Editorial Type:
Article
Article Type:
Research Article

Mesoscale Precipitation Fields. Part II: Hydrometeorologic Modeling

Augusto J. Pereira Fo. Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of São Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil

Search for other papers by Augusto J. Pereira Fo. in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Kenneth C. Crawford School of Meteorology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma

Search for other papers by Kenneth C. Crawford in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
, and
David J. Stensrud NOAA/ERL/National Severe Storms Laboratory, Norman, Oklahoma

Search for other papers by David J. Stensrud in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
Print Publication:
01 Jan 1999
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1999)038<0102:MPFPIH>2.0.CO;2
Page(s):
102–125
Restricted access

Abstract

A hydrometeorologic forecast system (HFS) has been developed that takes advantage of new high-resolution rainfall datasets from the WSR-88D radar system, the Oklahoma Mesonet, and Oklahoma Local Analysis and Prediction System (OLAPS). New schemes to analyze precipitation and to adjust radar rainfall rates have been proposed to improve the quantitative precipitation forecast (QPF) for hydrologic purposes. Adjusted WSR-88D rainfall rates were advected by the 700-mb wind field from OLAPS to produce an extrapolation QPF. Several experiments were conducted to evaluate the effect of the rainfall adjustment and wind field upon the extrapolation QPF. In addition, mesoscale model–produced QPFs were generated using The Pennsylvania State University–National Center for Atmospheric Research Mesoscale Model. Control and rainfall assimilation experiments were performed using both Kuo and Kain–Fritsch cumulus parameterization schemes for three rainfall events from April 1994. All model runs were integrated forward 12 h and then verified against the analyzed precipitation field.

Both the extrapolation and model-produced QPFs were used to produce hydrologic forecasts for the Dry Creek watershed in north-central Oklahoma. Results indicate that extrapolation QPFs degrade exponentially with time and become inferior to the QPF from a mesoscale model after 2 h. When the extrapolated rainfall estimates were input into a hydrologic model, an underestimate of the peak flow occurred since the time evolution of precipitating systems is not handled by extrapolation. Due to the lag time between the peak in precipitation and the peak in streamflow, the greatest impact upon the accuracy of hydrologic forecasts resulted from improvements in the analyzed precipitation field.

On the other hand, mesoscale forecast simulations revealed that the assimilation of analyzed rainfall had a limited impact upon the evolution of model-produced precipitation forecasts out to 4 h. However, model-produced QPFs improved after 8 h into the integration. While the Kuo scheme produced less dispersion error, the Kain–Fritsch scheme created less amplitude error. The assimilation of analyzed rainfall through the convergence factor of the Kuo scheme had a greater impact upon the performance of the mesoscale model than did the Kain–Fritsch rainfall assimilation through the adjustment of its precipitation efficiency factor. Therefore, a new generation HFS has been developed to take advantage of new technology and new scientific methods in an attempt to mitigate the age-old issue of devastating floods that occur without warning. Each component has been tested and evaluated. The results of testing and evaluating each component of the proposed HFS are presented in this paper.

Corresponding author address: Augusto J. Pereira Fo., Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of São Paulo, Rua do Matão, 1226 - Cidade Universitária, São Paulo, SP, Brazil 05508-900.

Abstract

A hydrometeorologic forecast system (HFS) has been developed that takes advantage of new high-resolution rainfall datasets from the WSR-88D radar system, the Oklahoma Mesonet, and Oklahoma Local Analysis and Prediction System (OLAPS). New schemes to analyze precipitation and to adjust radar rainfall rates have been proposed to improve the quantitative precipitation forecast (QPF) for hydrologic purposes. Adjusted WSR-88D rainfall rates were advected by the 700-mb wind field from OLAPS to produce an extrapolation QPF. Several experiments were conducted to evaluate the effect of the rainfall adjustment and wind field upon the extrapolation QPF. In addition, mesoscale model–produced QPFs were generated using The Pennsylvania State University–National Center for Atmospheric Research Mesoscale Model. Control and rainfall assimilation experiments were performed using both Kuo and Kain–Fritsch cumulus parameterization schemes for three rainfall events from April 1994. All model runs were integrated forward 12 h and then verified against the analyzed precipitation field.

Both the extrapolation and model-produced QPFs were used to produce hydrologic forecasts for the Dry Creek watershed in north-central Oklahoma. Results indicate that extrapolation QPFs degrade exponentially with time and become inferior to the QPF from a mesoscale model after 2 h. When the extrapolated rainfall estimates were input into a hydrologic model, an underestimate of the peak flow occurred since the time evolution of precipitating systems is not handled by extrapolation. Due to the lag time between the peak in precipitation and the peak in streamflow, the greatest impact upon the accuracy of hydrologic forecasts resulted from improvements in the analyzed precipitation field.

