Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2023

Dynamically Downscaled Hourly Future Weather Data with 12-km Resolution Covering Most of North America

This is an hourly future weather dataset for energy modeling applications. The dataset is primarily based on the output of a regional climate model (RCM), i.e., the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model version 3.3.1. The WRF simulations are driven by the output of a general circulation model (GCM), i.e., the Community Climate System Model version 4 (CCSM4). This dataset is in the EPW format, which can be read or translated by more than 25 building energy modeling programs (e.g., EnergyPlus, ESP-r, and IESVE), energy system modeling programs (e.g., System Advisor Model (SAM)), indoor air quality analysis programs (e.g., CONTAM), and hygrothermal analysis programs (e.g., WUFI). It contains 13 weather variables, which are the Dry-Bulb Temperature, Dew Point Temperature, Relative Humidity, Atmospheric Pressure, Horizontal Infrared Radiation Intensity from Sky, Global Horizontal Irradiation, Direct Normal Irradiation, Diffuse Horizontal Irradiation, Wind Speed, Wind Direction, Sky Cover, Albedo, and Liquid Precipitation Depth. The weather data is created for two emissions scenarios: RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 and spans two 10-year time slices in the future: 2045 - 2054 and 2085 - 2094. It offers a spatial resolution of 12 km by 12 km with extensive coverage across most of North America. Due to the enormous size of the entire dataset, in the first stage of its distribution, we provide 20 years of future weather data for the centroid of each Public Use Microdata Area (PUMA), excluding Hawaii. PUMAs are non-overlapping, statistical geographic areas that partition each state or equivalent entity into geographic areas containing no fewer than 100,000 people each. The 2,378 PUMAs as a whole cover the entirety of the U.S. The weather data can be utilized alongside the large-scale energy analysis tools, ResStock and ComStock, developed by National Renewable Energy Laboratory, whose smallest resolution is at the PUMA scale. The data for RCP4.5 is still being processed and will be published soon.

Array↗
DOE OSTI2024

Characterizing model uncertainties in simulated coast-to-offshore wind over the northeast U.S. using multi-platform measurements from the TCAP field campaign

Numerical weather prediction (NWP) models, such as the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model, are widely used to provide estimates of the offshore wind energy resource owing to their large spatial coverage compared to available observations. Nevertheless, spatiotemporal distribution of model biases is highly dependent on factors including model configuration, location, and the interplay of multi-scale physical processes. Here, in this study, we focus on the characterization of model uncertainties in simulated coast-to-offshore winds over the northeast U.S., by varying sea surface temperature (SST) forcings, surface layer (SL) and planetary boundary layer (PBL) parameterizations, as well as identifying biases that may be directly passed from initial and boundary conditions. Multiple measurements, including aircraft data collected during the U.S. Department of Energy's Two-Column Aerosol Project (TCAP) experiment, are used to constrain the model results and facilitate quantitative comparisons. Our analysis indicates while SST forcing has notable impacts on simulated air temperature and moisture within PBL, the modeled winds are in general more sensitive to the choices of SL and PBL physics than to SST. The model’s forcing data not only controls the vertical dependence of wind speed errors, but also alters regional variability in wind speed’s spatial correlation. Bias comparisons between ERA5 reanalysis and ensemble simulations revealed significant similarity, particularly in wind speed biases during winter, underscoring their dependency on initial and boundary conditions. Coastal and offshore near-surface wind speed biases tend to exhibit much higher similarity in winter than in summer due to the presence of much stronger and more persistent synoptic wind conditions. This study highlights the importance of accurate atmospheric forcing and parameterization choices in improving wind forecasts and suggests the potential for extrapolating coastal wind biases to offshore locations, aiding wind energy forecasting and informing the Wind Forecast Improvement Project-3 (WFIP3).

