Search Results
You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for :
- Author or Editor: Zhuo Wang x
- Modern Era Retrospective-Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA) x
- Refine by Access: All Content x
Abstract
Ocean surface turbulent fluxes play an important role in the energy and water cycles of the atmosphere–ocean coupled system, and several flux products have become available in recent years. Here, turbulent fluxes from 6 widely used reanalyses, 4 satellite-derived flux products, and 2 combined product are evaluated by comparison with direct covariance latent heat (LH) and sensible heat (SH) fluxes and inertial-dissipation wind stresses measured from 12 cruises over the tropics and mid- and high latitudes. The biases range from −3.0 to 20.2 W m−2 for LH flux, from −1.4 to 6.0 W m−2 for SH flux, and from −7.6 to 7.9 × 10−3 N m−2 for wind stress. These biases are small for moderate wind speeds but diverge for strong wind speeds (>10 m s−1). The total flux biases are then further evaluated by dividing them into uncertainties due to errors in the bulk variables and the residual uncertainty. The bulk-variable-caused uncertainty dominates many products’ SH flux and wind stress biases. The biases in the bulk variables that contribute to this uncertainty can be quite high depending on the cruise and the variable. On the basis of a ranking of each product’s flux, it is found that the Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA) is among the “best performing” for all three fluxes. Also, the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) interim reanalysis (ERA-Interim) and the National Centers for Environmental Prediction–Department of Energy (NCEP–DOE) reanalysis are among the best performing for two of the three fluxes. Of the satellite-derived products, version 2b of the Goddard Satellite-Based Surface Turbulent Fluxes (GSSTF2b) is among the best performing for two of the three fluxes. Also among the best performing for only one of the fluxes are the 40-yr ERA (ERA-40) and the combined product objectively analyzed air–sea fluxes (OAFlux). Direction for the future development of ocean surface flux datasets is also suggested.
Abstract
Ocean surface turbulent fluxes play an important role in the energy and water cycles of the atmosphere–ocean coupled system, and several flux products have become available in recent years. Here, turbulent fluxes from 6 widely used reanalyses, 4 satellite-derived flux products, and 2 combined product are evaluated by comparison with direct covariance latent heat (LH) and sensible heat (SH) fluxes and inertial-dissipation wind stresses measured from 12 cruises over the tropics and mid- and high latitudes. The biases range from −3.0 to 20.2 W m−2 for LH flux, from −1.4 to 6.0 W m−2 for SH flux, and from −7.6 to 7.9 × 10−3 N m−2 for wind stress. These biases are small for moderate wind speeds but diverge for strong wind speeds (>10 m s−1). The total flux biases are then further evaluated by dividing them into uncertainties due to errors in the bulk variables and the residual uncertainty. The bulk-variable-caused uncertainty dominates many products’ SH flux and wind stress biases. The biases in the bulk variables that contribute to this uncertainty can be quite high depending on the cruise and the variable. On the basis of a ranking of each product’s flux, it is found that the Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA) is among the “best performing” for all three fluxes. Also, the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) interim reanalysis (ERA-Interim) and the National Centers for Environmental Prediction–Department of Energy (NCEP–DOE) reanalysis are among the best performing for two of the three fluxes. Of the satellite-derived products, version 2b of the Goddard Satellite-Based Surface Turbulent Fluxes (GSSTF2b) is among the best performing for two of the three fluxes. Also among the best performing for only one of the fluxes are the 40-yr ERA (ERA-40) and the combined product objectively analyzed air–sea fluxes (OAFlux). Direction for the future development of ocean surface flux datasets is also suggested.
Abstract
Reanalysis products produced at the various centers around the globe are utilized for many different scientific endeavors, including forcing land surface models and creating surface flux estimates. Here, flux tower observations of temperature, wind speed, precipitation, downward shortwave radiation, net surface radiation, and latent and sensible heat fluxes are used to evaluate the performance of various reanalysis products [NCEP–NCAR reanalysis and Climate Forecast System Reanalysis (CFSR) from NCEP; 40-yr European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) Re-Analysis (ERA-40) and ECMWF Interim Re-Analysis (ERA-Interim) from ECMWF; and Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA) and Global Land Data Assimilation System (GLDAS) from the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC)]. To combine the biases and standard deviation of errors from the separate stations, a ranking system is utilized. It is found that ERA-Interim has the lowest overall bias in 6-hourly air temperature, followed closely by MERRA and GLDAS. The variability in 6-hourly air temperature is again most accurate in ERA-Interim. ERA-40 is found to have the lowest overall bias in latent heat flux, followed closely by CFSR, while ERA-40 also has the lowest 6-hourly sensible heat bias. MERRA has the second lowest and is close to ERA-40. The variability in 6-hourly precipitation is best captured by GLDAS and ERA-Interim, and ERA-40 has the lowest precipitation bias. It is also found that at monthly time scales, the bias term in the reanalysis products are the dominant cause of the mean square errors, while at 6-hourly and daily time scales the dominant contributor to the mean square errors is the correlation term. Also, it is found that the hourly CFSR data have discontinuities present due to the assimilation cycle, while the hourly MERRA data do not contain these jumps.
Abstract
Reanalysis products produced at the various centers around the globe are utilized for many different scientific endeavors, including forcing land surface models and creating surface flux estimates. Here, flux tower observations of temperature, wind speed, precipitation, downward shortwave radiation, net surface radiation, and latent and sensible heat fluxes are used to evaluate the performance of various reanalysis products [NCEP–NCAR reanalysis and Climate Forecast System Reanalysis (CFSR) from NCEP; 40-yr European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) Re-Analysis (ERA-40) and ECMWF Interim Re-Analysis (ERA-Interim) from ECMWF; and Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA) and Global Land Data Assimilation System (GLDAS) from the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC)]. To combine the biases and standard deviation of errors from the separate stations, a ranking system is utilized. It is found that ERA-Interim has the lowest overall bias in 6-hourly air temperature, followed closely by MERRA and GLDAS. The variability in 6-hourly air temperature is again most accurate in ERA-Interim. ERA-40 is found to have the lowest overall bias in latent heat flux, followed closely by CFSR, while ERA-40 also has the lowest 6-hourly sensible heat bias. MERRA has the second lowest and is close to ERA-40. The variability in 6-hourly precipitation is best captured by GLDAS and ERA-Interim, and ERA-40 has the lowest precipitation bias. It is also found that at monthly time scales, the bias term in the reanalysis products are the dominant cause of the mean square errors, while at 6-hourly and daily time scales the dominant contributor to the mean square errors is the correlation term. Also, it is found that the hourly CFSR data have discontinuities present due to the assimilation cycle, while the hourly MERRA data do not contain these jumps.
