Assessing the Accuracy of the Cloud and Water Vapor Fields in the Hurricane WRF (HWRF) Model Using Satellite Infrared Brightness Temperatures
In this study, cycled forecast experiments were performed to assess the ability of different cloud microphysics and cumulus parameterization schemes in the Hurricane Weather Research and Forecasting (HWRF) Model to accurately simulate the evolution of the cloud and moisture fields during the entire...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Monthly weather review 2017-05, Vol.145 (5), p.2027-2046 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 2046 |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 2027 |
container_title | Monthly weather review |
container_volume | 145 |
creator | Otkin, Jason A. Lewis, William E. Lenzen, Allen J. McNoldy, Brian D. Majumdar, Sharanya J. |
description | In this study, cycled forecast experiments were performed to assess the ability of different cloud microphysics and cumulus parameterization schemes in the Hurricane Weather Research and Forecasting (HWRF) Model to accurately simulate the evolution of the cloud and moisture fields during the entire life cycle of Hurricane Edouard (2014). The forecast accuracy for each model configuration was evaluated through comparison of observed and simulated Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite-13 (GOES-13) infrared brightness temperatures and satellite-derived tropical cyclone intensity estimates computed using the advanced Dvorak technique (ADT). Overall, the analysis revealed a large moist bias in the mid- and upper troposphere during the entire forecast period that was at least partially due to a moist bias in the initialization datasets but was also affected by the microphysics and cumulus parameterization schemes. Large differences occurred in the azimuthal brightness temperature distributions, with two of the microphysics schemes producing hurricane eyes that were much larger and clearer than observed, especially for later forecast hours. Comparisons to the forecast 10-m wind speeds showed reasonable agreement (correlations between 0.58 and 0.74) between the surface-based intensities and the ADT intensity estimates inferred via cloud patterns in the upper troposphere. It was also found that model configurations that had the smallest differences between the ADT and surface-based intensities had the most accurate track and intensity forecasts. Last, the cloud microphysics schemes had the largest impact on the forecast accuracy. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1175/MWR-D-16-0354.1 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1924624415</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1924624415</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c376t-aeb603be4b848bf61fe3ff56d32726f3616199511536417eb47835fdf041d5ef3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotkE9PwjAYxhujiYievTbxoodC37Xr2BFBxARigiDHptvewsjYsN0OfAi_swO8vE_e5PmT_Ah5BN4DiML-fL1gYwaKcRHKHlyRDoQBZ1zG4pp0OA8ixpWUt-TO-x3nXCkZdMjv0Hv0Pi83tN4iHaZp40x6pJU9_6OiajJqyoyuTY2OfptD5egkxyLzNC_PnmnjXJ6aEul6MaHP0_a-0HmVYUFX5-KvNloUeY30o7TOOMzoq8s327psl-kS9wd0pm4c-ntyY03h8eFfu2Q1eVuOpmz2-f4xGs5YKiJVM4OJ4iJBmQzkILEKLAprQ5WJIAqUFQoUxHEIEAolIcJERgMR2sxyCVmIVnTJ06X34KqfBn2td1XjynZSQxxIFUjZZrukf3GlrvLeodUHl--NO2rg-sRct8z1WIPSJ-YaxB9N0HSG</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1924624415</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Assessing the Accuracy of the Cloud and Water Vapor Fields in the Hurricane WRF (HWRF) Model Using Satellite Infrared Brightness Temperatures</title><source>American Meteorological Society</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Otkin, Jason A. ; Lewis, William E. ; Lenzen, Allen J. ; McNoldy, Brian D. ; Majumdar, Sharanya J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Otkin, Jason A. ; Lewis, William E. ; Lenzen, Allen J. ; McNoldy, Brian D. ; Majumdar, Sharanya J.</creatorcontrib><description>In this study, cycled forecast experiments were performed to assess the ability of different cloud microphysics and cumulus parameterization schemes in the Hurricane Weather Research and Forecasting (HWRF) Model to accurately simulate the evolution of the cloud and moisture fields during the entire life cycle of Hurricane Edouard (2014). The forecast accuracy for each model configuration was evaluated through comparison of observed and simulated Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite-13 (GOES-13) infrared brightness temperatures and satellite-derived tropical cyclone intensity estimates computed using the advanced Dvorak technique (ADT). Overall, the analysis revealed a large moist bias in the mid- and