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Assessing Impacts of Waves on Hub-Height Winds off the U.S. West Coast Using Lidar Buoys and Coupled Modeling Approaches

Given the importance of offshore wind energy development to the U.S. clean energy targets, it is vital to be able to characterize the wind resource in that environment accurately. Toward that end, two Bureau of Ocean Energy Management buoys equipped with Doppler lidar are being maintained by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory on behalf of the Department of Energy and deployed to regions of potential offshore wind development. In addition to standard meteorological and oceanographic measurements, the buoys document the wind profile between about 40 m and 250 m above the sea surface through Doppler lidar retrievals. After a multiyear deployment of two buoys along the U.S. East Coast, the buoys were redeployed to the U.S. West coast from 2020 – 2022 to locations near the Humboldt and Morro Bay lease areas. The buoys provide nearly continuous, multiyear datasets that can be used to evaluate predictions of hub-height (~100 m) wind speed for standard atmospheric models in the region. In the absence of measurements at the study site, offshore wind developers rely on model-based data to assess site conditions. Potential sources of model error in this environment include under-resolution or misrepresentation of coastal topographically forced flows, marine boundary layer dynamics and the evolution of their associated cloud and turbulence fields, the role of upwelling and other currents on surface heat fluxes into the boundary layer, and the impact of wave fields on surface momentum fluxes and thus the wind speed profile. In particular, most predictive models of wind speed do not predict wave fields at all, relying on parameterizations to represent their effects. In thus study, we focus on evaluating the role of wind / wave interactions on modeled hub-height wind speed and error by using the Coupled Ocean–Atmosphere–Wave–Sediment–Transport Modeling System to capture two-way interactions between an atmospheric model (Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF)) and a wave model (WAVEWATCHIII (WW3)) and compare to both stand-alone WRF and one-way coupled WRF / WW3 configurations. Our approach is similar to that used in Gaudet et al. (2022) to evaluate wind / wave coupling over the U.S. East Coast, but applied to the very different environment of the U.S. West Coast. We show examples for two cases, a cold-season frontal case and a warm-season low-level jet case. We find that wind / wave coupling makes little impact on model error for these cases at the location of the lidar buoys, for which other misrepresentations of model physics seems to be responsible for model-observation discrepancies. However, domain-wide evaluations, which also make use of the National Buoy Data Center network, show that a two-way coupling approach is less prone to systematic errors in the hub-height wind field than the one-way coupled approach. WRF resolution of kilometer-scale or less is needed to properly capture the sharp wind speed gradients that can be found along the coastline, and WW3 simulations driven by the downscaled WRF produce better bulk and spectral wave fields when compared to observations. Implications of the results for wind resource characterization are then discussed.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

US East Coast synthetic aperture radar wind atlas for offshore wind energy

We present the first synthetic aperture radar (SAR) offshore wind atlas of the US East Coast from Georgia to the Canadian border. Images from RADARSAT-1, Envisat, and Sentinel-1A/B are processed to wind maps using the geophysical model function (GMF) CMOD5.N. Extensive comparisons with 6008 collocated buoy observations of the wind speed reveal that biases of the individual systems range from -0.8 to 0.6 m s -1 . Unbiased wind retrievals are crucial for producing an accurate wind atlas, and intercalibration of the SAR observations is therefore applied. Wind retrievals from the intercalibrated SAR observations show biases in the range of to -0.2 to 0.0 m s -1 , while at the same time improving the root-mean-squared error from 1.67 to 1.46 m s -1 . The intercalibrated SAR observations are, for the first time, aggregated to create a wind atlas at the height 10 m a.s.l. (above sea level). The SAR wind atlas is used as a reference to study wind resources derived from the Wind Integration National Dataset Toolkit (WTK), which is based on 7 years of modelling output from the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model. Comparisons focus on the spatial variation in wind resources and show that model outputs lead to lower coastal wind speed gradients than those derived from SAR. Areas designated for offshore wind development by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management are investigated in more detail; the wind resources in terms of the mean wind speed show spatial variations within each designated area between 0.3 and 0.5 m s -1 for SAR and less than 0.2m s -1 for the WTK. Our findings indicate that wind speed gradients and variations might be underestimated in mesoscale model outputs along the US East Coast.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
NASA NTRS2007

