1 The EXIM (Extrapolated Imagery) products Alexander Jann ZAMG, Vienna, Austria NWCSAF User...
-
Upload
steven-sells -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
0
Transcript of 1 The EXIM (Extrapolated Imagery) products Alexander Jann ZAMG, Vienna, Austria NWCSAF User...
1
The EXIM (Extrapolated Imagery) products
Alexander JannZAMG, Vienna, Austria
NWCSAF User Workshop, 24-26 February 2015, AEMET HQ, Madrid, Spain
2
Goal of EXIM
Provide
forecast satellite images forecast NWCSAF products
•through kinematic extrapolation•for lead times ≤ 1 hour
Heritage (MFG IR, +2h)
3
Forecast Cloud Type 12/12/2008, 11.00 + 15min
Forecast Cloud Type 12/12/2008, 11.00 + 30min
Forecast Cloud Type 12/12/2008, 11.00 + 45min
Forecast Cloud Type 12/12/2008, 11.00 + 60min
8
Outline of the algorithm
Interpolate (irregularly distributed) HrW product down to pixel level
Apply the vector field on every pixel n times (n results from user’s specifications plus the limitation of max. + 1 hour)
Construct the predicted image / NWCSAF product by putting pixels at their predicted positions
Fill gaps through nearest-neighbour or average interpolation
Other post-processing, e.g. applying land-sea mask or writing NODATA at the edge of the image
9
Assumptions...
…that might be worth some discussion: We take every piece of HrW information that we can get, i.e. we eventually mix HrW vectors from those channels which the user selected in the HrW configuration file.We make predictions at multiples of slot intervals, i.e. for MSG in nominal mode: +15, +30, +45 and +60. Thus, we “have” images / products earlier than without EXIM, yet we don’t produce imagery for times where we have no actual satellite images.
10
Input fields we already tried
SEVIRI: WV6.2, WV7.3, IR8.7, IR9.7, IR10.8, IR12.0, IR13.4 (yes, VIS0.6-IR3.9 work technically just as well but there are
doubts whether we should enable their forecasting in the first version) Cma CT CTTH_HEIGHT, CTTH_PRE PC_PR1 and PCPh_PC CRR and CRPh_CRR SPhR_BL, ML, HL, KI, LI, SHW, TPW
11
Output files we envisage
One file per channel / product per forecast date Mimicking output format for analysis output as perfect
as possible. Ideally, EXIM products can be distinguished from their analysis counterparts only through the filename and the directory where they are dumped
“DATABUF” for satellite imagery, netCDF for products
12
Output files we envisage (2)
Relevant quality flags shall be extrapolated as well and
be included in the forecast netCDF The EXIM-specific quality flag (“actually extrapolated”
vs. “achieved through post-processing / gap-filling”, applicable to both SEVIRI and product forecasts, hence one per forecast date) is dumped as DATABUF
13
Validation
The SAFNWC PRT defines EXIM’s threshold accuracy as: on average better than persistence forecast
Target accuracy is: always better than persistence forecast
Hence, the validation approach is quite obvious:Compare the EXIM forecast with what was actually observed 15, 30,… minutes later and verify that the displacement actually did anything positive on the skill score (we use Peirce’s [abbr. PSS] and, for the CT product, its multicategorical variant, “R” “verification” ”multi.cont”)
14
Validation
The following slides show PSS time series
Extracted every 2 hoursOver ~3.5 months (Sep 14 – Jan 15)from ZAMG’s operational NWCSAF v2013+ suite, meaning in particular
the HrW default model configuration file was used 3-hourly NWP data, ECMWF, 1 degree resolution European area
15
Geographical coverage
SEVIRI
16
17
18
19
20
NWCSAF PRODUCTS
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
Conclusions - SEVIRI
Release of EXIM certainly OK for
IR WV
Perhaps it would be OK even for the entire spectrum, but the lack of modelling the solar radiation impact for 0.6 – 3.9 means: Risk!
36
37
Conclusions – NWCSAF products
Release of EXIM certainly OK for
CMa CT CTTH CRR
38
Conclusions – NWCSAF products
Big question-mark on PC with its pronounced dependence on illumination conditions (recommended to users only during high-summer season?).
For PCPh and CRPh, stringent validation difficult (uncertainties about areas where one can have 100% confidence). Statistics nevertheless indicate that there is value in the extrapolation (and things should improve with the 24h products announced by AeMet).
39
Conclusions – SPhR (future TqPh)
SPhR and extrapolation with the atmospheric flow do not seem to go well together:For the stability indices sub-group, this could have been expected.For the moisture parameter subgroup, we have evidence that - to a large degree - the task is to predict the outcome of temporal NWP interpolation, at least for NWP intervals ≥ 3 hours → Leave it in the portfolio for those who wish to experiment with 1-hr NWP (actually recommended by SPhR developers)??
40
Future developments
Until v1.0:Consolidate the software (in particular working on the new netCDF output format)Incorporating User WS outcome that can be accommodated fairly quicklyContinue validation
Afterwards:Incorporating User WS outcome that is rather challenging to be implementedTake new NWCSAF/GEO products on board (we are always “day-2”)MTG