GMB Apr24, 2008 1

Wind Profile from Space based DWLEvaluation using OSSEs

http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/research/JointOSSEshttp://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/research/THORPEX/osse

Michiko Masutani

GMB Apr24, 2008 2

DWL from ESA in 2009

GMB Apr24, 2008 3

GMB Apr24, 2008 4

GMB Apr24, 2008 5

GMB Apr24, 2008 6

GMB Apr24, 2008 7

GWOS Mission Concept from NASA

GMB Apr24, 2008 8

Michiko Masutani, John S. Woollen, Stephen J. Lord, Yucheng Song, Zoltan Toth,Russ Treadon

NCEP/EMC

Haibing Sun, Thomas J. KleespiesNOAA/NESDIS

G. David Emmitt , Sidney A. Wood, Steven GrecoSimpson Weather Associates

Joseph TerryNASA/GSFC

Co-Authors and Contributors to NCEP OSSEs

Acknowledgements: John C. Derber, Weiyu Yang, Bert Katz, Genia Brin, Steve Bloom, Bob Atlas, V. Kapoor, Po Li, Walter Wolf, Jim Yoe, Bob Kistler, Wayman Baker, Tony Hollingsworth, Roger Saunder, and many moor

Evaluation of DWL in NCEP OSSEs

GMB Apr24, 2008 9

Nature Run: Serves as a true atmosphere for OSSEs

Observational data will be simulated from the Nature Run

Nature RunNature Run

GMB Apr24, 2008 10

DATAPRESENTATION

OSSE Quality Control

(Simulated conventional data)

OSSEDATA

PRESENTATION

Quality Control (Real conventional data)

OSSEDA

Real

TOVS

AIRS

etc.

DA

Simulated

TOVS

AIRS

etc.

NWP forecast

Existing data +

Proposed dataDWL, CrIS, ATMS, UAS, etc

Nature RunCurrent observing system

NWP forecastGFS OSSE

GMB Apr24, 2008 11

NCEP OSSETo be upgrade to Joint OSSEs

at NCEP

• Wintertime Nature run (1 month, Feb5-Mar.7,1993)• NR by ECMWF model T213 (~0.5 deg)• 1993 data distribution for calibration

• NCEP DA (SSI) withT62 ~ 2.5 deg, 300km and T170 ~1 deg, 110km

• Simulate and assimilate level1B radiance– Different method than using interpolated temperature as retrieval

• Use line-of- sight (LOS) wind for DWL– not u and v components

• Calibration performed• Effects of observational error tested• NR clouds are evaluated and adjusted

GMB Apr24, 2008 12

Results from OSSEs forDoppler Wind Lidar (DWL)

All levels (Best-DWL): Ultimate DWL that provides full tropospheric LOS soundings, clouds permitting.

DWL-Upper: An instrument that provides mid- and upper- tropospheric winds down only to the levels of significant cloud coverage.

DWL-PBL: An instrument that provides wind observations only from clouds and the PBL.

Non-Scan DWL : A non-scanning instrument that provides full tropospheric LOS soundings, clouds permitting, along a single line that parallels the ground track. (ADM-Aeolus like DWL)

Zonally and time averaged number of DWL measurements in a 2.5 degree grid box with 50km thickness for 6 hours. Numbers are divided by 1000. Note that 2.5 degree boxes are smaller in size at higher latitudes.

Estimate impact of real DWL from combination.

GMB Apr24, 2008 13

Forecast hour

Doppler Wind Lidar (DWL) Impact

33

1.2 1.2

Dashed green line is for scan DWL with 20 times less data to make observation counts similar to non-scan DWL. The results show definite advantage of scanning.This experiment is done with T62 model and SSI.

No Lidar (Conventional + NOAA11 and NOAA12 TOVS)

Scan DWL_Lower

Scan DWL Uniformly thinned to 5%

Scan DWL_upper

Non-scan_DWL

Scan_DWL

Synoptic S

caleT

otal scale

200 mb V 850 mb V

GMB Apr24, 2008 14

DWL-Upper: Operates only 10% (possibly up to 20%) of the time. Switched on for 10 min at a time. Need DWL-lower to keep instrument

warm.