Coupled Stochastic Time-Inverted Lagrangian Transport/Weather Forecast and Research/Vegetation Photosynthesis and Respiration Model: Simulations of Tower-Based and Airborne CO2 Measurements - Part II

This paper evaluates simulations of atmospheric CO2 measured in 2004 at continental surface and airborne receptors, intended to test the capability to use data with high temporal and spatial resolution for analyses of carbon sources and sinks at regional and continental scales. The simulations were performed using the Stochastic Time-Inverted Lagrangian Transport (STILT) model driven by the Weather Forecast and Research (WRF) model, and linked to surface fluxes from the satellite-driven Vegetation Photosynthesis and Respiration Model (VPRM). The simulations provide detailed representations of hourly CO2 tower data and reproduce the shapes of airborne vertical profiles with high fidelity. WRF meteorology gives superior model performance compared with standard meteorological products, and the impact of including WRF convective mass fluxes in the STILT trajectory calculations is significant in individual cases. Important biases in the simulation are associated with the nighttime CO2 build-up and subsequent morning transition to convective conditions, and with errors in the advected lateral boundary condition. Comparison of STILT simulations driven by the WRF model against those driven by the Brazilian variant of the Regional Atmospheric Modeling System (BRAMS) shows that model-to-model differences are smaller than between an individual transport model and observations, pointing to systematic errors in the simulated transport. Future developments in the WRF model s data assimilation capabilities, basic research into the fundamental aspects of trajectory calculations, and intercomparison studies involving other transport models, are possible venues for reducing these errors. Overall, the STILT/WRF/VPRM offers a powerful tool for continental and regional scale carbon flux estimates.

Eluszkiewicz, Janusz↗
NASA NTRS2008

Weather Research and Forecasting Model Wind Sensitivity Study at Edwards Air Force Base, CA

NASA prefers to land the space shuttle at Kennedy Space Center (KSC). When weather conditions violate Flight Rules at KSC, NASA will usually divert the shuttle landing to Edwards Air Force Base (EAFB) in Southern California. But forecasting surface winds at EAFB is a challenge for the Spaceflight Meteorology Group (SMG) forecasters due to the complex terrain that surrounds EAFB, One particular phenomena identified by SMG is that makes it difficult to forecast the EAFB surface winds is called "wind cycling". This occurs when wind speeds and directions oscillate among towers near the EAFB runway leading to a challenging deorbit bum forecast for shuttle landings. The large-scale numerical weather prediction models cannot properly resolve the wind field due to their coarse horizontal resolutions, so a properly tuned high-resolution mesoscale model is needed. The Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model meets this requirement. The AMU assessed the different WRF model options to determine which configuration best predicted surface wind speed and direction at EAFB, To do so, the AMU compared the WRF model performance using two hot start initializations with the Advanced Research WRF and Non-hydrostatic Mesoscale Model dynamical cores and compared model performance while varying the physics options.

Watson, Leela R.↗
NASA NTRS2012

A Robust Multi-Scale Modeling System for the Study of Cloud and Precipitation Processes

During the past decade, numerical weather and global non-hydrostatic models have started using more complex microphysical schemes originally developed for high resolution cloud resolving models (CRMs) with 1-2 km or less horizontal resolutions. These microphysical schemes affect the dynamic through the release of latent heat (buoyancy loading and pressure gradient) the radiation through the cloud coverage (vertical distribution of cloud species), and surface processes through rainfall (both amount and intensity). Recently, several major improvements of ice microphysical processes (or schemes) have been developed for cloud-resolving model (Goddard Cumulus Ensemble, GCE, model) and regional scale (Weather Research and Forecast, WRF) model. These improvements include an improved 3-ICE (cloud ice, snow and graupel) scheme (Lang et al. 2010); a 4-ICE (cloud ice, snow, graupel and hail) scheme and a spectral bin microphysics scheme and two different two-moment microphysics schemes. The performance of these schemes has been evaluated by using observational data from TRMM and other major field campaigns. In this talk, we will present the high-resolution (1 km) GeE and WRF model simulations and compared the simulated model results with observation from recent field campaigns [i.e., midlatitude continental spring season (MC3E; 2010), high latitude cold-season (C3VP, 2007; GCPEx, 2012), and tropical oceanic (TWP-ICE, 2006)].

