1. Evaluation of simulated precipitation fields of some MAP events: sensitivity experiments and model intercomparison ( 1) LA CNRS/UPS, Toulouse, France (2) CNRM, Météo-France, Toulouse, France (3) RPN, Montréal, Canada (4) ISAC, CNR, Bologna, Italy (5) University of L ’Aquila, Italy (6) University of Milano, Italy (7) University of Munich, Germany E. Richard (1), N. Asencio (2), R. Benoit (3), A. Buzzi (4), R. Ferretti (5), F. Lascaux (1), P. Malguzzi (4), S. Serafin (6), G. Zängl (7), J-F. Georgis (1)

3. 1.Sensitivity experiments based upon Meso-NH IOP2a 17 September 1999: A short, intense, isolated, convective event 70 mm within 12h

4. 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 24:00

5. RADAR Reflectivity Z 2000m OBSERVATION MESO-NH COMPUTATION The convective system of MAP - IOP 2a (17 September, 1999, hourly time evolution) Toce Ticino watershed

6. ECMWF: OP. ANA 1999 ARPEGE: OP. ANA. 1999 ECMWF: REANALYSIS RADAR OBSERVATIONS

7. ANA. OP. 1999 REANA: E9MI 850hPa water vapor mixing ratio : 17 September 1999 12UTC IOP 2a

8. ANA. OP. 1999 REANALYSIS 850hPa water vapor mixing ratio : 17 September 1999 12UTC IOP 2a REANA (NO MAP DATA)

9. ECMWF: OP. ANA 1999 ARPEGE: OP. ANA. 1999 ECMWF: OP. ANA. 2002 ECMWF: REANALYSIS MAP - IOP2A: Intense Convection Strong sensitivity to initial state Low predictability RADAR OBSERVATIONS

10. 1. Sensitivity experiments based upon Meso-NH IOP2a 17 September 1999: A short, intense, isolated, convective event 70 mm within 12h 2. Model intercomparison : MC2, MM5, MOLOCH, Meso-NH IOP2b 20/21 September 1999: Orographic enhancement of a frontal system 200 mm within 30h

11. 19 Sept. 1999 12:0020 Sept. 1999 12:00 METEOSAT infrared

12. The different models: MESO-NH10 KM + 2.5 KM MOLOCH10 KM + 2 KM MM5-RE27 KM + 9 KM + 3 KM MM5-E118 KM + 6 KM + 2 KM MC240 KM + 10 KM +2 KM Initial and boundary conditions from ECMWF operational analyses From 19 Sep. 12 UTC to 20 Sep. 18 UTC (30 hours)

13. MAP - IOP2B - 19-20 Sep. 1999 Intercomparison exercise 4 non-hydrostatic models with horizontal resolution of 2 to 3 km Initialization based upon ECMWF operational analysis Accumulated precipitation from the 19th 15 UTC to the 20th 18UTC Toce-Ticino watershed

16. Rain gauges Time evolution of the mean hourly precipitation rate Radar

17. Time evolution of the correlation coeffecient (wrt rain gauges)

18. Heidke skill scores as a function of precip. class 1h precip.27h precip.

19. Comparison with rain gauge measurements (121 points)

20. Conclusion: Two contrasted MAP events !! IOP 2a –Meso-NH results indicate a srong sensitivity to the analysis –The best results are not obtained for the « best analysis » –What is the part of luck ? –Is this conclusion model dependent? –Ideal test for mesoscale assimilation experiments.

21. IOP 2b –Very good consistency of the accumulated precipitation pattern –Model results over/under estimate the total precipitation by a factor ranging from +30% to -30% –The bias may be related to the level of smoothing applied to the model orography –The accuracy of the model precipitation is rather weak for the hourly rainfall but fairly reasonable for the precipitation accumulated over the 30h time period of the event –Radar derived precipitation are not yet very accurate

22. The End ! Interested ?? Join the MAP working group on Numerical Modelling http://www.aero.obs-mip.fr/map/MAP_wgnum

23. Model Topography : Dx = 2KM MC2: Max 3483m MM5: Max 3979m

24. Sensitivity to the topography MAX: 512 mmMAX: 435 mm MEAN: 78 mmMEAN: 74 mm

25. Heidke skill scores as a function of precip. class 1h precip.27h precip. Sensitivity to the topography

26. Sensitivity to the analysis ECMWF Op. Analysis MAP Reanalysis Max: 512 mmMax: 482 mm Mean: 78 mmMean: 87 mm

27. Heidke skill scores as a function of precip. class 1h precip.27h precip. Sensitivity to the analysis

28. Time evolution of the correlation coeffecient (wrt rain gauges) MM5 experiments

29. Time evolution of the correlation coeffecient (wrt rain gauges) MM5 experiments