Slide 1

ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 1 Towards an adaptive observation network: monitoring the observations impact in ECMWF forecast Carla Cardinali Office 1006 Slide 2 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 2 Roger Daleys idea Mid-1995, Roger Daley joined NRL data assimilation when predictability scientists were preparing the FASTEX targeting campaign. It was clear that while sensitivity gradients products could identify sensitivity regions, they could not provide any guidance on how deployed extra-observations would have improved the forecast. After one of the frequent discussions on the subject, Roger left the office wondering if there was some way to find the sensitivity of the forecast model with respect to the observations. Unable to sleep that night, he instead derived the equations for the sensitivity of the forecast aspect to the observation and the background. J is a measure of the forecast error (as defined through e.g dry energy norm) Slide 3 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 3 Outline Forecast Sensitivity to Observation or Observation Impact on Forecast Equation FSO Diagnostic Tool Forecast system performance investigation in two different seasons Monitoring the forecast impact ECMWF Operational configuration Conclusion Slide 4 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 4 Forecast sensitivity to observation: Equations from a Roger Daley idea J is a measure of the forecast error (as defined through e.g dry energy norm) Forecast error sensitivity to the analysis Rabier F, et al. 1996 Slide 5 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 5 Sensitivity Gradient Summer Winter + - Dry Energy norm Slide 6 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 6 Forecast sensitivity to observation: Equations from a Roger Daley idea J is a measure of the forecast error (as defined through e.g dry energy norm) Forecast error sensitivity to the analysis Rabier F, et al. 1996 Slide 7 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 7 B(qxq)=Var(x b ) R(pxp)=Var(y) K(qxp) gain matrix H(pxq) Jacobian matrix xbxb y xbxb yxbxb y Analysis Solution in Model space Analysis Sensitivity to the Observation DFS in observation space Slide 8 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 8 Define Forecast Sensitivity Analysis sensitivity to the observation (model space) Slide 9 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 9 Equations Solution for forecast sensitivity Krylov Subspace Method Slide 10 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 10 Forecast sensitivity to observation: Equations from a Roger Daley idea J is a measure of the forecast error (as defined through e.g dry energy norm) Forecast error sensitivity to the analysis Rabier F, et al. 1996 Compute the forecast impact or forecast error variation J Slide 11 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 11 Monitoring ECMWF System 15 June-15 July Summer 2006 5 January-12 February Winter 2007 24h OSE FcE Cycle 31R2 T511T95T159 L60 Slide 12 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 12 FSO: Pilot and Wind Profilers FcE contribution Summer 2006 Pilot Wind Profiler NA Negative impact Positive impact Slide 13 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 13 FSO: Wind Profilers North America Summer 2006 North America Problem (OD/RD special topic 2005) strong, moist warm flow from the Gulf of Mexico large and divergent wind increments at 150-250 hPa the conclusion was that increments are not related to bad observations or a poor 4D-Var performance Slide 14 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 14 Mean TCWV Mean CAPE Summer case 2006 ERA40 Jan ERA40 Jun Mean 850-hPa Wind & Z500 hPa courtesy by Fernando Prates Slide 15 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 15 Summary FSO wind Profiler FSO showed a Fc Error increase due to the American wind profiler observations. Southerly flow across SE USA bringing warm and moist air from Gulf of Mexico produced strong convective instability in the region, a typical situation at this time of the year. Following Ackley et al report (1998) on wind profiler measurements validity in strong unstable conditions (turbulence) the measure of the mean horizontal wind is corrupted affecting the measurements. Suggesting that the forecast impact can change with the meteorological situation for the summer 2006 case. Slide 16 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 16 FSO: Atmospheric Motion Vector FcE Contribution Summer 2006 Forecast error contribution of the observed wind grouped by satellite types- positive corresponds to an increase of Fc Error Forecast error contribution of the wind on pressures levels & grouped by satellite types- largest degradation comes from the lower troposphere Slide 17 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 17 FSO AMV 700-1000 hPa U-Wind: Summer 2006 RMSE AMV- Baseline 850 hPa U Slide 18 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 18 FSO AMV 700-1000 hPa Summer 2006 V-compU-comp Mean 850hPa wind Atlantic Ocean: transition between sub- tropical and extra-tropical from weak to strong zonal flow Indian Ocean: well established Monsoon circulation courtesy by Fernando Prates Slide 19 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 19 FSO Atlantic Ocean: Observation Quality The strong sinking motion in SH near 30S represents the southern limit