Tao, Wei-Kuo↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Ensemble Forecasting/Assimilation/Emissions Estimation with WRF-Chem/DART: Accomplishments, Lessons Learned, and Future Plans

Over the past ten years, we have been conducting research on regional ensemble atmospheric composition forecasting/data assimilation/emissions estimation with WRF-Chem/DART. WRF- Chem/DART integrates the Weather Research and Forecasting model (WRF) with online chemistry (WRF-Chem) into the Data Assimilation Research Testbed (DART). DART is an ensemble data assimilation system based on the ensemble adjustment Kalman filter (EAKF) with adaptive inflation, localization (physical and state space), and an optional non-Gaussian formulation of the EAKF. DART includes assimilation of meteorological and limited chemical observations. WRF-Chem/DART extends DART to include assimilation of: MOPITT CO; IASI CO and O3; MODIS AOD; OMI O3, NO2, and SO2; TROPOMI CO, O3, NO2, and SO2, TES CO, CO2 (research mode), O3, NH3, and CH4 (research mode); CrIS CO, O3, NH3, CH4 (research mode), and PAN; SCIAMACHY NO2; GOME2a NO2; MLS O3 and HNO3; and proxy TEMPO O3, and NO2 satellite retrievals as raw retrievals or as ‘compact phase space retrievals’ (CPSRs) for profile retrievals. WRF-Chem/DART also assimilates in situ atmospheric composition measurements and uses the ‘state augmentation method’ for emissions estimation. In our presentation, we will provide an overview of WRF-Chem/DART: • applications and results; • lessons learned from: (i) independent versus joint assimilation; (ii) total/partial column versus profile retrieval assimilation; (iii) joint in situ and retrieval assimilation; (iv) assimilation at grid resolutions ranging from 100 km to 4 km; (v) dynamic emissions estimation; and • future work related to wildfire emissions estimation and intercomparison of CMAQ (online)/JEDI and CMAQ (online and offline)/DART.

WRF-Chem/DART↗
NASA NTRS2015

Real-Time Kennedy Space Center and Cape Canaveral Air Force Station High-Resolution Model Implementation and Verification

NASA's Launch Services Program, Ground Systems Development and Operations, Space Launch System and other programs at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) use the daily and weekly weather forecasts issued by the 45th Weather Squadron (45 WS) as decision tools for their day-to-day and launch operations on the Eastern Range (ER). Examples include determining if they need to limit activities such as vehicle transport to the launch pad, protect people, structures or exposed launch vehicles given a threat of severe weather, or reschedule other critical operations. The 45 WS uses numerical weather prediction models as a guide for these weather forecasts, particularly the Air Force Weather Agency (AFWA) 1.67 km Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model. Considering the 45 WS forecasters' and Launch Weather Officers' (LWO) extensive use of the AFWA model, the 45 WS proposed a task at the September 2013 Applied Meteorology Unit (AMU) Tasking Meeting requesting the AMU verify this model. Due to the lack of archived model data available from AFWA, verification is not yet possible. Instead, the AMU proposed to implement and verify the performance of an ER version of the high-resolution WRF Environmental Modeling System (EMS) model configured by the AMU (Watson 2013) in real time. Implementing a real-time version of the ER WRF-EMS would generate a larger database of model output than in the previous AMU task for determining model performance, and allows the AMU more control over and access to the model output archive. The tasking group agreed to this proposal; therefore the AMU implemented the WRF-EMS model on the second of two NASA AMU modeling clusters. The AMU also calculated verification statistics to determine model performance compared to observational data. Finally, the AMU made the model output available on the AMU Advanced Weather Interactive Processing System II (AWIPS II) servers, which allows the 45 WS and AMU staff to customize the model output display on the AMU and Range Weather Operations (RWO) AWIPS II client computers and conduct real-time subjective analyses.

