Sensitivity of Bow-Echo Simulation to Microphysical Parameterizations

The sensitivity of a case study bow-echo simulation to eight different microphysical schemes in the Weather Research and Forecasting model was tested, with a focus on graupel parameter characteristics. The graupel parameter in one scheme was modified to have a larger mean size and faster fall speed...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Weather and forecasting 2013-10, Vol.28 (5), p.1188-1209
Hauptverfasser: ADAMS-SELIN, Rebecca D, VAN DEN HEEVER, Susan C, JOHNSON, Richard H
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1209
container_issue 5
container_start_page 1188
container_title Weather and forecasting
container_volume 28
creator ADAMS-SELIN, Rebecca D
VAN DEN HEEVER, Susan C
JOHNSON, Richard H
description The sensitivity of a case study bow-echo simulation to eight different microphysical schemes in the Weather Research and Forecasting model was tested, with a focus on graupel parameter characteristics. The graupel parameter in one scheme was modified to have a larger mean size and faster fall speed to represent hail (“hail like”). The goal of the study was to measure the sensitivity of five parameters that are important to operational forecasters to graupel properties: timing of bowing development, system speed, wind gusts, system areal coverage, and accumulated precipitation. The time each system initiated bowing varied by as much as 105 min. Simulations containing graupel with smaller mean size and slower fall speed (“graupel like”) bowed earlier due to increased microphysical cooling and stronger cold pools. These same systems had reduced precipitation efficiency, producing a peak storm-total accumulation of 36 mm, compared to a hail-like peak value of 237 mm, and observed a peak value of 53 mm. Faster-falling hail-like hydrometeors reached the surface with minimal melting, producing the largest accumulations. Graupel-like systems had 10-m wind gusts 73% stronger compared to hail-like systems, due to stronger low-level downdrafts. Systems with a smaller mean graupel size were 19% faster, also due to increased microphysical cooling. The size of the convective region varied by 150%, although this was partially due to scheme differences other than the graupel parameter. The significant differences in bow-echo characteristics produced by graupel property variations in convective-resolving models emphasize careful microphysical parameterization design. These sensitivities have forecasting implications, as graupel characteristics vary depending on the ambient environment and other factors. Detailed observations of graupel properties are recommended.
doi_str_mv 10.1175/WAF-D-12-00108.1
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2827711352</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2827711352</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c418t-a21302f95f1e96c5c5f7941f3e78233d610a8e2bbf58376a117add3443a9210f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1PAjEQhhujiYjePW5iPBY7_dhtj4igJhhN0HhsytKGEthiu2jw11uBePQ0l-d9Z-ZB6BJID6ASN-_9Eb7DQDEhQGQPjlAHBCWYcMaPUYdISbEEUZ6is5QWhBAqqOqg4cQ2ybf-07fbIrjiNnzhYT0PxcSvNkvT-tAUbSiefB3Der5NvjbL4sVEs7Ktjf57R6RzdOLMMtmLw-yit9HwdfCAx8_3j4P-GNccZIsNBUaoU8KBVWUtauEqxcExW0nK2KwEYqSl06kTklWlyY-Z2YxxzoyiQBzroqt97zqGj41NrV6ETWzySk0lrSoAJuh_FHBeKkoynCmyp_JnKUXr9Dr6lYlbDUT_KtVZqb7TQPVOqYYcuT4Um5Q9uGia2qe_XD5ASak4-wHS93TR</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1446920282</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Sensitivity of Bow-Echo Simulation to Microphysical Parameterizations</title><source>Electronic Journals Library</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><source>AMS Journals (Meteorology)</source><creator>ADAMS-SELIN, Rebecca D ; VAN DEN HEEVER, Susan C ; JOHNSON, Richard H</creator><creatorcontrib>ADAMS-SELIN, Rebecca D ; VAN DEN HEEVER, Susan C ; JOHNSON, Richard H</creatorcontrib><description>The sensitivity of a case study bow-echo simulation to eight different microphysical schemes in the Weather Research and Forecasting model was tested, with a focus on graupel parameter characteristics. The graupel parameter in one scheme was modified to have a larger mean size and faster fall speed to represent hail (“hail like”). The goal of the study was to measure the sensitivity of five parameters that are important to operational forecasters to graupel properties: timing of bowing development, system speed, wind gusts, system