Abstract
The identification of the model discrepancy and skill is crucial when a forecast is issued. The characterization of the model errors for different cumulus parameterization schemes (CPSs) provides more confidence on the model outputs and qualifies which CPSs are to be used for better forecasts. Cases of good/bad skill scores can be isolated and clustered into weather systems to identify the atmospheric structures that cause difficulties to the forecasts. The objective of this work is to study the sensitivity of weather forecast, produced using the PSU-NCAR Mesoscale Model version 5 (MM5) during the launch of an Indian satellite on 5th May, 2005, to the way in which convective processes are parameterized in the model. The real-time MM5 simulations were made for providing the weather conditions near the launch station Sriharikota (SHAR). A total of 10 simulations (each of 48 h) for the period 25th April to 04th May, 2005 over the Indian region and surrounding oceans were made using different CPSs. The 24 h and 48 h model predicted wind, temperature and moisture fields for different CPSs, namely the Kuo, Grell, Kain-Fritsch and Betts-Miller, are statistically evaluated by calculating parameters such as mean bias, rootmean-squares error (RMSE), and correlation coefficients by comparison with radiosonde observation. The performance of the different CPSs, in simulating the area of rainfall is evaluated by calculating bias scores (BSs) and equitable threat scores (ETSs). In order to compute BSs and ETSs the model predicted rainfall is compared with Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) observed rainfall. It was observed that model simulated wind and temperature fields by all the CPSs are in reasonable agreement with that of radiosonde observation. The RMSE of wind speed, temperature and relative humidity do not show significant differences among the four CPSs. Temperature and relative humidity were overestimated by all the CPSs, while wind speed is underestimated, except in the upper levels. The model predicted moisture fields by all CPSs show substantial disagreement when compared with observation. Grell scheme outperforms the other CPSs in simulating wind speed, temperature and relative humidity, particularly in the upper levels, which implies that representing entrainment/detrainment in the cloud column may not necessarily be a beneficial assumption in tropical atmospheres. It is observed that MM5 overestimates the area of light precipitation, while the area of heavy precipitation is underestimated. The least predictive skill shown by Kuo for light and moderate precipitation asserts that this scheme is more suitable for larger grid scale (> 30 km). In the predictive skill for the area of light precipitation the Betts-Miller scheme has a clear edge over the other CPSs. The evaluation of the MM5 model for different CPSs conducted during this study is only for a particular synoptic situation. More detailed studies however, are required to assess the forecast skill of the CPSs for different synoptic situations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Adler, R. F., Bolun, D. T., Curtis, S., and Nelkin, E. J. (2000), Tropical rainfall distributions determined using TRMM combined with other satellite and rain-gauge information, J. Applied Meteor. 39, 2007–2023.
Anthes, R.A. (1977), A cumulus parameterization scheme utilizing a one-dimensional cloud model, Mon. Wea. Rev. 105, 270–286.
Anthes, R.A (1983), Regional models of the atmosphere in middle latitudes, Mon. Wea. Rev. 111, 1306–1335.
Anthes, R.A. and Warner, T. T. (1978), Development of hydrodynamical models suitable for air pollution and other mesometeorological studies, Mon. Wea. Rev. 106, 1045–1078.
Anthes, R.A., His, E.-Y., and Kuo, Y.H. (1987), Description of Pen State/NCAR Mesoscale model version 4(MM4). NCAR/TN-282+STR, National Center for Atmospheric Research.
Anthes, R.A, Kuo, Y.-H., Hsie, E.-Y., Low-Nam, S., and Bettge, T.W. (1989), Estimation of skill and uncertainty in regional numerical models, Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc. 115, 763–806.
Arakawa, A. and Schubert, W.H. (1974), Interaction of a cumulus cloud ensemble with the large-scale environment. Part I, J. Atmos. Sci. 31, 674–701.
Betts, A.K. and Miller, M.J. (1986), A new convective adjustment scheme; Part II: single column tests using GATE wave, BOMEX, ATEX, and arctic air-mass data set, J. Roy. Meteor. Soc. 112, 693–709.
Betts, A.K. and Miller, M.J. (1993), The Betts-Miller scheme. The representation of cumulus convection in numerical models (K.A. Emanuel and D. J. Raymond, eds.), (Am. Met. Soc. 1993) 246 pp.
Colle, B.A., Westrick, K.J., and Mass, C.F. (1999), Evaluation of MM5 and Eta-10 precipitation forecasts over the Pacific northwest during the cool season, Wea. Forecasting 14, 137–154.
Das, S., Mithra, A.K., Iyengar, G.R., and Singh, J. (2002), Skill of medium-range Forecasts over the Indian region using different parameterizations of deep cumulus convection, Wea. Forecasting 17, 1194–1210.
Das Gupta, M., Ashrit, R., George, J. P., Das, Someswar, and Bohra, A.K. (2005), Validation of MM5 model over Indian region during Monsoon 2004, WRF/MM5 User’s Workshop, June 2005.
Dudhia, J. (1989), Numerical study of convection observed during the winter monsoon experiment using mesoscale two-dimensional model, J. Atmos. Sci. 46, 3077–3107.
Dudhia, J. (1993), Nonhydrostatic version of Penn State-NCAR mesoscale model validation tests and simulation of an Atlantic cyclone and cold front, Mon. Wea. Rev. 121, 1493–1513.
Dudhia, J. (2005), MM5 Version 3.7 (The Final Version), WRF/MM5 User’s Workshop. IIT Delhi, India.
Fritsch, J.M. and Chappel, C.F. (1980), Numerical prediction of convectively driven mesoscale pressure system. Part I: Convective parameterization, J. Atmos. Sci. 37, 1722–1732.
Gallus, W. A., Jr. (1999), Eta simulations of three extreme precipitation events: Sensitivity to resolution and convective parameterization, Wea. Forecasting 14, 405–426.
Gochis, D.J., Shuttleworth, W.J., and Yang, Z.L. (2002), Sensitivity of the modeled North American monsoon regional climate to convective parameterization, Mon. Wea. Rev. 130, 1282–1298.
Grell, G.A (1993), Prognostic evaluation of assumptions used by cumulus parameterizations, Mon. Wea. Rev. 121, 764–787.
Grell, G.A., Dhuhia, J., and Stauffer, D.R. (1994), A description of the fifth-generation Penn State/NCAR mesoscale model (MM5), NCAR/Tn-398+STR, 117 pp.
Hack, J.J, Boville, B.A., Briegleb, B.P., Kiehl, J.T., Rasch, P.J., and Williamson, D.L. (1993), Description of the NCAR community climate model (CCM2), NCAR Tech. Note NCAR/TN-382+STR, 108 pp.
Hong, S. Y., and Pan, H. L. (1996), Nonlocal boundary layer vertical diffusion in a medium range forecast model, Mon. Wea. Rev. 124, 2322–2339.
Janjic, Z.I. (1994), The step-mountain eta coordinate model: Further developments of the convection, viscous sublayer, and turbulence closure schemes, Mon. Wea. Rev. 122, 927–945.
Kain, J. S. and Fritsch, J.M. (1990), A one-dimensional entraining /detraining plume model and its application in convective parameterization, J. Atmos. Sci. 47, 2784–2802.
Kain, J. S. and Fritsch, J.M., Convective parameterization for mesoscale models. The Kain-Fritsch scheme. The representation of cumulus convection in numerical models, (K. A. Emanuel and D. J. Raymond, eds.), (Amer. Meteor. Soc. 1993) 246 pp.
Kishtawal, C.M. and Krishnamurti, T.N. (1998), TRMM: a user’s manual for modelers, Available at Florida State University. 31 pp.
Kuo, H.L. (1965), On the formation and intensification of tropical cyclone through latent heat release by cumulus convection, J. Atoms. Sci. 22, 40–63.
Kuo, H.L. (1974), Further studies of the parameterization of the influence of cumulus convection on largescale flow, J. Atoms. Sci. 31, 1232–1240.
Kuo, H.L., Reed, R.J., and Liu, Y.-B. (1996), The ERICA IOP 5 storm. Part III: Mesoscale cyclogenesis and precipitation parameterization, Mon. Wea. Rev. 124, 1409–1434.
Molinari, J. and Dudek, M. (1992), A critical review, Mon. Wea. Rev. 120, 326–344.
Peng, X. and Tsuboki, K. (1997), Impact of convective parameterizations on mesoscale precipitation associated with the Baiu front, J. Meteor. Soc. Japan 75, 1141–1154.
Singh, R., Pal, P.K., Kishtawal, C.M., and Joshi, P.C. (2005), Impact of bogus vortex for track and intensity prediction of tropical cyclone, J. Earth System Sci. 114, 427–436.
Stensurd, D. J. (1996), Effects of persistent, mid-latitude mesoscale regions of convection on large-scale environment during the warm season, J. Atmos. Sci, 53, 3503–3527.
Wang, W. and Seaman, N.L. (1997), A comparison study of convective parameterization schemes in a mesoscale model, Mon. Wea. Rev. 125, 252–278.
Wilks, D.S., Statistical Methods in the Atmospheric Sciences (Academic Press 1995), 467 pp.
Yang, M.-J., Chien, F.-C., and Cheng, M.-D. (2000), precipitation parameterizations in a simulated Mei-Yu front, Terr. Atmos. and Oceanic Sci. 11, 393–422.
Yang, M.-J., and Tung, Q.C. (2003), Evaluation of rainfall forecasts over Taiwan by four cumulus parameterization schemes, J. Meteor. Soc. Japan, 81, 1163–1183
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2007 Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rakesh, V., Singh, R., Pal, P.K., Joshi, P.C. (2007). Sensitivity of Mesoscale Model Forecast During a Satellite Launch to Different Cumulus Parameterization Schemes in MM5. In: Sharan, M., Raman, S. (eds) Atmospheric and Oceanic. Pageoph Topical Volumes. Birkhäuser Basel. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7643-8493-7_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7643-8493-7_10
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Birkhäuser Basel
Print ISBN: 978-3-7643-8492-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-7643-8493-7
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)