Meteorology↗
NASA NTRS2015

Real-Time Kennedy Space Center and Cape Canaveral Air Force Station High-Resolution Model Implementation and Verification

Customer: NASA's Launch Services Program (LSP), Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO), and Space Launch System (SLS) programs. NASA's LSP, GSDO, SLS and other programs at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) use the daily and weekly weather forecasts issued by the 45th Weather Squadron (45 WS) as decision tools for their day-to-day and launch operations on the Eastern Range (ER). For example, to determine if they need to limit activities such as vehicle transport to the launch pad, protect people, structures or exposed launch vehicles given a threat of severe weather, or reschedule other critical operations. The 45 WS uses numerical weather prediction models as a guide for these weather forecasts, particularly the Air Force Weather Agency (AFWA) 1.67 kilometer Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model. Considering the 45 WS forecasters' and Launch Weather Officers' (LWO) extensive use of the AFWA model, the 45 WS proposed a task at the September 2013 Applied Meteorology Unit (AMU) Tasking Meeting requesting the AMU verify this model. Due to the lack of archived model data available from AFWA, verification is not yet possible. Instead, the AMU proposed to implement and verify the performance of an ER version of the AMU high-resolution WRF Environmental Modeling System (EMS) model (Watson 2013) in real-time. The tasking group agreed to this proposal; therefore the AMU implemented the WRF-EMS model on the second of two NASA AMU modeling clusters. The model was set up with a triple-nested grid configuration over KSC/CCAFS based on previous AMU work (Watson 2013). The outer domain (D01) has 12-kilometer grid spacing, the middle domain (D02) has 4-kilometer grid spacing, and the inner domain (D03) has 1.33-kilometer grid spacing. The model runs a 12-hour forecast every hour, D01 and D02 domain outputs are available once an hour and D03 is every 15 minutes during the forecast period. The AMU assessed the WRF-EMS 1.33-kilometer domain model performance for the 2014 warm season (May-September). Verification statistics were computed using the Model Evaluation Tools, which compared the model forecasts to observations. The mean error values were close to 0 and the root mean square error values were less than 1.8 for mean sea-level pressure (millibars), temperature (degrees Kelvin), dewpoint temperature (degrees Kelvin), and wind speed (per millisecond), all very small differences between the forecast and observations considering the normal magnitudes of the parameters. The precipitation forecast verification results showed consistent under-forecasting of the precipitation object size. This could be an artifact of calculating the statistics for each hour rather than for the entire 12-hour period. The AMU will continue to generate verification statistics for the 1.33-kilometer WRF-EMS domain as data become available in future cool and warm seasons. More data will produce more robust statistics and reveal a more accurate assessment of model performance. Once the formal task was complete, the AMU conducted additional work to better understand the wind direction results. The results were stratified diurnally and by wind speed to determine what effects the stratifications would have on the model wind direction verification statistics. The results are summarized in the addendum at the end of this report. In addition to verifying the model's performance, the AMU also made the output available in the Advanced Weather Interactive Processing System II (AWIPS II). This allows the 45 WS and AMU staff to customize the model output display on the AMU and Range Weather Operations AWIPS II client computers and conduct real-time subjective analyses. In the future, the AMU will implement an updated version of the WRF-EMS model that incorporates local data assimilation. This model will also run in real-time and be made available in AWIPS II.

Numerical Weather Prediction↗
DOE OSTI2021

Effects of organized convection parameterization on the MJO and precipitation in E3SMv1. Part I: Mesoscale heating

Mesoscale organization of convection is typically not represented in global circulation models, and hence its influence on the global circulation is not accounted for. The heating component of a parameterization that represents the dynamical and physical effects of circulations associated with organized convection, referred to as the multiscale coherent structure parameterization (MCSP), is implemented in the Energy Exascale Earth System Model version 1 (E3SMv1). Numerical simulations are conducted to assess its impact on the simulated climate. Besides E3SMv1 simulations, we performed high-resolution (1 km) simulations using the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) Model to determine the temperature tendencies induced by mesoscale convective systems embedded in deep convection. We tuned the free parameters of the MCSP based on the WRF simulations. MCSP heating enhances Kevin wave spectra in E3SMv1, improves the representation of the Madden-Julian Oscillation, and impacts on mean precipitation that vary with locations and seasons, including a reduction of biases over the tropical Pacific.