of the Hadley circulation where the subtropical high cell is located. Cloud suppression or low clouds. AN mean vertical velocity (*0.01 Pa/s) north south ERA40 north south Cross Section [35W-0E] AMV quality: difficult to assign the height of the cloud top courtesy by Fernando Prates Slide 20 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 20 FSO Indian Monsoon Summer 2006: Model bias A too strong low level flow of Indian Summer Monsoon is a well known problem in the model as is indicated by the JJA mean analysis increments Mean An inc 925-hPa JJA 2006 v-wind u-wind Diagnostic explorer Slide 21 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 21 AMV FSO 700-1000 hPa: Winter 2007 v-wind u-wind Largest negative impact of AMVs to Fc error can be seen in central/eastern Pacific (absent in summer case). Negative impact seen during summer 06 in south Atlantic near 30S has disappeared in winter 07 In the Indian Ocean the degradation is mainly due to u- component of the wind Overall impact of the observations to FcError Positive impactnegative impact Slide 22 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 22 u-wind 180W 150W 135W Winter 2007 central/eastern Pacific Cross Section The largest negative impact of AMVs to the Fc error is found between 5N - 15N coinciding to a broad downward mean motion of the Hadley circulation. Large departures were also found below 700hPa in the same region. A second cluster of negative impact near 25N/140W is localized on top of a region of weak winds (strong sinking motion/ high pressure system) ERA40 Mean vertical velocity (*0.01 Pa/s) northsouth 180-150 W Slide 23 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 23 Summary FSO AMVs FSO showed a Fc error increase due to AMVs The location of the largest negative impact of the AMVs in Atlantic (Summer 2006) and in pacific (Winter 2007, El Nino) is found close to the region of strong sinking mean motion embedded in the Hadley circulation Observation quality problem on the height assignment Detrimental effect is also observed in the Indian ocean associated with a too strong Indian monsoon circulation developed by the model Model bias Slide 24 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 24 GPS RO Impact on Forecast Error Winter 2007 48h Fce24h Fce Slide 25 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 25 Automatic&Manual Surface Press SYNOP FcE Conribution winter case 6000 SYNOP sfc-press observations shows an overall globally positive impact to the forecast error but not over Europe. Slide 26 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 26 Automatic Surf Press SYNOP FcE Contribution time series - Winter 2007 Storm Kyrill 18 -20 Jan Eu Area manual metar Daily Fc error contribution over Europe Slide 27 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 27 GPS RO Impact on Forecast Error Winter 2007 hPa 10 40 500 The negative impact is more pronounced in the tropics & subtropics GPS RO at 50-hPa Overall impact of the observations to fc error Slide 28 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 28 50 hPa RMSE Temperature GPSRO-Control Winter 2007 50-hPa Temp RMSE differences between GPS RO-Control OSEs (24-hrs Fc) The degradation (positive values) are found mainly in the tropical belt which is consistent with the geographical distribution obtained from the FSO The OSE shows a positive impact for the GPS-RO for the 10-days forecast with the exception of the first 24hrs forecast. RMSE Mean GPS-RO Control Slide 29 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 29 Summary FSO GPS-RO and SYNOP/METAR sfc-pressure A negative impact to Fc error due to GPS-RO is found in the lower stratosphere and mainly in the tropical belt which is related with temperature model bias. OSE showed the same impact for the first 24hrs forecast but also the positive impact for longer time ranges. The overall decrease of Fc error due to SYNOP (man. & auto.) contrasted with the degradation over Europe. Adverse weather conditions over Europe (strong pressure gradient) for several weeks would require a higher resolution analysis system. Slide 30 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 30 B(qxq)=Var(x b ) R(pxp)=Var(y) K(qxp) gain matrix H(pxq) Jacobian matrix xbxb y xbxb y xbxb y Analysis Solution Model space Observation space FSO Analysis Sensitivity to the Observation or Information Content Cardinali et al 2004 Cardinali 2009 Slide 31 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 31 Operational ECMWF system September to December 2008 All Observations Slide 32 ECMWF Training course 2010 slide 32 Conclusion&Remarks Over the last decade the assessment of each observation contribution to analysis and forecast is among the most challenging diagnostics in data assimilation and NWP. Forecast sensitivity to observations allows to monitor the observation forecast impact on the 24 range The tool provides information on the observation type, subtype, variable and level responsible for the forecast error variation. Causes must be found that explain the failure Failures can be due to the data quality or some characteristics of the assimilation system and can highly depend on the weather situation A joint effort blending different expertises, tool developers and meteorologists, is necessary to produce a comprehensive investigation and understanding of forecast failures The assessment should be carried out on a daily basis