upper troposphere during the entire forecast period that was at least partially due to a moist bias in the initialization datasets but was also affected by the microphysics and cumulus parameterization schemes. Large differences occurred in the azimuthal brightness temperature distributions, with two of the microphysics schemes producing hurricane eyes that were much larger and clearer than observed, especially for later forecast hours. Comparisons to the forecast 10-m wind speeds showed reasonable agreement (correlations between 0.58 and 0.74) between the surface-based intensities and the ADT intensity estimates inferred via cloud patterns in the upper troposphere. It was also found that model configurations that had the smallest differences between the ADT and surface-based intensities had the most accurate track and intensity forecasts. Last, the cloud microphysics schemes had the largest impact on the forecast accuracy.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0027-0644</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1520-0493</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1175/MWR-D-16-0354.1</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington: American Meteorological Society</publisher><subject>Accuracy ; Atmospheric sciences ; Bias ; Brightness ; Brightness temperature ; Climatology ; Cloud computing ; Cloud microphysics ; Cloud parameterization ; Cloud patterns ; Clouds ; Computer simulation ; Correlation ; Cumulus clouds ; Cyclones ; Estimates ; Evolution ; Eye of hurricane ; Fields ; Forecast accuracy ; GOES satellites ; Heat ; Hurricanes ; Life cycle ; Life cycle engineering ; Life cycles ; Mathematical models ; Meteorological satellites ; Microphysics ; Model accuracy ; Moisture ; Parameterization ; Satellites ; Studies ; Surface radiation temperature ; Temperature ; Temperature distribution ; Temperature effects ; Tropical climate ; Tropical cyclones ; Troposphere ; Upper troposphere ; Water vapor ; Water vapour ; Weather ; Weather forecasting ; Wind speed</subject><ispartof>Monthly weather review, 2017-05, Vol.145 (5), p.2027-2046</ispartof><rights>Copyright American Meteorological Society May 2017</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c376t-aeb603be4b848bf61fe3ff56d32726f3616199511536417eb47835fdf041d5ef3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c376t-aeb603be4b848bf61fe3ff56d32726f3616199511536417eb47835fdf041d5ef3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,3682,27929,27930</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Otkin, Jason A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lewis, William E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lenzen, Allen J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McNoldy, Brian D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Majumdar, Sharanya J.</creatorcontrib><title>Assessing the Accuracy of the Cloud and Water Vapor Fields in the Hurricane WRF (HWRF) Model Using Satellite Infrared Brightness Temperatures</title><title>Monthly weather review</title><description>In this study, cycled forecast experiments were performed to assess the ability of different cloud microphysics and cumulus parameterization schemes in the Hurricane Weather Research and Forecasting (HWRF) Model to accurately simulate the evolution of the cloud and moisture fields during the entire life cycle of Hurricane Edouard (2014). The forecast accuracy for each model configuration was evaluated through comparison of observed and simulated Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite-13 (GOES-13) infrared brightness temperatures and satellite-derived tropical cyclone intensity estimates computed using the advanced Dvorak technique (ADT). Overall, the analysis revealed a large moist bias in the mid- and upper troposphere during the entire forecast period that was at least partially due to a moist bias in the initialization datasets but was also affected by the microphysics and cumulus parameterization schemes. Large differences occurred in the azimuthal brightness temperature distributions, with two of the microphysics schemes producing hurricane eyes that were much larger and clearer than observed, especially for later forecast hours. Comparisons to the forecast 10-m wind speeds showed reasonable agreement (correlations between 0.58 and 0.74) between the surface-based intensities and the ADT intensity estimates inferred via cloud patterns in the upper troposphere. It was also found that model configurations that had the smallest differences between the ADT and surface-based intensities had the most accurate track and intensity forecasts. Last, the cloud microphysics schemes had the largest impact on the forecast accuracy.