Marco ArpagausMeteo Swiss ch WG 3 WG 5

Marco. Arpagaus@Meteo. Swiss. ch WG 3 -WG 5 workshop, 9. 3. 2005, Langen COSMO WG 3 -WG 5 workshop 9 March 2005, Langen

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Who should run the test cases, WGs 1 -3 or WG 5? (all) Test cases for WP 5. 6. 2: defined by WGs 1 -3 or WG 5 (or both)? (all) What can be improved? – First experience from WG 5 members … (all) What could be the next (WG 3) candidates for WP 5. 6. 2? (Arpagaus) … 10: 45 - 11: 15 coffee break Marco. Arpagaus@Meteo. Swiss. ch WG 3 -WG 5 workshop, 9. 3. 2005, Langen WP 5. 6. 2: “Verification of new schemes from WGs 1 -3” 09: 15 - 09: 30 Marco Arpagaus and Matthias Raschendorfer: Introduction to WP 5. 6. 2 09: 30 - 10: 15 Francis Schubiger, Pirmin Kaufmann, Dominique Ruffieux, and Matteo Buzzi: “A first attempt to WP 5. 6. 2” 10: 15 - 10: 45 Discussion, next steps, i. e. , 1 Agenda for joint WG 3 -WG 5 workshop (1)

Agenda for joint WG 3 -WG 5 workshop (2) 12: 45 - 13: 45 lunch break 13: 45 - 16: 00 WG 5 workshop Marco. Arpagaus@Meteo. Swiss. ch WG 3 -WG 5 workshop, 9. 3. 2005, Langen Other results from WG 5 11: 45 - 12: 15 Chiara Marsigli: “Analysis of LM behaviour in different configurations on some test cases” 12: 15 - 12: 45 Ulrich Damrath: ”Some systematic LM-errors” 2 WP 5. 5. 1: “Validation of near-surface boundary layer processes” 11: 15 -11: 45 Gerd Vogel and Felix Ament: “Impact of soil moisture on near surface atmospheric layers”

“Verification of new schemes from WGs 1 -3” 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Who should run the test cases, WGs 1 -3 or WG 5? (all) Test cases for WP 5. 6. 2: defined by WGs 1 -3 or WG 5 (or both)? (all) What can be improved? – First experience from WG 5 members … (all) What could be the next (WG 3) candidates for WP 5. 6. 2? (Arpagaus) … Marco. Arpagaus@Meteo. Swiss. ch WG 3 -WG 5 workshop, 9. 3. 2005, Langen TKE scheme: operational verification results Experiments at ECMWF: exp 001 & exp 002 In-depth verification by WG 5 members Discussion 3 Aim(s) of WP 5. 6. 2 A first attempt …

a first attempt to WP 5. 6. 2: a simple (sensitivity-) experiment … Marco. Arpagaus@Meteo. Swiss. ch WG 3 -WG 5 workshop, 9. 3. 2005, Langen Already done: Establish first WP in WP 5 (“Verification and Case Studies”) concerning case studies … As soon as possible: Try to bring WG 5 results closer to the needs of WG 3 (as well as WGs 1 & 2), i. e. , get some (WG 3 -independant) results based on conditional verifications of test cases, test periods, and operational model suites. Christmas 2006 (? ): Provide a common and easy-to-use tool that allows WG 1 -3 members to do conditional verifications themselves --- the tool should ideally be provided, maintained, and used by WG 5. 4 Aim(s) of WP 5. 6. 2

TKE scheme: operational verification results (1) Marco. Arpagaus@Meteo. Swiss. ch WG 3 -WG 5 workshop, 9. 3. 2005, Langen 5 LM: model has a cold bias in the PBL

TKE scheme: operational verification results (2) Marco. Arpagaus@Meteo. Swiss. ch WG 3 -WG 5 workshop, 9. 3. 2005, Langen 6 LM: model has a cold bias in the PBL

Marco. Arpagaus@Meteo. Swiss. ch WG 3 -WG 5 workshop, 9. 3. 2005, Langen A cold (and moist) model bias first of all is a hint for too much evaporation in the model. In this case, for cloud free conditions, the model would tend to systematically have too small heating rates within the boundary layer during day time, connected with too much moistening. On the other hand, during winter there is only little forcing of the boundary layer during day time and cooling during the night may be more important. Thus, a too cold boundary layer may also be a hint for too strong heat fluxes during the night from the atmosphere towards the soil. In this case the model would tend to have too strong cooling rates during clear sky night conditions. 10 Experiments at ECMWF: exp 001 & exp 002 (1)

Marco. Arpagaus@Meteo. Swiss. ch WG 3 -WG 5 workshop, 9. 3. 2005, Langen Large domain (461 x 389) encompassing most of Europe IBCs and LBCs from ECMWF analyses LM version 3. 12, 7 km mesh size, 45 vertical levels Exp 001: most namelist parameters identical to operational setting at DWD Exp 002: same as exp 001 except for pat_len = 0. and ztk_hmin = ztk_mmin = 0. (see below) 72 hours forecast starting 12 Dec 2004 00 UTC High pressure system (SLP and 500 h. Pa) over central Europe; fairly stable stratification for large parts of the domain, some low level clouds over northern Europe Full model level output (GRIB) stored on ECFS at ECMWF; extraction of data with fieldextra 11 Experiments at ECMWF: exp 001 & exp 002 (2)

