1 / 13

Dimitrii Mironov and Axel Seifert Deutscher Wetterdienst, Offenbach am Main, Germany

Dimitrii Mironov and Axel Seifert Deutscher Wetterdienst, Offenbach am Main, Germany. Deutscher Wetterdienst GB Forschung und Entwicklung. Modifications to the COSMO-Model Cumulus Parameterisation Scheme (Tiedtke 1989): Implementation and Testing. Revision of the T89 mass-flux scheme.

vea
Download Presentation

Dimitrii Mironov and Axel Seifert Deutscher Wetterdienst, Offenbach am Main, Germany

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Dimitrii Mironov and Axel Seifert Deutscher Wetterdienst, Offenbach am Main, Germany Deutscher Wetterdienst GB Forschung und Entwicklung Modifications to the COSMO-Model Cumulus Parameterisation Scheme (Tiedtke 1989):Implementation and Testing

  2. Revision of the T89 mass-flux scheme • Motivation: • Once in a while, COSMO-EU simulates very high precipitation amounts that are unrealistic, e.g. 200-400 mm in 24 h, making the COSMO-EU forecasts less useful for a number of applications, e.g. for flood prediction • Orographic precipitation is primarily on the windward side of mountains, very little in the lee • In general, a better coupling of convection, grid-scale microphysics and radiation is desirable

  3. Revision of the T89 mass-flux scheme (cont’d) • Modifications of the Tiedtke (1989) scheme: • Co-existence of cloud water and cloud ice (water-ice mixed phase) over a certain temperature range (see next slide) is allowed during the saturation adjustment calculations within the T89 scheme (current version of COSMO-T89: cloud condensate is either water or ice, depending on the temperature being above/below the freezing point); this change slows down the T89 scheme • Detrainment of convective cloud condensate (most importantly, cloud ice) which is passed to the other COSMO-model physics and dynamics in the form of tendencies of qc and qi (current version of COSMO-T89: detrained convective cloud condensate instantaneously evaporates); this change improves coupling of the T89 scheme with the other COSMO-model schemes • 80% environment air relative humidity threshold for evaporation of convective rain (current version of COSMO-T89: 95% threshold); this change partially counteracts the above mixed-phase change by increasing the surface precipitation amount • All these modifications have long since been operational in the ECMWF IFS

  4. Mixed phase clouds in the Tiedtke scheme The modified T89 scheme computes the saturation water vapour pressure over the (convective) cloud water-cloud ice mixed phase by interpolating between the saturation pressures over liquid water and over ice, using temperature as an interpolation variable. • Ratio of ice water content (IWC) and total water content (TWC) for convective updrafts in COSMO-DE (w > 10 m/s, TWC > 1 g/m3) taken from a single forecast of a squall line case (20.07.2007 00UTC run). • Lines show possible transitions from pure liquid to pure ice phase • The linear function used in the first experiments resulted in too weak convection • The quadratic function taken from the ECMWF IFS is now used in the COSMO model

  5. COSMO-EU Routine: mean=1.49, max=243.91 Total Precipitation 12 May 2008 COSMO-EU Parallel Routine: mean=1.36, max=112.58

  6. COSMO-EU Routine: mean=1.56, max=147.87 Total Precipitation May 2008Boundary Effects COSMO-EU Parallel Routine: mean=1.46, max=193.49

  7. accumulated precipitation in mm avg 3.1 mm max 60 mm New scheme much better, but does not work that good all the time. Example 11 June 2007 observation control new scheme avg 2.8 mm avg 3.9 mm avg 1.9 mm max 44 mm max 274 mm max 27 mm

  8. accumulated precipitation in mm Example 27 June 2007 observation control new scheme avg 2.0 mm avg 2.4 mm avg 2.3 mm max 33 mm max 29 mm max 38 mm An old problem solved? Only for weak orographic precip.

  9. Monthly accumulation June 2007 observation control new scheme 105 mm 128 mm (+21%) 116 mm (+11 %) • Obvious problems in control. Local overprediction, too strong orographic enhancement and bias of 21%. • New convection scheme clearly improves the model, but does not solve all problems.

  10. Montly accumulation July 2007 observation control new scheme 120 mm 131 mm (+9%) 120 mm (+0 %) • Confirms the good results for June 2007.

  11. Some QPF scores: Juni/Juli 2007 • Verification against 24h-REGNIE precipitation estimate at each model grid point. • Bootstrap hypotheses test that confirms that the model change is statistically significant, i.e. both models version are indeed different. • FBI clearly improved, TSS und ETS somewhat worse for low threshold (both scores are not independent from FBI). Slight improvement for high thresholds.

  12. BIAS,...: 00 UTC (‘LMQ-Domain’)Exp 6467(equivalent to COSMO-EU Routine) vs.Exp 6468 (modified T89 scheme) Low level clouds slightly improved High level clouds slightly deteriorated

  13. Deutscher Wetterdienst GB Forschung und Entwicklung Conclusions • The modified Tiedtke (1989) scheme helps improve the precipitation forecasts with the COSMO model • The unrealistic high precipitation amounts are reduced • The orographic precipitation structures are improved • The FBI (frequency bias) is reduced and so are the monthly accumulations • QPF scores, such as TSS and ETS, can be slightly worse due to the reduced FBI • Prediction of low level clouds is slightly improved • Prediction of high level clouds is slightly deteriorated

More Related