areal coverage, and accumulated precipitation. The time each system initiated bowing varied by as much as 105 min. Simulations containing graupel with smaller mean size and slower fall speed (“graupel like”) bowed earlier due to increased microphysical cooling and stronger cold pools. These same systems had reduced precipitation efficiency, producing a peak storm-total accumulation of 36 mm, compared to a hail-like peak value of 237 mm, and observed a peak value of 53 mm. Faster-falling hail-like hydrometeors reached the surface with minimal melting, producing the largest accumulations. Graupel-like systems had 10-m wind gusts 73% stronger compared to hail-like systems, due to stronger low-level downdrafts. Systems with a smaller mean graupel size were 19% faster, also due to increased microphysical cooling. The size of the convective region varied by 150%, although this was partially due to scheme differences other than the graupel parameter. The significant differences in bow-echo characteristics produced by graupel property variations in convective-resolving models emphasize careful microphysical parameterization design. These sensitivities have forecasting implications, as graupel characteristics vary depending on the ambient environment and other factors. Detailed observations of graupel properties are recommended.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0882-8156</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1520-0434</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1175/WAF-D-12-00108.1</identifier><identifier>CODEN: WEFOE3</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Boston, MA: American Meteorological Society</publisher><subject>Bowing ; Case studies ; Cold ; Cold pools ; Cooling ; Design parameters ; Downdraft ; Earth, ocean, space ; Echoes ; Exact sciences and technology ; External geophysics ; Forecasting ; Graupel ; Gusts ; Hail ; Hydrometeors ; Mathematical models ; Meteorology ; Parameter modification ; Parameter sensitivity ; Parameterization ; Precipitation ; Radiation ; Rain ; Simulation ; Storms ; Storms, hurricanes, tornadoes, thunderstorms ; Weather analysis and prediction ; Weather forecasting ; Wind</subject><ispartof>Weather and forecasting, 2013-10, Vol.28 (5), p.1188-1209</ispartof><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright American Meteorological Society Oct 2013</rights><rights>Copyright American Meteorological Society 2013</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c418t-a21302f95f1e96c5c5f7941f3e78233d610a8e2bbf58376a117add3443a9210f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c418t-a21302f95f1e96c5c5f7941f3e78233d610a8e2bbf58376a117add3443a9210f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3668,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=27798894$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>ADAMS-SELIN, Rebecca D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VAN DEN HEEVER, Susan C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>JOHNSON, Richard H</creatorcontrib><title>Sensitivity of Bow-Echo Simulation to Microphysical Parameterizations</title><title>Weather and forecasting</title><description>The sensitivity of a case study bow-echo simulation to eight different microphysical schemes in the Weather Research and Forecasting model was tested, with a focus on graupel parameter characteristics. The graupel parameter in one scheme was modified to have a larger mean size and faster fall speed to represent hail (“hail like”). The goal of the study was to measure the sensitivity of five parameters that are important to operational forecasters to graupel properties: timing of bowing development, system speed, wind gusts, system areal coverage, and accumulated precipitation. The time each system initiated bowing varied by as much as 105 min. Simulations containing graupel with smaller mean size and slower fall speed (“graupel like”) bowed earlier due to increased microphysical cooling and stronger cold pools. These same systems had reduced precipitation efficiency, producing a peak storm-total accumulation of 36 mm, compared to a hail-like peak value of 237 mm, and observed a peak value of 53 mm. Faster-falling hail-like hydrometeors reached the surface with minimal melting, producing the largest accumulations. Graupel-like systems had 10-m wind gusts 73% stronger compared to hail-like systems, due to stronger low-level downdrafts. Systems with a smaller mean graupel size were 19% faster, also due to increased microphysical cooling. The size of the convective region varied by 150%, although this was partially due to scheme differences other than the graupel parameter. The significant differences in bow-echo characteristics produced by graupel property variations in convective-resolving models emphasize careful microphysical parameterization design. These sensitivities have forecasting implications, as graupel characteristics vary depending on the ambient environment and other factors. Detailed observations of graupel properties are recommended.