</description><subject>Accuracy</subject><subject>Atmospheric sciences</subject><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Brightness</subject><subject>Brightness temperature</subject><subject>Climatology</subject><subject>Cloud computing</subject><subject>Cloud microphysics</subject><subject>Cloud parameterization</subject><subject>Cloud patterns</subject><subject>Clouds</subject><subject>Computer simulation</subject><subject>Correlation</subject><subject>Cumulus clouds</subject><subject>Cyclones</subject><subject>Estimates</subject><subject>Evolution</subject><subject>Eye of hurricane</subject><subject>Fields</subject><subject>Forecast accuracy</subject><subject>GOES satellites</subject><subject>Heat</subject><subject>Hurricanes</subject><subject>Life cycle</subject><subject>Life cycle engineering</subject><subject>Life cycles</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>Meteorological satellites</subject><subject>Microphysics</subject><subject>Model accuracy</subject><subject>Moisture</subject><subject>Parameterization</subject><subject>Satellites</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Surface radiation temperature</subject><subject>Temperature</subject><subject>Temperature distribution</subject><subject>Temperature effects</subject><subject>Tropical climate</subject><subject>Tropical cyclones</subject><subject>Troposphere</subject><subject>Upper troposphere</subject><subject>Water vapor</subject><subject>Water vapour</subject><subject>Weather</subject><subject>Weather forecasting</subject><subject>Wind speed</subject><issn>0027-0644</issn><issn>1520-0493</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNotkE9PwjAYxhujiYievTbxoodC37Xr2BFBxARigiDHptvewsjYsN0OfAi_swO8vE_e5PmT_Ah5BN4DiML-fL1gYwaKcRHKHlyRDoQBZ1zG4pp0OA8ixpWUt-TO-x3nXCkZdMjv0Hv0Pi83tN4iHaZp40x6pJU9_6OiajJqyoyuTY2OfptD5egkxyLzNC_PnmnjXJ6aEul6MaHP0_a-0HmVYUFX5-KvNloUeY30o7TOOMzoq8s327psl-kS9wd0pm4c-ntyY03h8eFfu2Q1eVuOpmz2-f4xGs5YKiJVM4OJ4iJBmQzkILEKLAprQ5WJIAqUFQoUxHEIEAolIcJERgMR2sxyCVmIVnTJ06X34KqfBn2td1XjynZSQxxIFUjZZrukf3GlrvLeodUHl--NO2rg-sRct8z1WIPSJ-YaxB9N0HSG</recordid><startdate>20170501</startdate><enddate>20170501</enddate><creator>Otkin, Jason A.</creator><creator>Lewis, William E.</creator><creator>Lenzen, Allen J.</creator><creator>McNoldy, Brian D.</creator><creator>Majumdar, Sharanya J.</creator><general>American Meteorological Society</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88F</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>M1Q</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20170501</creationdate><title>Assessing the Accuracy of the Cloud and Water Vapor Fields in the Hurricane WRF (HWRF) Model Using Satellite Infrared Brightness Temperatures</title><author>Otkin, Jason A. ; Lewis, William E. ; Lenzen, Allen J. ; McNoldy, Brian D. ; Majumdar, Sharanya J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c376t-aeb603be4b848bf61fe3ff56d32726f3616199511536417eb47835fdf041d5ef3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Accuracy</topic><topic>Atmospheric sciences</topic><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Brightness</topic><topic>Brightness temperature</topic><topic>Climatology</topic><topic>Cloud computing</topic><topic>Cloud microphysics</topic><topic>Cloud parameterization</topic><topic>Cloud patterns</topic><topic>Clouds</topic><topic>Computer simulation</topic><topic>Correlation</topic><topic>Cumulus clouds</topic><topic>Cyclones</topic><topic>Estimates</topic><topic>Evolution</topic><topic>Eye of hurricane</topic><topic>Fields</topic><topic>Forecast accuracy</topic><topic>GOES satellites</topic><topic>Heat</topic><topic>Hurricanes</topic><topic>Life cycle</topic><topic>Life cycle engineering</topic><topic>Life cycles</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>Meteorological satellites</topic><topic>Microphysics</topic><topic>Model accuracy</topic><topic>Moisture</topic><topic>Parameterization</topic><topic>Satellites</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Surface radiation temperature</topic><topic>Temperature</topic><topic>Temperature distribution</topic><topic>Temperature effects</topic><topic>Tropical climate</topic><topic>Tropical cyclones</topic><topic>Troposphere</topic><topic>Upper troposphere</topic><topic>Water vapor</topic><topic>Water vapour</topic><topic>Weather</topic><topic>Weather forecasting</topic><topic>Wind speed</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Otkin, Jason A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lewis, William E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lenzen, Allen J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McNoldy, Brian D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Majumdar, Sharanya J.