On the other hand, mesoscale forecast simulations revealed that the assimilation of analyzed rainfall had a limited impact upon the evolution of model-produced precipitation forecasts out to 4 h. However, model-produced QPFs improved after 8 h into the integration. While the Kuo scheme produced less dispersion error, the Kain–Fritsch scheme created less amplitude error. The assimilation of analyzed rainfall through the convergence factor of the Kuo scheme had a greater impact upon the performance of the mesoscale model than did the Kain–Fritsch rainfall assimilation through the adjustment of its precipitation efficiency factor. Therefore, a new generation HFS has been developed to take advantage of new technology and new scientific methods in an attempt to mitigate the age-old issue of devastating floods that occur without warning. Each component has been tested and evaluated. The results of testing and evaluating each component of the proposed HFS are presented in this paper.

Corresponding author address: Augusto J. Pereira Fo., Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of São Paulo, Rua do Matão, 1226 - Cidade Universitária, São Paulo, SP, Brazil 05508-900.

Save
Cover Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology
Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology

  • Anthes, R. A., 1990: Recent applications of the Penn State/NCAR mesoscale model to synoptic, mesoscale, and climate studies. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,71, 1610–1629.

  • ——, E.-Y. Hsie, and Y.-H. Kuo, 1987: Description of the Penn State/NCAR Mesoscale Model Version 4 (MM4). NCAR Tech. Note NCAR/TN-282+STR, 66 pp. [Available from National Center for Atmospheric Research, P.O. Box 3000, Boulder, CO 80307-3000.].

  • Aonashi, K., 1993: An initialization method to incorporate precipitation data into a mesoscale numerical weather prediction model. J. Meteor. Soc. Japan,71, 393–405.

  • Austin, G. L., and A. Bellon, 1974: The use of digital weather forecast of radar reflectivity. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc.,100, 658–664.

  • ——, and ——, 1982: Very-short-range forecasting of precipitation by objective extrapolation of radar and satellite data. Nowcasting, K. A. Browning, Ed., Academic Press, 177–190.

  • Blackadar, A. K., 1979: High resolution models of the planetary boundary layer. Adv. Environ. Sci. Eng.,1(1), 50–85.

  • Bouttier, F., J.-F. Mahfouf, and J. Noilhan, 1993: Sequential assimilation of soil moisture from atmospheric low-level parameters. Part I: Sensitivity and calibration studies. J. Appl. Meteor.,32, 1335–1364.

  • Brewster, K., F. Carr, N. Lin, J. Straka, and J. Krause, 1994: A local analysis system for initializing real-time convective-scale models. Preprints, 10th Conf. on Numerical Weather Prediction, Portland, OR, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 596–598.

  • Browning, K. A., C. G. Collier, P. R. Larke, P. Menmuir, and G. A. Monk, 1982: On the forecasting of frontal rain using a weather radar network. Mon. Wea. Rev.,110, 534–552.

  • Donaldson, R. J., Jr., R. M. Dyer, and M. J. Kraus, 1975: An objective evaluator of techniques for predicting severe weather events. Preprints, Ninth Conf. on Severe Local Storms, Norman, OK, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 321–326.

  • Doswell, C. A., III, 1986: Short-range forecasting. Mesoscale Meteorology and Forecasting, Peter Ray, Ed., Amer. Meteor. Soc., 689–719.

  • Fritsch, J. M., and C. F. Chappell, 1980: Numerical prediction of convectively driven mesoscale pressure systems. Part I: Convective parameterization. J. Atmos. Sci.,37, 1722–1733.

  • Gal-Chen, T., and J. Zhang, 1993: On the optimal use of reflectivities and single Doppler radar velocities to deduce 3-D motions. Preprints, 26th Int. Conf. on Radar Meteorology, Norman, OK, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 414–416.

  • Gill, D. O., 1992: A user’s guide to the Penn State/NCAR mesoscale modeling system. NCAR Tech. Note NCAR/TN-381+IA, 178 pp. [Available from National Center for Atmospheric Research, P.O. Box 3000, Boulder, CO 80307-3000.].

  • Kain, J. S., and J. M. Fritsch, 1990: A one-dimensional entraining/detraining plume model and its application in convective parameterization. J. Atmos. Sci.,47, 2784–2802.

  • ——, and ——, 1992: The role of the convective “trigger function” in numerical forecast of mesoscale convective systems. Meteor. Atmos. Phys.,49, 93–106.

  • Kitzmiller, D. H., and J. B. Ator, 1993: Extrapolation–statistical forecast of radar reflectivity. Natl. Wea. Dig.,18, 12–19.

