et al, poster session) New pseudo AQHI- OA (will be transferred to oper in 2014-2015) Sfc data assimilation using OA-offline (current experiment successfull for Ozone, Sulfates and Crustal material in GEM-MACH 1.3.8, Summer 2012) (Presented here) Assimilation exp. extended to other seasons Fusion MAESTRO suites OA and GEM-MACH2 Produce high resolution OA 2.5 km for PANAM games (Toronto 2015; see presentation C. Stroud) and oil sands project Online sfc data assimilation with OA-OI transfered to oper

4 Page 4 – June 24, 2016 Basic equations K = (HP f ) t * (H(HP f ) t +R) -1 1) H(HP f (k 1,k 2 )) t = σ f (k 1 )*σ f (k 2 )*exp { - |x(k 1 )- x(k 2 )|/(L c } 2) Apply (HP f (i,j,k 1 )) t = σ f (i,j)*σ f (k 1 )*exp { - |x(i,j)- x(k 1 )|/(L c } N ~ < 1500 If error stats are gaussian then the above is truly the maximum likelihood estimator of the true state Hypothesis: σ f (i,j) and L c are constant over the whole domain However, a sensitivity analysis was done: it turns out that those 2 parameters are quite sensitive and can be tuned to achieved a better optimization. A A: positive definite (trace (A) > 0; det |A| > 0)

5 Page 5 – June 24, 2016 OA- Ozone

6 Page 6 – June 24, 2016 OA-PM25

7 Page 7 – June 24, 2016 OA-PM10

8 Page 8 – June 24, 2016 Air Quality Health Index mapping Used for public forecast - Multi-pollutant index - Triggers warnings

9 Page 9 – June 24, 2016 OA- AQHI

10 Page 10 – June 24, 2016 Cross-validation Ozone-OA (July)

11 Page 11 – June 24, 2016 Cross-validation Ozone – OA (Jan)

12 Page 12 – June 24, 2016 Cross-validation PM2.5 – OA (July)

13 Page 13 – June 24, 2016 Cross-validation PM2.5 – OA (Jan)

14 Page 14 – June 24, 2016 Impact on forecast

15 Page 15 – June 24, 2016 Methodology i - 1) Average of partitioning ratio sub-species mass TXX1/total PM2.5 for the whole month of July 2012 (from GEMMACH-10 model outputs, v 3.3.8) - 2) Produce a standard file of the partitioning ratio TXX1/PM2.5 for TSU1,TOC1,TEC1,TPC1,TNI1,TAM1 and TCM1 (e.g. mass fraction) - 3) Use the analysis increments PM2.5 OA (computed off-line and available since 2011) a) project in the vertical the analysis increment (linear decrease over n model levels) b) multiply by the appropriate partitioning ratio TXX1/PM2.5 1.0 0 a 1 20 levels LzLz

16 Page 16 – June 24, 2016 Methodology ii INCR(HY,TXX1)=INCR(sfc) PM2.5 * a(HY)* pratio(TXX1) - 4) store (TXX1 -1 (HY,TXX1) + INCR(HY,TXX1)) and put it in field TXX1 o and restart the model - 5) verify AF scores for 24 hour forecasts with independent obs PM2.5 (AIRNOW/EPA and NAPS/CAPMON data) July 1-21 2012

17 Page 17 – June 24, 2016 RATIO Sulfates/PM2.5

18 Page 18 – June 24, 2016 Ratio Crustal Material/PM2.5

19 Page 19 – June 24, 2016 Sensitivity tests for vertical correlation (PM25) – July 2012 – 00Z run Height 1.5 km 4.6 km Random error Syst. error FC2

20 Page 20 – June 24, 2016 Sensitivity tests for vertical correlation (O3) – July 2012 – 00Z run O3 FC2 STD DEV O-P MEAN O-P

21 Page 21 – June 24, 2016 Impact of assimilation on O3 Jul 2011 – run 00Z – US ONLY R S Model and assim NO2 only Assim O3&NO2 and Assim O3 only Model and assim NO2 only

22 Page 22 – June 24, 2016 Impact of assimilating PM2.5 on the forecast: Verifying Reliability (FC2) N ~ 7200 hourly TSU1,TOC1,TEC1, MODEL

23 Page 23 – June 24, 2016 Impact of assimilating PM2.5 on the forecast: Verifying Absolute bias N ~ 7200 hourly TSU1,TOC1,TEC1, MODEL µg/m 3

24 Page 24 – June 24, 2016 Impact of assimilating PM2.5 on the forecast: Verifying ABSOLUTE BIAS N ~ 7200 hourly TCM1,TNI1,TAM1, MODEL

25 Page 25 – June 24, 2016 Impact of assimilating PM2.5 on the forecast: Verifying Reliability (FC2) N ~ 7200 hourly TCM1,TNI1,TAM1, MODEL

26 Page 26 – June 24, 2016 Surface assimilation of TSU1 Verification scores (24 hr avg): % improvement mean absolute bias

27 Page 27 – June 24, 2016 Surface assimilation of TSU1 Verification scores (24 hr avg): % improvement std OmP

28 Page 28 – June 24, 2016 Surface assimilation of TCM1 Verification scores (24 hr avg): % improvement mean ABSOLUTE OmP

29 Page 29 – June 24, 2016 Surface assimilation of TCM1 Verification scores (24 hr avg): % improvement std OmP

30 Page 30 – June 24, 2016 Surface assimilation of PM2.5 Verification scores (24 hr avg): N ~ 172000 METRICMETRIC SUNIAMCMOCECPC MODEL (no assim) Abs (OmP) 5.796.796.666.506.556.736.597.15 Std dev (OmP) 8.469.969.709.649.749.909.6910.77 FC2 0.5610.4790.4800.5160.5190.4880.4910.484 Score 18.325.224.522.522.624.523.926.7 00Z run

31 Page 31 – June 24, 2016

32 Page 32 – June 24, 2016

33 Page 33 – June 24, 2016

34 Page 34 – June 24, 2016 SUMMARY & Conclusions 1) very good results beyond expectations FOR SFC ASSIM. IN GEMMACH-10 (in CHRONOS there was not much impact of the PM2.5 assimilation): now impact on GEM-MACH forecast is HUGE AND WAY beyond 24 hrs. (COMPARABLE TO BEST RESULTS FOUND IN LITTeRATURE) 2) Sulfates, organic carbon and crustal material are the one which give the best results. OC, EC and PC gives moderetaly good results and am,N I provide a small gain. The SUCCESS of the impact for a particular SUB- SPECIES depends on lifetime and abundance (strength of partitioning ratio) 3) GREAT VALUE OF implementing PM2.5 assimilation TO OPERATIONS (we MOVING TOWARDS THAT) 4) on-line results are expected to give even better results ( REQUIRES FUSION OF TWO MAESTRO SUITES)

35 Page 35 – June 24, 2016 OA MAESTRO suite /home/pxarqj/arqj/aro/.suites/rdaqa

36 Page 36 – June 24, 2016 GEM2- MAESTRO suite


Download ppt "Assimilation of surface chemical species observations into the Canadian GEM-MACH model using optimal interpolation Alain Robichaud, Richard Ménard ASTD/ARQD."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google