Climate Modeling↗
NASA NTRS2010

4-D Cloud Water Content Fields Derived from Operational Satellite Data

In order to improve operational safety and efficiency, the transportation industry, including aviation, has an urgent need for accurate diagnoses and predictions of clouds and associated weather conditions. Adverse weather accounts for 70% of all air traffic delays within the U.S. National Airspace System. The Federal Aviation Administration has determined that as much as two thirds of weather-related delays are potentially avoidable with better weather information and roughly 20% of all aviation accidents are weather related. Thus, it is recognized that an important factor in meeting the goals of the Next Generation Transportation System (NexGen) vision is the improved integration of weather information. The concept of a 4-D weather cube is being developed to address that need by integrating observed and forecasted weather information into a shared 4-D database, providing an integrated and nationally consistent weather picture for a variety of users and to support operational decision support systems. Weather analyses and forecasts derived using Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP) models are a critical tool that forecasters rely on for guidance and also an important element in current and future decision support systems. For example, the Rapid Update Cycle (RUC) and the recently implemented Rapid Refresh (RR) Weather Research and Forecast (WRF) models provide high frequency forecasts and are key elements of the FAA Aviation Weather Research Program. Because clouds play a crucial role in the dynamics and thermodynamics of the atmosphere, they must be adequately accounted for in NWP models. The RUC, for example, cycles at full resolution five cloud microphysical species (cloud water, cloud ice, rain, snow, and graupel) and has the capability of updating these fields from observations. In order to improve the models initial state and subsequent forecasts, cloud top altitude (or temperature, T(sub c)) derived from operational satellite data, surface observations of cloud base altitude, radar reflectivity, and lightning data are used to help build and remove clouds in the models assimilation system. Despite this advance and the many recent advances made in our understanding of cloud physical processes and radiative effects, many problems remain in adequately representing clouds in models. While the assimilation of cloud top information derived from operational satellite data has merit, other information is available that has not yet been exploited. For example, the vertically integrated cloud water content (CWC) or cloud water path (CWP) and cloud geometric thickness (delta Z) are standard products being derived routinely from operational satellite data. These and other cloud products have been validated under a variety of conditions. Since the uncertainties have generally been found to be less than those found in model analyses and forecasts, the satellite products should be suitable for data assimilation, provided an appropriate strategy can be developed that links the satellite-derived cloud parameters with cloud parameters specified in the model. In this paper, we briefly outline such a strategy and describe a methodology to retrieve cloud water content profiles from operational satellite data. Initial results and future plans are presented. It is expected that the direct assimilation of this new product will provide the most accurate depiction of the vertical distribution of cloud water ever produced at the high spatial and temporal resolution needed for short term weather analyses and forecasts.

Smith, William L., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS2017

The Effect of Entrainment Through Atmospheric Boundary Layer Growth on Observed and Modeled Surface Ozone in the Colorado Front Range

Ozone concentrations at the Earth's surface are controlled by meteorological and chemical processes and are a function of advection, entrainment, deposition, and net chemical production/loss. The relative contributions of these processes vary in time and space. Understanding the relative importance of these processes controlling surface ozone concentrations is an essential component for designing effective regulatory strategies. Here we focus on the diurnal cycle of entrainment through atmospheric boundary layer (ABL) growth in the Colorado Front Range. Aircraft soundings and surface observations collected in July/August 2014 during the DISCOVER-AQ/FRAPPÉ (Deriving Information on Surface conditions from Column and Vertically Resolved Observations Relevant to Air Quality/Front Range Air Pollution and Photochemistry Éxperiment) campaigns and equivalent data simulated by a regional chemical transport model are analyzed. Entrainment through ABL growth is most important in the early morning, fumigating the surface at a rate of ~5 ppbv/h. The fumigation effect weakens near noon and changes sign to become a small dilution effect in the afternoon on the order of -1 ppbv/h. The chemical transport model WRF-Chem (Weather Research and Forecasting Model with chemistry) underestimates ozone at all altitudes during this study on the order of 10-15 ppbv. The entrainment through ABL growth is overestimated by the model in the order of 0.6-0.8 ppbv/h. This results from differences in boundary layer growth in the morning and ozone concentration jump across the ABL top in the afternoon. This implicates stronger modeled fumigation in the morning and weaker modeled dilution after 11:00 LT.