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Military Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy & Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Military Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>Monthly weather review</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Otkin, Jason A.</au><au>Lewis, William E.</au><au>Lenzen, Allen J.</au><au>McNoldy, Brian D.</au><au>Majumdar, Sharanya J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Assessing the Accuracy of the Cloud and Water Vapor Fields in the Hurricane WRF (HWRF) Model Using Satellite Infrared Brightness Temperatures</atitle><jtitle>Monthly weather review</jtitle><date>2017-05-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>145</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>2027</spage><epage>2046</epage><pages>2027-2046</pages><issn>0027-0644</issn><eissn>1520-0493</eissn><abstract>In this study, cycled forecast experiments were performed to assess the ability of different cloud microphysics and cumulus parameterization schemes in the Hurricane Weather Research and Forecasting (HWRF) Model to accurately simulate the evolution of the cloud and moisture fields during the entire life cycle of Hurricane Edouard (2014). The forecast accuracy for each model configuration was evaluated through comparison of observed and simulated Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite-13 (GOES-13) infrared brightness temperatures and satellite-derived tropical cyclone intensity estimates computed using the advanced Dvorak technique (ADT). Overall, the analysis revealed a large moist bias in the mid- and upper troposphere during the entire forecast period that was at least partially due to a moist bias in the initialization datasets but was also affected by the microphysics and cumulus parameterization schemes. Large differences occurred in the azimuthal brightness temperature distributions, with two of the microphysics schemes producing hurricane eyes that were much larger and clearer than observed, especially for later forecast hours. Comparisons to the forecast 10-m wind speeds showed reasonable agreement (correlations between 0.58 and 0.74) between the surface-based intensities and the ADT intensity estimates inferred via cloud patterns in the upper troposphere. It was also found that model configurations that had the smallest differences between the ADT and surface-based intensities had the most accurate track and intensity forecasts. Last, the cloud microphysics schemes had the largest impact on the forecast accuracy.</abstract><cop>Washington</cop><pub>American Meteorological Society</pub><doi>10.1175/MWR-D-16-0354.1</doi><tpages>20</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0027-0644 |
ispartof | Monthly weather review, 2017-05, Vol.145 (5), p.2027-2046 |
issn | 0027-0644 1520-0493 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1924624415 |
source | American Meteorological Society; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Accuracy Atmospheric sciences Bias Brightness Brightness temperature Climatology Cloud computing Cloud microphysics Cloud parameterization Cloud patterns Clouds Computer simulation Correlation Cumulus clouds Cyclones Estimates Evolution Eye of hurricane Fields Forecast accuracy GOES satellites Heat Hurricanes Life cycle Life cycle engineering Life cycles Mathematical models Meteorological satellites Microphysics Model accuracy Moisture Parameterization Satellites Studies Surface radiation temperature Temperature Temperature distribution Temperature effects Tropical climate Tropical cyclones Troposphere Upper troposphere Water vapor Water vapour Weather Weather forecasting Wind speed |
title | Assessing the Accuracy of the Cloud and Water Vapor Fields in the Hurricane WRF (HWRF) Model Using Satellite Infrared Brightness Temperatures |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-12T04%3A03%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Assessing%20the%20Accuracy%20of%20the%20Cloud%20and%20Water%20Vapor%20Fields%20in%20the%20Hurricane%20WRF%20(HWRF)%20Model%20Using%20Satellite%20Infrared%20Brightness%20Temperatures&rft.jtitle=Monthly%20weather%20review&rft.au=Otkin,%20Jason%20A.&rft.date=2017-05-01&rft.volume=145&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=2027&rft.epage=2046&rft.pages=2027-2046&rft.issn=0027-0644&rft.eissn=1520-0493&rft_id=info:doi/10.1175/MWR-D-16-0354.1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1924624415%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1924624415&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |