Advertisement

The Influence of WRF Parameterisation Schemes on High Resolution Simulations Over Greece

  • I. TegouliasEmail author
  • S. Kartsios
  • I. Pytharoulis
  • S. Kotsopoulos
  • Theodore S. Karacostas
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Atmospheric Sciences book series (SPRINGERATMO)

Abstract

In a computing intensive discipline as numerical weather forecasting scientists were usually bound to perform either high resolution simulations for limited time or long range simulations in lower resolutions. The advent of high-performance computing (HPC) systems provided meteorologists the ability to perform research in areas never explored before. In the present study an attempt is made to evaluate the performance of the WRF model (WRF-ARW ver3.7.1) using different parameterization schemes. The objective of the evaluation is the selection of the proper setup of the model to be used for long term high-resolution simulations; the endmost goal being the creation of a reliable high resolution climatic dataset. WRF is integrated in three domains, with the high resolution domain (1.667 km × 1.667 km) covering the wider Greek area. By alternating microphysics and boundary layer schemes we perform three experiments and we investigate their performance. It is shown that new updates incorporated in the latest model versions improve the results while keeping computer time cost within reasonable values.

Keywords

Numerical Weather Prediction Mean Absolute Error Mean Error Boundary Layer Scheme High Resolution Simulation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work has been supported by computational time granted by the Greek Research and Technology Network (GRNET) in the National HPC facility—ARIS—under project PR001009-COrRECT.

References

  1. Papadopoulos A, Katsafados P (2009) Verification of operational weather forecasts from the POSEIDON system across the eastern Mediterranean. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 9:1299–1306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Pytharoulis I, Tegoulias I, Kotsopoulos S, Bampzelis D, Karacostas TS, Katragkou E (2014) Evaluation of the operational numerical weather predictions of the WaveForUs project. In: Proceedings of 12th conference of meteorology, climatology and atmospheric physics. Hellenic Meteorological Society, Heraklion, GreeceGoogle Scholar
  3. Skamarock W (2004) Evaluating mesoscale NWP models using kinetic energy spectra. Mon Wea Rev 132:3019–3032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Skamarock W, Klemp J, Dudhia J, Gill D, Barker D, Duda M, Huang X-Y, Wang W, Powers J (2008) A description of the advanced research WRF version 3. NCAR/TN-475Google Scholar
  5. Wang W, Bruyère C, Duda M, Dudhia J, Gill D, Kavulich M, Keene K, Lin H-C, Michalakes J, Rizvi S, Zhang X, Berner J, Fossell K, Beezley J, Coen J, Mandel J, Chuang H-Y, McKee N, Slovacek T, Wolff J (2016) ARW version 3 modeling system user’s guide. Mesoscale and Microscale Meteorology Division, National Center for Atmospheric Research, p 408Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • I. Tegoulias
    • 1
    Email author
  • S. Kartsios
    • 1
  • I. Pytharoulis
    • 1
  • S. Kotsopoulos
    • 1
  • Theodore S. Karacostas
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Meteorology and Climatology, Faculty of Sciences, School of GeologyAristotle University of ThessalonikiThessalonikiGreece

Personalised recommendations