Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

Panel
bgColorwhite
titleBGColorlightlightgrey
titleAvailable forecast dates

Data is provided for multiple forecasts starting from different dates, known as different lead times.

Available lead times for the St Judes storm are forecasts starting from these October 2013 aredates: 24th, 25th, 26th and 27th.

Some tasks will use all the lead times, others require only one.

Panel
bgColorwhite
titleBGColorlightlightgrey
titlePlot HRES forecast
Section
Column
 For

For this task, use the metview icons in the row labelled 'Oper forecast'

Image Removed

oper_rmse.

mv           

mv                                   : this plots the root-mean-square-error growth curves for the operational HRES forecast for the different lead times.

oper_1x1.mv

and

&oper_2x2.mv

 

    : these work in a similar way to the same icons used in the previous task where parameters from a single lead time can be plotted.

oper_to_an_runs.

mv 

mv                         : this plots the same parameter from the different forecasts for the same verifying time. Use this to understand how the forecasts differed, particularly for the later forecasts closer to the event.

oper_to_an_diff.

mv   

mv                           : this plots a single parameter as a difference between the operational HIRES forecast and the ECMWF analysis. Use this to understand the forecast errors from the different lead times.

 

Parameters & map appearance. These macros have the same choice of parameters to plot and same choice of mapType, either the Atlantic sector or over Europe.

Column

Image Added

Note
iconfalse
titleKey questions
  1. How does the HRES forecast compare to analysis and observations?
  2. Was it a good or bad forecast? Why?
  3. How does the forecast change with the different lead times?
Note
iconfalse
titleTeam: Getting started

Each team should look at the forecast from all 4 starting dates and each team member should see the RMSE curves.

Start by looking at the RMS error curves for the 4 different starting dates using MSLP (mean-sea-level pressure) and wind parameters (wind gust at 10m: WGUST10 and wind-speed at 850hPa : SPEED850) and the two geographical regions. Use the oper_rmse.mv icon for this.

As a team, discuss what plots & parameters to use to address the questions above given what you see in the error growth curves.

Then look at the difference between forecast and analysis to understand the error in the forecast, particularly the starting formation and final error.

Team members can look at particular dates and choose particular variables for team discussion.

 

...

Exercise 3 : Visualize the ensemble forecasts and ensemble spread

Recap

Key points

  • Sources of forecast uncertainty: initial analysis and model error.
  • Initial analysis uncertainty: sampled by use of Singular Vectors (SV) and Ensemble Data Assimilation (EDA).
  • Model uncertainty: sampled by use of stochastic processes. In IFS this means Stochastically Perturbed Physical Tendencies (SPPT) and the spectral backscatter scheme (SKEB)
  • Singular Vectors: a way of representing the fastest growing modes.

  • Ensemble mean : this gives the average of all the ensemble members. Where the spread is high, small scale features can be smoothed out in the ensemble mean.
  • Ensemble spread: this gives the standard deviation of the ensemble members and represents how different the members are from the ensemble mean

Objective: understand the forecast uncertainty

Gliffy Diagram
nameensemble workflow

 

Panel
Key questions:
  1. Visualise the ensemble mean - how does it compare to the HIRES forecast and analysis?
  2. Visualize stamp map - are there any members that provide a better forecast?
  3. Visualize spaghetti map - see how members spread over the duration of the forecast. How does the spread grow?

...

Note that as only 6hrly wind gust data is available from the operational forecasts, we have supplemented the 3hrly fields using forecast data.


 

 

...

Task ??. CDF/RMSE at different locations

Recap

TO DO: RMSE & CDF (concepts need explanation)

...

Panel

Group A: The Swedish weather centre is interested in giving out useful weather warnings. They want to know the maximum precipitation and wind gusts over Scandinavia and their likelihood (more than XX m/s wind and XX mm precipitation). Would you give out weather warnings and if yes for which days and areas (1 day lead time)?

Group B: The organiser of a garden party at Windsor Castle at a particular date needs to prepare for weather. The Queen will join the party and she is not amused if there are too many tents that are not necessary. However, it will take some time to prepare shelters for rain and wind or to cancel the event (two days lead time). Would you prepare for rain?

Group C: The operator of a wind farm in the northern see needs to know the highest possible wind speeds to shut down turbines (at XX m/s). If the turbines are shut down too early, power production will be reduced. If they are shut down too late, they will break (6 hours lead time). Would you shut down the wind farm?

 

 

...

Task ?? Creating an ensemble forecast using OpenIFS

See separate handout.

In this exercise, OpenIFS will be run on the ECMWF Cray XC30 to create  a forecast for the storm at T319 resolution using only the stochastic schemes in the model. All forecasts are started from the same initial conditions based on the analysis.

Aim is to understand the impact of these different methods on the ensemble

 

Exercise 4.

...

Exploring the role of uncertainty using OpenIFS forecasts

Experiments available:

  • EDA+SV+SPPT+SKEB : Includes initial data and model uncertainty (experiment id : gbzl)
  • EDA+SV only                   : Includes only initial data uncertainty (experiment id: gc11)
  • SPPT+SKEB only            : Includes model uncertainty only (run by participants, experiment id: oifs)

...

Shutts et al, 2011, ECMWF Newsletter 129.

Acknowledgements

Many people have contributed to this exercise and their contributions are acknowledgedWe gratefully acknowledge the following for their contributions in preparing these exercises, in particular from ECMWF: Glenn Carver, Sandor Kertesz, Linus Magnusson, Sandor Kertesz, Martin Leutbecher, Iain Russell, Filip Vana, Erland Kallen. From University of Oxford: Aneesh Subramanian, Peter Dueben, Peter Watson, Hannah Christensen, Antje Weisheimer.

...