Marco. Arpagaus@Meteo. Swiss. ch WG 3 -WG 5 workshop, 9. 3. 2005, Langen 12 Experiments at ECMWF: exp 001 & exp 002 (3)

Marco. Arpagaus@Meteo. Swiss. ch WG 3 -WG 5 workshop, 9. 3. 2005, Langen It should be possible to check both possibilities (see above) by comparing the evolution of boundary layer profiles (‘diurnal cycle’) of temperature and specific humidity (dew point temperature) in exp 001 with those of the corresponding analysis (or with observations directly). Exp 002 is a run with decreased vertical mixing during stable conditions (pat_len = 0. (instead of 500. ) switches off the circulation term in the prognostic TKE equation; additionally, ztk_hmin = ztk_mmin = 0. (instead of 1. ) sets the minimal diffusion coefficients for scalars (heat, moisture) and momentum to zero). Assuming that too much mixing during the night plays an important role, exp 002 should have a reduced cold bias. 13 Experiments at ECMWF: exp 001 & exp 002 (4)

Experiments at ECMWF: exp 001 & exp 002 (5) This would allow to see whethere is too much vertical exchange/diffusion in case of a stably stratified PBL (and with a correctly forecasted cloud cover). Additionally, differences over land/sea would also be interesting (the amount of low level clouds over sea may be a potential problem in exp 002). Marco. Arpagaus@Meteo. Swiss. ch WG 3 -WG 5 workshop, 9. 3. 2005, Langen look for cloud free situations (at least low and mid-level clouds; obs & model) look for a stably stratified PBL (obs & model) possibly compare the above with 'opposite' situations (i. e. , cloudy situations, unstably stratified PBL) 14 Conditional verification:

In-depth verification by WG 5 members Marco. Arpagaus@Meteo. Swiss. ch WG 3 -WG 5 workshop, 9. 3. 2005, Langen 15 Francis Schubiger, Pirmin Kaufmann, Dominique Ruffieux, and Matteo Buzzi: “A first attempt to WP 5. 6. 2”

Marco. Arpagaus@Meteo. Swiss. ch WG 3 -WG 5 workshop, 9. 3. 2005, Langen 16 poor mans conditional verification (1)

Marco. Arpagaus@Meteo. Swiss. ch WG 3 -WG 5 workshop, 9. 3. 2005, Langen 17 poor mans conditional verification (2)

Marco. Arpagaus@Meteo. Swiss. ch WG 3 -WG 5 workshop, 9. 3. 2005, Langen 18 poor mans conditional verification (3)

Marco. Arpagaus@Meteo. Swiss. ch WG 3 -WG 5 workshop, 9. 3. 2005, Langen 20 poor mans conditional verification (5)

Discussion of results … 2. 3. 4. 5. Who should run the test cases, WGs 1 -3 or WG 5? (all) Test cases for WP 5. 6. 2: defined by WGs 1 -3 or WG 5 (or both)? (all) What can be improved? – First experience from WG 5 members … (all) What could be the next (WG 3) candidates for WP 5. 6. 2? (Arpagaus) … Marco. Arpagaus@Meteo. Swiss. ch WG 3 -WG 5 workshop, 9. 3. 2005, Langen 1. 21 … and:

Who should run the test cases? WGs 1 -3: To be sure that the correct model version and namelists are used (PK, FS) To be sure that everyone looks at the same data WG 3 favours the 2 nd option. Marco. Arpagaus@Meteo. Swiss. ch WG 3 -WG 5 workshop, 9. 3. 2005, Langen To be sure to have the right model output (MM) To be sure that the cases are of interest to the WG 5 member (CM) 22 WG 5 members individually:

Test cases: defined by WGs 1 -3 or WG 5? WGs 1 -3: Because a heavy precipitation case may not be very suitable to test clear-sky radiation issues … ‘smallest common multiple’ - run some cases defined by WGs 1 -3 and some more of particular interest to WG 5: members More work … ‘largest common divider’ - run the cases WGs 1 -3 select from the WG 5 -defined list: There may be none … Marco. Arpagaus@Meteo. Swiss. ch WG 3 -WG 5 workshop, 9. 3. 2005, Langen To be sure that the cases are of interest to the WG 5 member (CM) 23 WG 5:

Marco. Arpagaus@Meteo. Swiss. ch WG 3 -WG 5 workshop, 9. 3. 2005, Langen 24 What can be improved? First experience from WG 5 members …

The next candidates for WP 5. 6. 2? WG 3: Marco. Arpagaus@Meteo. Swiss. ch WG 3 -WG 5 workshop, 9. 3. 2005, Langen WGs 1 & 2: ? ? ? 25 another sensitivity-experiment for the TKE scheme (? ) 3 d turbulence (WP 3. 9. 2; 2. 8 km mesh size) Kain-Fritsch scheme (WP 3. 3. 1)