Entrainment through ABL Growth↗
DOE OSTI2021

Quantifying the Impacts of Land Surface Modeling on Hub-Height Wind Speed under Different Soil Conditions

We investigate the impact of three land surface models (LSMs) on hub-height wind speed under three different soil regimes (dry, wet, and frozen) to understand and improve the physics of wind energy forecasts using the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model. A six-day representative period is selected for each soil condition. The simulated wind speed, surface energy budget and soil properties are compared with the observations collected from the second Wind Forecast Improvement Project (WFIP2). For the selected cases, our simulation results suggest that, the impact of LSMs on hub-height wind speed are sensitive to the soil states but not so much to the choice of LSM. The simulated hub-height wind speed is in much better agreement with the observations for the dry soil case than the wet and frozen soil cases. Over the dry soil, there is a strong physical connection between the land surface and hub-height wind speed through near-surface turbulent mixing. Over the wet soil, the simulated hub-height wind speed is less impacted by land surface due to weaker surface fluxes and more dominated by large-scale synoptic disturbances. Over the frozen soil, the land surface model seems to have limited impact on hub-height wind speed variability due to the decoupling of the land surface with the overlying atmosphere. Two main sources of modeling uncertainties are proposed. The first are the insufficient model physics representing the surface energy budget, especially the ground heat flux, and the second are the inaccurate initial soil states such as soil temperature and soil moisture.

Xia, Geng↗
DOE OSTI2024

Urban Parameters Maricopa County 100m Grid Spacing

132 urban parameters for Maricopa County are provided in WRF-readable binary form at 100m grid spacing with index. These parameters allow regional weather modelers to account for the contribution of built structures in modeling the urban heat island. This data is also provided in CSV format. Data are generated using 2023 Model America Version 1 data (https://www.osti.gov/biblio/1774134) and will be used to represent the urban morphology in Maricopa County to the WRF model for experiments conducted for the Southwest Urban Corridor Integrated Field Laboratory (SW-IFL). Three files associated with these parameters are included in this repository: index, binary file 00001-01549.00001-01796, Maricopa_Parameters_03072024.csv . To use the binary file with the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model, the binary file and the index file must be placed in their own directory in WRF_GEOG and accessed in the same way the National Urban Database and Access Portal Tool data (NUDAPT44) would be accessed. The name of the binary file must be in the format: 00001-02715.00001-01803. If, upon download, the binary filename has additional or different characters, please change them to match this format.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