</description><subject>Bowing</subject><subject>Case studies</subject><subject>Cold</subject><subject>Cold pools</subject><subject>Cooling</subject><subject>Design parameters</subject><subject>Downdraft</subject><subject>Earth, ocean, space</subject><subject>Echoes</subject><subject>Exact sciences and technology</subject><subject>External geophysics</subject><subject>Forecasting</subject><subject>Graupel</subject><subject>Gusts</subject><subject>Hail</subject><subject>Hydrometeors</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>Meteorology</subject><subject>Parameter modification</subject><subject>Parameter sensitivity</subject><subject>Parameterization</subject><subject>Precipitation</subject><subject>Radiation</subject><subject>Rain</subject><subject>Simulation</subject><subject>Storms</subject><subject>Storms, hurricanes, tornadoes, thunderstorms</subject><subject>Weather analysis and prediction</subject><subject>Weather forecasting</subject><subject>Wind</subject><issn>0882-8156</issn><issn>1520-0434</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1PAjEQhhujiYjePW5iPBY7_dhtj4igJhhN0HhsytKGEthiu2jw11uBePQ0l-d9Z-ZB6BJID6ASN-_9Eb7DQDEhQGQPjlAHBCWYcMaPUYdISbEEUZ6is5QWhBAqqOqg4cQ2ybf-07fbIrjiNnzhYT0PxcSvNkvT-tAUbSiefB3Der5NvjbL4sVEs7Ktjf57R6RzdOLMMtmLw-yit9HwdfCAx8_3j4P-GNccZIsNBUaoU8KBVWUtauEqxcExW0nK2KwEYqSl06kTklWlyY-Z2YxxzoyiQBzroqt97zqGj41NrV6ETWzySk0lrSoAJuh_FHBeKkoynCmyp_JnKUXr9Dr6lYlbDUT_KtVZqb7TQPVOqYYcuT4Um5Q9uGia2qe_XD5ASak4-wHS93TR</recordid><startdate>20131001</startdate><enddate>20131001</enddate><creator>ADAMS-SELIN, Rebecca D</creator><creator>VAN DEN HEEVER, Susan C</creator><creator>JOHNSON, Richard H</creator><general>American Meteorological Society</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7RQ</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88F</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</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>H96</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>M1Q</scope><scope>M2O</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><scope>U9A</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20131001</creationdate><title>Sensitivity of Bow-Echo Simulation to Microphysical Parameterizations</title><author>ADAMS-SELIN, Rebecca D ; VAN DEN HEEVER, Susan C ; JOHNSON, Richard H</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c418t-a21302f95f1e96c5c5f7941f3e78233d610a8e2bbf58376a117add3443a9210f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Bowing</topic><topic>Case studies</topic><topic>Cold</topic><topic>Cold pools</topic><topic>Cooling</topic><topic>Design parameters</topic><topic>Downdraft</topic><topic>Earth, ocean, space</topic><topic>Echoes</topic><topic>Exact sciences and technology</topic><topic>External geophysics</topic><topic>Forecasting</topic><topic>Graupel</topic><topic>Gusts</topic><topic>Hail</topic><topic>Hydrometeors</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>Meteorology</topic><topic>Parameter modification</topic><topic>Parameter sensitivity</topic><topic>Parameterization</topic><topic>Precipitation</topic><topic>Radiation</topic><topic>Rain</topic><topic>Simulation</topic><topic>Storms</topic><topic>Storms, hurricanes, tornadoes, thunderstorms</topic><topic>Weather analysis and prediction</topic><topic>Weather forecasting</topic><topic>Wind</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>ADAMS-SELIN, Rebecca D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VAN DEN HEEVER, Susan C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>JOHNSON, Richard H</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>ProQuest Career &amp; Technical Education Database</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; 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>STEM 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)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Agriculture &amp; Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy &amp; Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Military Database</collection><collection>ProQuest research library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest advanced technologies &amp; aerospace journals</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; 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>Weather and forecasting</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>ADAMS-SELIN, Rebecca D</au><au>VAN DEN HEEVER, Susan C</au><au>JOHNSON, Richard H</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Sensitivity of Bow-Echo Simulation to Microphysical Parameterizations</atitle><jtitle>Weather and forecasting</jtitle><date>2013-10-01</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>28</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>1188</spage><epage>1209</epage><pages>1188-1209</pages><issn>0882-8156</issn><eissn>1520-0434</eissn><coden>WEFOE3</coden><abstract>The sensitivity of a case study bow-echo simulation to eight different microphysical schemes in the Weather Research and Forecasting model was tested, with a focus on graupel parameter characteristics. The graupel parameter in one scheme was modified to have a larger mean size and faster fall speed to represent hail (“hail like”). The goal of the study was to measure the sensitivity of five parameters that are important to operational forecasters to graupel properties: timing of bowing development, system speed, wind gusts, system areal coverage, and accumulated precipitation. The time each system initiated bowing varied by as much as 105 min. Simulations containing graupel with smaller mean size and slower fall speed (“graupel like”) bowed earlier due to increased microphysical cooling and stronger cold pools. These same systems had reduced precipitation efficiency, producing a peak storm-total accumulation of 36 mm, compared to a hail-like peak value of 237 mm, and observed a peak value of 53 mm. Faster-falling hail-like hydrometeors reached the surface with minimal melting, producing the largest accumulations. Graupel-like systems had 10-m wind gusts 73% stronger compared to hail-like systems, due to stronger low-level downdrafts. Systems with a smaller mean graupel size were 19% faster, also due to increased microphysical cooling. The size of the convective region varied by 150%, although this was partially due to scheme differences other than the graupel parameter. The significant differences in bow-echo characteristics produced by graupel property variations in convective-resolving models emphasize careful microphysical parameterization design. These sensitivities have forecasting implications, as graupel characteristics vary depending on the ambient environment and other factors. Detailed observations of graupel properties are recommended.</abstract><cop>Boston, MA</cop><pub>American Meteorological Society</pub><doi>10.1175/WAF-D-12-00108.1</doi><tpages>22</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0882-8156
ispartof Weather and forecasting, 2013-10, Vol.28 (5), p.1188-1209
issn 0882-8156
1520-0434
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2827711352
source Electronic Journals Library; Alma/SFX Local Collection; AMS Journals (Meteorology)
subjects Bowing
Case studies
Cold
Cold pools
Cooling
Design parameters
Downdraft
Earth, ocean, space
Echoes
Exact sciences and technology
External geophysics
Forecasting
Graupel
Gusts
Hail
Hydrometeors
Mathematical models
Meteorology
Parameter modification
Parameter sensitivity
Parameterization
Precipitation
Radiation
Rain
Simulation
Storms
Storms, hurricanes, tornadoes, thunderstorms
Weather analysis and prediction
Weather forecasting
Wind
title Sensitivity of Bow-Echo Simulation to Microphysical Parameterizations
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-29T10%3A06%3A54IST&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=Sensitivity%20of%20Bow-Echo%20Simulation%20to%20Microphysical%20Parameterizations&rft.jtitle=Weather%20and%20forecasting&rft.au=ADAMS-SELIN,%20Rebecca%20D&rft.date=2013-10-01&rft.volume=28&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=1188&rft.epage=1209&rft.pages=1188-1209&rft.issn=0882-8156&rft.eissn=1520-0434&rft.coden=WEFOE3&rft_id=info:doi/10.1175/WAF-D-12-00108.1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2827711352%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=1446920282&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true