  • Kuo, H. L., 1974: Further studies of the parameterization of the influence of cumulus convection on large-scale flow. J. Atmos. Sci.,31, 1232–1240.

  • Kuo, Y-H., and R. A. Anthes, 1984: Semiprognostic tests of Kuo-type cumulus parameterization schemes in an extratropical convective system. Mon. Wea. Rev.,112, 1498–1509.

  • Lakhtakia, M. N., and T. T. Warner, 1994: A comparison of simple and complex treatments of surface hydrology and thermodynamics suitable for mesoscale atmospheric models. Mon. Wea. Rev.,122, 880–896.

  • Lin, Y.-L., R. D. Farley, and H. D. Orville, 1983: Bulk parameterization of the snow field in a cloud model. J. Climate Appl. Meteor.,22, 1065–1092.

  • Lin, Y., P. S. Ray, and K. W. Johnson, 1993: Initialization of a modeled convective storm using Doppler radar-derived fields. Mon. Wea. Rev.,121, 2757–2775.

  • McNider, R. T., A. J. Song, D. M. Casey, P. J. Wetzel, W. L. Crosson, and R. M. Rabin, 1994: Toward a dynamic–thermodynamic assimilation of satellite surface temperature in numerical atmospheric models. Mon. Wea. Rev.,122, 2784–2803.

  • Pereira Fo., A. J., 1989: Short-term precipitation forecast with weather radar applied to hydrologic forecast of urbanized watersheds (in Portuguese). M.S. thesis, Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of São Paulo, IAG/USP, 150 pp. [Available from Rua do Matão, 1226, São Paulo, SP, Brazil, CEP 05508–900.].

  • ——, and K. C. Crawford, 1999: Mesoscale precipitation fields. Part I: Statistical analysis and hydrologic response, J. Appl. Meteor.,38, 82–101.

  • Ramamurthy, M. K., and F. H. Carr, 1987: Four-dimensional data assimilation in the monsoon region. Part I: Experiments with wind data. Mon. Wea. Rev.,115, 1678–1706.

  • ——, and ——, 1988: Four-dimensional data assimilation in the monsoon region. Part II: Role of temperature and moisture data. Mon. Wea. Rev.,116, 1896–1913.

  • Ross, B. B., 1986: An overview of numerical weather prediction. Mesoscale Meteorology and Forecasting, Peter Ray, Ed., Amer. Meteor. Soc., 720–751.

  • Stauffer, D. R., and N. L. Seaman, 1990: Use of four-dimensional data assimilation in a limited-area mesoscale model. Part I: Experiments with synoptic-scale data. Mon. Wea. Rev.,118, 1250–1277.

  • ——, and ——, and F. S. Binkowski, 1991: Use of four-dimensional data assimilation in a limited-area mesoscale model. Part II: Effects of data assimilation within the planetary boundary layer. Mon. Wea. Rev.,119, 734–754.

  • Stensrud, D. J., and J. M. Fritsch, 1994a: Mesoscale convective systems in weakly forced large-scale environments. Part II: Generation of a mesoscale initial condition. Mon. Wea. Rev.,122, 2069–2083.

  • ——, and ——, 1994b: Mesoscale convective systems in weakly forced large-scale environments. Part III: Numerical simulations and implications for operational forecasting. Mon. Wea. Rev.,122, 2084–2104.

  • Takacs, L. L., 1985: A two-step scheme for the advection equation with minimized dissipation and dispersion errors. Mon. Wea. Rev.,113, 1050–1065.

  • Takano, I., and A. Segami, 1993: Assimilation and initialization of a mesoscale model for improved spin-up of precipitation. J. Meteor. Soc. Japan,71, 377–391.

  • Tatehira, R., H. Sato, and Y. Makino, 1976: Short-term forecasting of digitized echo pattern. J. Meteor. Res.,28, 61–70.

  • Tremback, C. J., J. Powell, W. R. Cotton, and R. A. Pielke, 1987: The forward-in-time upstream advection scheme: Extension to higher orders. Mon. Wea. Rev.,115, 540–555.

  • Wang, W., and T. Warner, 1988: Use of four-dimensional data assimilation by Newtonian relaxation and latent-heat forcing to improve a mesoscale-model precipitation forecast: A case study. Mon. Wea. Rev.,116, 2593–2613.

  • Zhang, D.-L., H.-R. Chang, N. L. Seaman, T. T. Warner, and J. M. Fritsch, 1986: A two-way interactive nesting procedure with variable terrain resolution. Mon. Wea. Rev.,114, 1330–1339.

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 297 46 4
PDF Downloads 53 20 4