DWL-Lower:. Possible to operates 100% of the time and keeps the instruments warm as well as measuring low level wind

DWL-NonScan: DWL covers all levels without scanning(ADM mission type DWL)

Targeted DWL experiments

Combination of lidarsTechnologically possible scenarios

GMB Apr24, 2008 15

200mb

100% Upper Level

10% Upper Level Adaptive sampling(based on the difference between first guess and NR, three minutes of segments are chosen – the other 81 min are discarded)

Doubled contour

(Feb13 - Mar 6 average )

Non-Scan DWL

GMB Apr24, 2008 16

CTL

Anomaly correlation difference from control 200V

No Lidar (Conventional + NOAA11 and NOAA12 TOVS)

100% Lower

100% Lower + 100% Upper100% Lower + 10% Targeted Upper100% Lower + Non-Scan

Non-Scan only

Zonal wave 1-20 Zonal wave 10-20

GMB Apr24, 2008 17

CTL

Anomaly correlation difference from control 200V

No Lidar (Conventional + NOAA11 and NOAA12 TOVS)

100% Lower

100% Lower + 100% Upper100% Lower + 10% Targeted Upper100% Lower + Non-Scan

Non-Scan only

Zonal wave 1-20 Zonal wave 10-20

DWL-Lower with scan is better than DWL-Non-Scan only even in upper atmosphere

With 100% DWl-Lower, targeted 10% DWL-Upper performs somewhat better than DWL-Non-Scan in the analysis

DWL non-Scan become better in 36-48 hour forecast

GMB Apr24, 2008 18

D2+D3: Red: Scan upper+scan Lower

D1: Light Blue closed circle: Best DWL (D1) with scan Rep Error 1m/s

R45: Cyen dotted line triangle:D1 with rep error 4.5m/s (4.5x4.5≈20)

U20: Orange: D1 uniformly thinned for factor 20 (Note this is technologically difficult)

N4: Violet:D1 Thinned for factor 20 but in for direction 45,135,225,315 (mimicking GWOS)

S10: Green dashed: Scan DWL 10min on 90 min off. No other DWL

D4 : Dark Blue dashed: non scan DWL

One or Four non-scan-DWL

NH V500Zonal wave number10-20

GMB Apr24, 2008 19

Difference in AC from CTL (Conventional+TOVS)U and V at 500hPa, top NH Bot SH, left 1-3, right 10-20

NH

SH

U500

U500 U500

U500

V500

V500V500

V500

Zonal wave 1-3 Zonal wave 10-20

D2+D3: Red: Scan upper+scan LowerD1: Light Blue closed circle:scal-DWL repE1m/sR45: Cyen dotted line triangle: repE 4.5m/sU20: Orange: uniformly thinned to 5%N4: Violet:Four direction S10: Green dashed:Scan DWL 10min on 90 min off. D4 : Dark Blue dashed: non scan DWL

GMB Apr24, 2008 20

Difference in AC from CTL (Conventional+TOVS)T and W at 500hPa, top NH Bot SH, left 1-3, right 10-20

NH

SH

T500

T500 T500

T500

W500

W500W500

W500

Zonal wave 1-3 Zonal wave 10-20

D2+D3: Red: Scan upper+scan LowerD1: Light Blue closed circle:scal-DWL repE1m/sR45: Cyen dotted line triangle: repE 4.5m/sU20: Orange: uniformly thinned to 5%N4: Violet:Four direction S10: Green dashed:Scan DWL 10min on 90 min off. D4 : Dark Blue dashed: non scan DWL

GMB Apr24, 2008 21

GWOS is better than ADM-Aeolus in theSH, Zonal wave 1-3

TW

GWOS

ADM

UV

D2+D3: Red: Scan upper+scan LowerD1: Light Blue closed circle:scal-DWL repE1m/sR45: Cyen dotted line triangle: repE 4.5m/sU20: Orange: uniformly thinned to 5%N4: Violet:Four direction S10: Green dashed:Scan DWL 10min on 90 min off. D4 : Dark Blue dashed: non scan DWL

GMB Apr24, 2008 22

Scan-DWL has much more impact compared to non- scan-DWL with same amount of data.

If the data is thinned uniformly 20 times thinned data (U20) produce 50%-90% of impact.

20 times less weighted 100% data (R45) is generally slightly better than U20 (5% of data)

In fact U20 and R45 perform better than D1 time to time. This is more clear in 200hPa.

Simple GWOS type experiment (N4) showed significant improvement to D4 only in large scale over SH but not much better over NH and synoptic scale.

Without additional scan-DWL,10min on 90 off (S10)sampling is much worse than U20(5% uniform thinning) with twice as much as data.

GMB Apr24, 2008 23

Using T62 model forecast skill drop after 48 hr but this will improved with T170 particularly in wave number 10-20

The results are expected to change with GSI particularly with flow dependent back ground error covariance.

OSSE with one month long T213 nature run is limited. Need better nature run.

Any comments and advice appreciated

GMB Apr24, 2008 24

Need one good new Nature Run which will be used by many OSSEs, including regional data assimilation.

Share the simulated data to compare the OSSE results from various DA systems to gain confidence in results.

OSSEs require many experts and require a wide range of resources.

Extensive international collaboration within the Meteorological community is essential for timely and reliable OSSEs to influence decisions.

