l. k. shay, g. halliwell, j.brewster, c. lozano, w. teague mpo, rsmas, univ. of miami emc-ncep

17
JHT Project: Evaluation and Improvement of Ocean Model Parameterizations for NCEP Operations (Ivan) L. K. Shay, G. Halliwell, J.Brewster, C. Lozano, W. Teague MPO, RSMAS, Univ. of Miami EMC-NCEP Oceanography Department, NRL-Stennis http://isotherm.rsmas.miami.edu/~nick

Upload: ciro

Post on 05-Jan-2016

39 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

DESCRIPTION

JHT Project: Evaluation and Improvement of Ocean Model Parameterizations for NCEP Operations (Ivan). L. K. Shay, G. Halliwell, J.Brewster, C. Lozano, W. Teague MPO, RSMAS, Univ. of Miami EMC-NCEP Oceanography Department, NRL-Stennis http://isotherm.rsmas.miami.edu/~nick. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: L. K.  Shay, G. Halliwell, J.Brewster, C. Lozano, W. Teague MPO, RSMAS, Univ. of Miami EMC-NCEP

JHT Project: Evaluation and Improvement of Ocean Model Parameterizations for NCEP Operations (Ivan)

L. K. Shay, G. Halliwell, J.Brewster, C. Lozano, W. TeagueMPO, RSMAS, Univ. of Miami

EMC-NCEPOceanography Department, NRL-Stennishttp://isotherm.rsmas.miami.edu/~nick

Page 2: L. K.  Shay, G. Halliwell, J.Brewster, C. Lozano, W. Teague MPO, RSMAS, Univ. of Miami EMC-NCEP

JHT Project Objectives:

Ivan an example of negative feedback (cold wake cooling and Cold Core Ring) as opposed to less negative feedback (Loop Current/Warm Core Rings)

By building on a previous JHT, specific objectives are: • optimizing spatial resolution that will permit the ocean model to

run efficiently as possible without degrading the simulated response;

• improving the initial background state provided to the ocean model;

• improving the representation of vertical and horizontal friction and mixing;

• generating realistic high-resolution atmospheric forcing fields necessary to achieve these objectives; and

• Testing differing formulations of the drag coefficient (cd).

Page 3: L. K.  Shay, G. Halliwell, J.Brewster, C. Lozano, W. Teague MPO, RSMAS, Univ. of Miami EMC-NCEP

MOTIVATION:

Ivan (2004) over the GOM SSH (cm) from HYCOM (from Halliwell et al., MWR, 2008).

SST Analyses

Northern Cyclone

Southern Cyclone

Page 4: L. K.  Shay, G. Halliwell, J.Brewster, C. Lozano, W. Teague MPO, RSMAS, Univ. of Miami EMC-NCEP

Ivan’s Track and Intensity Relative to OHC (left) NRL SEED Mooring Locations in Northern Gulf of Mexico Relative

to Bottom Depth (Right) (Teague et al., JPO, 2007).

14 ADCP moorings- Focus here in Array 9.

Page 5: L. K.  Shay, G. Halliwell, J.Brewster, C. Lozano, W. Teague MPO, RSMAS, Univ. of Miami EMC-NCEP

HYbrid Coordinate Ocean Model (HYCOM)Hurricane Ivan Simulations 10 Sept-6 Oct 04

Configuration:• 0.04° Mercator grid, Gulf of Mexico domain• No data assimilation performed

Initial and boundary conditions from U.S. Navy HYCOM ocean nowcast-forecast system:•Data assimilative ocean nowcast•Navy Coupled Ocean Data Assimilation (NCODA) assimilation

Atmospheric Forcing:•Navy 27 km COAMPS atmospheric model•Vector wind blended with higher resolution fields from HWIND •Wind stress for HWIND calculated using Donelan cd

Page 6: L. K.  Shay, G. Halliwell, J.Brewster, C. Lozano, W. Teague MPO, RSMAS, Univ. of Miami EMC-NCEP

Hurricane Ivan Modeling Experiment Summary

Model Attribute Baseline Experiment GOM1 Alternate Experiments

Horizontal resolution 0.04° Mercator GOM2: 0.08° Mercator

Vertical resolution 26 layers, 4-8m in OML GOM3: 21 layers, 7.5-15m in OMLGOM4: 31 layers, 3-5m in OML

Vertical mixing KPP GOM5: MYGOM6: GISS

CD Donelan GOM7: PowellGOM8: Large and PondGOM9: Large and Pond (capped)GOM10: Shay and Jacob

CEL, CES COARE3.0 algorithm GOM11: Kara et al.

