Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Evaluation of several WRF/NMM- CMAQ vertical coupling configurations Pius Lee, Jeff McQueen, Marina Tsildulko, Geoff DiMego Sarah Lu and Bert Katz NOAA/NCEP.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Evaluation of several WRF/NMM- CMAQ vertical coupling configurations Pius Lee, Jeff McQueen, Marina Tsildulko, Geoff DiMego Sarah Lu and Bert Katz NOAA/NCEP."— Presentation transcript:

1 Evaluation of several WRF/NMM- CMAQ vertical coupling configurations Pius Lee, Jeff McQueen, Marina Tsildulko, Geoff DiMego Sarah Lu and Bert Katz NOAA/NCEP Environmental Modeling Center Rohit Mathur, Hsin-Mu Lin, Daiwen Kang, Tanya Otte, Jon Pleim, George Pouliot, David Wong, Jeff Young, and Ken Schere U.S. EPA/ORD/ASMD and NOAA/OAR/ARL

2 WRF/NMM Hybrid Coordinate ground Pressure domain Sigma domain η1= 1; η2= 0 η 1 = 1; η 2 = 1 PTPT HYBRID PD T +P T η1= 0; η2= 0 Upper-levels Pressure Lower-levels σ-p Lin et al, Poster Session 3.1

3 WRF/NMM  ’ s limited to 0-1 Jacobian across the  -p interface Lin et al, Poster Session 3.1

4 Remarks on the hybrid layer cases (22L) 22 layers: Choose model layers aligned close to those used in the current National Air Quality Forecast System (AQFS). 14 lowest layers spanned ~ 2 km *(29L) 29 layers: Finer resolution than (a) in lowest 500m; top of PBL; and near tropopause. (40L) 40 layers: As fine as the met model for lowest 3.5 km. *29L result rather similar to that of 22L

5 Hybrid (a) 22L, (b) 29L, and (c) 40L

6 O3 episode (h max) Aug 3rd, 2006

7 22L-40L 40L reduced low bias for regions near Bakersfield 40L reduced high bias for regions near mid Long Island

8 Spatial verification for 22L

9 Spatial verification for 40L

10 Cross section on Central Valley, CA Cross section on Mid Long Island, NY

11 S S N N W W E E Bakersfield 1 pm Local PBL and Kz descriptions with less interoplation error O3

12 S S N N W WE E Bakersfield 1 am local O3 Resolves inversion better, retains more residual O3

13 NOy S S N N W W E E Bakersfield 1 pm Local Industrial plume from south.

14 S S N NW W E E Bakersfield 1 am localNOy Lower diffusivity Resulted in relatively un-dispersed plume heading eastward

15 Formaldehyde S S N NW W E E Bakersfield 1 pm Local A more concentrated plume of VOC and biogenic product coming from Southwest

16 S S N NW W E E Bakersfield 1 am local Formaldehyde Better description of residual and surface layers

17 CO S S N NW WE E Bakersfield 1 pm Local

18 S S N NW W E E Bakersfield 1 am localCO Better description of inversion, increased surface level concentrations

19 O3 S S N NW W E E Mid Long Island 4 pm local time Increased high bias for an offshore point to the south of Long Island Decrease high bias for New York City

20 S S N N W W E E O3 Mid Long Island 4 am local time Stronger inversion resulted in higher concentration in residual layer

21 S S N N W W E E Mid Long Island 4 pm local time NOy Better description of PBL also better description of sea breeze return flow

22 S S N N W W E E Mid Long Island 4 am local time NOy Species such as PAN will contribute to elevated surface O3 upon sunrise

23 S S N N W W E E Mid Long Island 4 pm local time Formaldehyde Reduction of high bias near New York City for VOC and biogenic photochemical products

24 S S N N W WE E Mid Long Island 4 am local time Formaldehyde Maintains a less dispersed plume of sea breeze return flow

25 Summary Three resolutions of a lower-levels σ-p terrain following and upper-levels pressure hybrid vertical co- ordinate systems have been tested: (a) 22L, (b) 29L, and ( c) 40L 40L is superior in two challenging localities: (1) Central Valley, CA: Perennial inversion; and Subsidence due to orographic and channel flows (2) Long Island, NY: Surrounding complex terrain and land-sea breezes Future work: Derivation of an Optimal vertical structure σ

26 22L-29L

27 29L-40L

28 Spatial verification for 29L

29 Definition based on a scatter plot a b c d

30 Definitions of measures

31 Categorical Statistics over 8/2-4, 2006 FCBFARPODCSIabcd 22L 98.482.0454.3918.398.765.32.71075.711.3 29L 98.361.6677.7810.867.966.72.71074.311.3 40L 98.272.0881.7411.948.1883107311

32 S S N N W W E E Mid Long Island 4 pm local time Surface SOx

33 S SN N W W E E Mid Long Island 4 am local timeSurface SOx

34 S S N NW WE E Mid Long Island 4 pm local time Surface CO

35


Download ppt "Evaluation of several WRF/NMM- CMAQ vertical coupling configurations Pius Lee, Jeff McQueen, Marina Tsildulko, Geoff DiMego Sarah Lu and Bert Katz NOAA/NCEP."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google