Joint OSSEs

GMB Apr24, 2008 25

OSSEs: Observing Systems Simulation ExperimentsJCSDA: Joint Center for Satellite Data AssimilationSWA: Simpson Weather AssociatesESRL: Earth System Research Laboratory (formerly FSL, CDC, ETL)

Joint OSSEs http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/research/JointOSSEs

April 2008

NCEP: Michiko Masutani, John S. Woollen, Yucheng Song, Stephen J. Lord, Zoltan TothECMWF: Erik Andersson KNMI: Ad Stoffelen, Gert-Jan MarseilleJCSDA: Lars Peter Riishojgaard (NASA/GFSC), NESDIS: Fuzhong Weng, Tong Zhu Haibing Sun, SWA: G. David Emmitt, Sidney A. Wood, Steven GrecoNASA/GFSC: Ron Errico, Oreste Reale, Runhua Yang, Emily Liu, Joanna Joiner,

Harpar Pryor, Alindo Da Silva, Matt McGill, NOAA/ESRL:Tom Schlatter, Yuanfu Xie, Nikki Prive, Dezso Devenyi, Steve WeygandtMSU/GRI: Valentine Anantharaj, Chris Hill, Pat Fitzpatrick, JMA Takemasa Miyoshi , Munehiko. Yamaguchi JAMSTEC Takeshi Enomoto

So far most of the work is done by volunteers.

People who helped or advised Joint OSSEs.

Joe Terry (NASA), K. Fielding (ECMWF), S. Worley (NCAR), C.-F., Shih (NCAR), Y. Sato (NCEP,JMA), Lee Cohen(ESRL), David Groff(NCEP), Daryl Kleist(NCEP), J Purser(NCEP), Bob Atlas(NOAA/AOML), C. Sun (BOM), M. Hart(NCEP), G. Gayno(NCEP), W. Ebisuzaki (NCEP), A. Thompkins (ECMWF), S. Boukabara(NESDIS), John Derber(NCEP), X. Su (NCEP), R. Treadon(NCEP), P. VanDelst (NCEP), M Liu(NESDIS), Y Han(NESDIS), H.Liu(NCEP),M. Hu (ESRL), Chris Velden (SSEC), William Lahoz (Reading), George Ohring(JCSDA), Many more people from NCEP,NESDIS, NASA, ESRL

More people are working on proposal, getting involved or considering participation. Z. Pu(Univ. Utah), Lidia Cucil (EMC, JCSDA), G. Compo(ESRL), Prashant D Sardeshmukh(ESRL), M.-J. Kim(NESDIS), Jean Pailleux(Meteo France), Roger Saunders(Met Office), C. O’Handley(SWA), E Kalnay(U.MD), A.Huang (U. Wisc), Craig Bishop(NRL), Hans Huang(NCAR),

GMB Apr24, 2008 26

New Nature Run by ECMWF Based on Recommendations by

JCSDA, NCEP, GMAO, GLA, SIVO, SWA, NESDIS, ESRL

Low Resolution Nature Run Spectral resolution : T511

Vertical levels: L913 hourly dump

Initial conditions: 12Z May 1st, 2005 Ends at: 0Z Jun 1,2006

Daily SST and ICE: provided by NCEPModel: Version cy31r1

Two High Resolution Nature Runs35 days long

Hurricane season: Starting at 12z September 27,2005,

Convective precipitation over US: starting at 12Z April 10, 2006 T799 resolution, 91 levels, one hourly dump

Get initial conditions from T511 NR

GMB Apr24, 2008 27

To be archived in the MARS system on the THORPEX server at ECMWFAccessed by external users. Currently available internally as expver=etwu

Copies for US are available to designated users for research purpose& users known to ECMWF

Saved at NCEP, ESRL, and NASA/GSFCComplete data available from portal at NASA/GSFC

Conctact:Michiko Masutani (michiko.masutani@noaa.gov), Harper.Pryor@nasa.gov

Archive and Distribution

Supplemental low resolution regular lat lon data 1degx1deg for T511 NR, 0.5degx0.5deg for T799 NR

Pressure level data: 31 levels, Potential temperature level data: 315,330,350,370,530K

Selected surface data for T511 NR: Convective precip, Large scale precip,

MSLP,T2m,TD2m, U10,V10, HCC, LCC, MCC, TCC, Sfc Skin Temp Complete surface data for T799 NRPosted from NCAR CISL Research Data Archive. Data set ID ds621.0

Currently NCAR account is required for access.(Also available from NCEP hpss, NASA/GSFC Portal, ESRL, NCAR/MMM, NRL/MRY, Univ. of Utah, JMA)

Note: This data must not be used for commercial purposes and re-distribution rights are not given. User lists are maintained by Michiko Masutani and ECMWF