Atmospheric forcing 27-km COAMPS+H*WIND GOM12: 27-km COAMPS only

Outer model NCODA GoM hindcast GOM13: Free GOM simulation

Ocean Dynamics 3-D Ocean Physics GOM14:1-D Column Models

Page 7: L. K.  Shay, G. Halliwell, J.Brewster, C. Lozano, W. Teague MPO, RSMAS, Univ. of Miami EMC-NCEP

Intense Forcing (upper) and

Relaxation Stages (lower) for NRL SEED moorings 7-14

7-10 Red ~500 m

11-14 Yellow~1000 m

(Teague et al. JPO, 2007).

Page 8: L. K.  Shay, G. Halliwell, J.Brewster, C. Lozano, W. Teague MPO, RSMAS, Univ. of Miami EMC-NCEP

M9 (1.5 Rmax) Observed and Near-Inertial Current Shear Response (Rmax= 32 km)

Normalized shear by 10-2 s-1 based on Isidore/Lili

Page 9: L. K.  Shay, G. Halliwell, J.Brewster, C. Lozano, W. Teague MPO, RSMAS, Univ. of Miami EMC-NCEP

RMS SST (oC) Differences

Page 10: L. K.  Shay, G. Halliwell, J.Brewster, C. Lozano, W. Teague MPO, RSMAS, Univ. of Miami EMC-NCEP

Pre Ivan SST

Post-Ivan SST

Pre-Post Ivan ΔSST

TMI and KPP SST Comparisons

Page 11: L. K.  Shay, G. Halliwell, J.Brewster, C. Lozano, W. Teague MPO, RSMAS, Univ. of Miami EMC-NCEP

Observed/Simulated Current Response at M9 (1.5 Rmax)from 7 ExperimentsHalliwell et al., MWR, (2009)

Below cd using ocean response as a tracer in Shay and Jacob (2006)

Page 12: L. K.  Shay, G. Halliwell, J.Brewster, C. Lozano, W. Teague MPO, RSMAS, Univ. of Miami EMC-NCEP

Current Time Series Comparisons @ 1.5 Rmax

U (east-west) V (north-south)

Page 13: L. K.  Shay, G. Halliwell, J.Brewster, C. Lozano, W. Teague MPO, RSMAS, Univ. of Miami EMC-NCEP
Page 14: L. K.  Shay, G. Halliwell, J.Brewster, C. Lozano, W. Teague MPO, RSMAS, Univ. of Miami EMC-NCEP

Taylor Diag., simulations vs. baseline:

SST;

v Current at M9 (1.5Rmax).

(Halliwell et al., MWR, 2009)

Page 15: L. K.  Shay, G. Halliwell, J.Brewster, C. Lozano, W. Teague MPO, RSMAS, Univ. of Miami EMC-NCEP

Taylor Diag., simulations vs. observations:

SST;

v Current at M9 (1.5Rmax).

(Halliwell et al., MWR, 2009)

Page 16: L. K.  Shay, G. Halliwell, J.Brewster, C. Lozano, W. Teague MPO, RSMAS, Univ. of Miami EMC-NCEP

Progress Summary and Blueprint For Future

Ivan a clear example of negative feedback (wake cooling/mixing induced by strong winds and Cold Core Ring) as opposed to positive feedback over the Loop Current and Warm Core Rings.

SST modulated by warm and cold ocean features that have to be properly initialized in ocean models and mixing. Data assimilation schemes are essential!

Trifecta Katrina, Rita and Wilma is next.

Temperatures and currents needed to assess mixing schemes and evaluate initialization schemes. Both Eulerian (AXCP, AXCTD, moorings) and Lagrangian (drifters, floats) needed – Targeted Obs in storm coordinates!

Working with MMS on 5-year Loop Current Dynamical Study, NOAA HFIP and NSF.

Page 17: L. K.  Shay, G. Halliwell, J.Brewster, C. Lozano, W. Teague MPO, RSMAS, Univ. of Miami EMC-NCEP

Sampling Pattern: AXCTDs and Drifters relative to OHC and Rita’s track.

Pre (15 Sep) and Post Rita (26 Sep) WCR/CCR/ LC OHC and 26oC isotherm depth.

Vertical structure from AXCTDs

(Jaimes and Shay, MWR, 2009a)