Assessing RRFS vs. HRRR in Predicting Widespread Convective Systems over Eastern CONUS

IF 3 3区 地球科学 Q2 METEOROLOGY & ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES
Joseph A. Grim, James O. Pinto, David C. Dowell
{"title":"Assessing RRFS vs. HRRR in Predicting Widespread Convective Systems over Eastern CONUS","authors":"Joseph A. Grim, James O. Pinto, David C. Dowell","doi":"10.1175/waf-d-23-0112.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study provides a comparison of the operational HRRR version 4 and its eventual successor, the experimental Rapid Refresh Forecast System (RRFS) model (summer 2022 version), at predicting the evolution of convective storm characteristics during widespread convective events that occurred primarily over the eastern United States during summer 2022. Thirty-two widespread convective events were selected using observations from the MRMS composite reflectivity, which includes an equal number of MCSs, quasi-linear convective systems (QLCSs), clusters, and cellular convection. Each storm system was assessed on four primary characteristics: total storm area, total storm count, storm area ratio (an indicator of mean storm size), and storm size distributions. It was found that the HRRR predictions of total storm area were comparable to MRMS, while the RRFS overpredicted total storm area by 40-60% depending on forecast lead time. Both models tended to underpredict storm counts particularly during the storm initiation and growth period. This bias in storm counts originates early in the model runs (forecast hour 1) and propagates through the simulation in both models indicating that both miss storm initiation events and/or merge individual storm objects too quickly. Thus, both models end up with mean storm sizes that are much larger than observed (RRFS more so than HRRR). Additional analyses revealed that the storm area and individual storm biases were largest for the clusters and cellular convective modes. These results can serve as a benchmark for assessing future versions of RRFS and will aid model users in interpreting forecast guidance.","PeriodicalId":49369,"journal":{"name":"Weather and Forecasting","volume":"226 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Weather and Forecasting","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1175/waf-d-23-0112.1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"METEOROLOGY & ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study provides a comparison of the operational HRRR version 4 and its eventual successor, the experimental Rapid Refresh Forecast System (RRFS) model (summer 2022 version), at predicting the evolution of convective storm characteristics during widespread convective events that occurred primarily over the eastern United States during summer 2022. Thirty-two widespread convective events were selected using observations from the MRMS composite reflectivity, which includes an equal number of MCSs, quasi-linear convective systems (QLCSs), clusters, and cellular convection. Each storm system was assessed on four primary characteristics: total storm area, total storm count, storm area ratio (an indicator of mean storm size), and storm size distributions. It was found that the HRRR predictions of total storm area were comparable to MRMS, while the RRFS overpredicted total storm area by 40-60% depending on forecast lead time. Both models tended to underpredict storm counts particularly during the storm initiation and growth period. This bias in storm counts originates early in the model runs (forecast hour 1) and propagates through the simulation in both models indicating that both miss storm initiation events and/or merge individual storm objects too quickly. Thus, both models end up with mean storm sizes that are much larger than observed (RRFS more so than HRRR). Additional analyses revealed that the storm area and individual storm biases were largest for the clusters and cellular convective modes. These results can serve as a benchmark for assessing future versions of RRFS and will aid model users in interpreting forecast guidance.
评估 RRFS 与 HRRR 在预测美国东部大范围对流系统中的作用
本研究比较了运行中的 HRRR 第 4 版和其最终的后续版本--试验性快速更新预报系统(RRFS)模式(2022 年夏季版本)--在预测 2022 年夏季主要发生在美国东部上空的大范围对流事件期间对流风暴特征的演变情况。利用 MRMS 综合反射率观测数据,选取了 32 个大范围对流事件,其中包括同等数量的 MCS、准线性对流系统 (QLCS)、集群和蜂窝状对流。对每个风暴系统的四个主要特征进行了评估:风暴总面积、风暴总次数、风暴面积比(平均风暴大小的指标)和风暴大小分布。结果发现,HRRR 对风暴总面积的预测与 MRMS 相当,而 RRFS 对风暴总面积的预测则高估了 40-60%,具体取决于预报前置时间。这两种模式都倾向于低估风暴次数,尤其是在风暴开始和增长期间。风暴次数的这种偏差起源于模式运行的早期(预报小时 1),并在两个模式的模拟过程中传播,这表明两个模式都错过了风暴的起始事件和/或过快地合并了单个风暴对象。因此,两个模式最终得出的平均风暴大小都比观测到的大得多(RRFS 比 HRRR 大得多)。其他分析表明,风暴群和蜂窝对流模式的风暴面积和单个风暴偏差最大。这些结果可作为评估 RRFS 未来版本的基准,并有助于模式用户解释预报指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Weather and Forecasting
Weather and Forecasting 地学-气象与大气科学
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
17.20%
发文量
131
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Weather and Forecasting (WAF) (ISSN: 0882-8156; eISSN: 1520-0434) publishes research that is relevant to operational forecasting. This includes papers on significant weather events, forecasting techniques, forecast verification, model parameterizations, data assimilation, model ensembles, statistical postprocessing techniques, the transfer of research results to the forecasting community, and the societal use and value of forecasts. The scope of WAF includes research relevant to forecast lead times ranging from short-term “nowcasts” through seasonal time scales out to approximately two years.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信