IM3/HyperFACETS Thermodynamic Global Warming (TGW) Simulation Datasets

Publication For a thorough description of the methods, see the peer-reviewed paper: Jones, A.D., Rastogi, D., Vahmani, P. et al. Continental United States climate projections based on thermodynamic modification of historical weather. Sci Data 10, 664 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-023-02485-5 Overview The IM3 / HyperFACETS climate simulations provide 40-year historical (1980-2019) as well as four 80-year future simulations (2020-2099) over the U.S. The future simulations are split into near (2020-2059) and far future (2060-2099) segments. The future scenarios span a range of plausible changes in future climate (both Global Circulation Model (GCM) and Representative Concentration Pathways/Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (RCP/SSP) dimensions). The simulations provide climate variables with high spatiotemporal resolution (25 hourly variables and 207 3-hourly variables at 12 km2). The datasets are generated using dynamical downscaling with the WRF (Weather Research and Forecasting) model (version 4.2.1) and therefore preserve physical consistency across variables. WRF is a state-of-the-art, fully compressible, non-hydrostatic, mesoscale numerical weather prediction model. WRF is coupled with an urban canopy model (UCM), which resolves urban surfaces. The future scenarios were developed using a thermodynamic global warming approach where past events are replayed under a range of future warming conditions. These scenarios therefore provide a perspective on potential increases in extreme event intensity, geographic scope, and duration, with previously non-extreme conditions potentially crossing new thresholds to be considered extreme by today's standards. This approach is not intended to estimate future changes in extreme event frequency that might result from changes in large-scale atmospheric dynamics. This dataset has NOT been bias corrected. A bias corrected version of selected variables is under development and will be released here when available. Scenarios Files Data for each scenario is provided in weekly NetCDF files. 25 variables are available at hourly resolution, and 207 variables are available at three-hourly resolution. Spatial resolution is 12km and spans the conterminous United States (CONUS), including some areas of Canada and Mexico, resulting in a grid of 424 by 299 cells. The spatial projection is a Lambert Conformal Conic with the following proj-string: "+proj=lcc +lat_0=40.0000076293945 +lon_0=-97 +lat_1=30 +lat_2=45 +x_0=0 +y_0=0 +R=6370000 +units=m +no_defs". The available scenarios and simulation periods are listed below: historical | 1980 - 2019 rcp45cooler | 2020 - 2059 rcp45cooler | 2060 - 2099 rcp45hotter | 2020 - 2059 rcp45hotter | 2060 - 2099 rcp85cooler | 2020 - 2059 rcp85cooler | 2060 - 2099 rcp85hotter | 2020 - 2059 rcp85hotter | 2060 - 2099 * The first year (1979, 2019, and 2059) of data within each scenario represents a model warmup period and should not be used. These are located in the `spinup_files` directory. Historical year 2020 is considered an extra year of data beyond the simulation period and can be found in the `additional_files` directory. For information on specific variables and a more in-depth discussion of methodology, please refer to the data landing page at https://tgw-data.msdlive.org. Delta Warming Files The global and CONUS warming deltas for each scenario are provided in degrees Celsius annually and monthly. Restart Files Yearly restart files are provided for each scenario which can be used to restart the WRF model at a particular point in time. Spinup Files The first year of data within each simulation period represents a model warmup period and should not be used. The files are provided here for the sake of reproducibility. Additional Files Additional years of data are provided as an extension of the historic simulation.

Jones, Andrew D.↗
DOE OSTI2022

A Machine‐Learning‐Assisted Stochastic Cloud Population Model as a Parameterization of Cumulus Convection

Abstract A machine‐learning‐assisted stochastic cloud population model is coupled with the Advanced Research Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model to represent fluctuations in the cloud‐base mass flux associated with the life cycles and interactions among cumulus convection cells. In this cloud population model, the size distribution and the associated cloud‐base mass flux of the convective cells are related to their previous state and to the change in the total convective area via a transition function. The convective area tendency in turn is assumed to depend on the cloud‐base mass flux that is resolved by the host WRF model. The transition function is represented by a single hidden‐layer neural network trained by the evolution of convective cell size distributions in a 1‐km grid‐spacing WRF simulation run over the Australian Monsoon region. At every grid point of the host model, the cloud population model predicts the cell size and cloud‐base mass flux distributions from which a random sample of cells is fed to an entraining parcel model that calculates precipitation as well as the associated liquid water potential temperature and total moisture tendencies. These tendencies are averaged over the cells and provided to the host model. Several regional simulations are performed over tropical and midlatitude domains to test this as a potential approach to scale‐aware parameterization. It is shown that such an approach could be a new promising path to simulating realistic precipitation statistics and propagation of precipitation associated with the Madden‐Julian Oscillation while maintaining realistic depictions of the diurnal cycle over both land and ocean.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Improved Representations of Land‐Atmosphere Interactions Over the Continental U.S. Through Dynamic Root Modeling

Previous studies have identified the oversimplified root system representation as a key factor leading to inaccuracies in vegetation‐atmosphere feedbacks. In this study, a dynamic root water uptake scheme in the Noah‐MP land surface model has been coupled to the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model to investigate its impact on the surface hydroclimate variables and land‐atmosphere interactions. To evaluate the impact of the dynamic root, two coupled simulations were conducted, one with the dynamic root water uptake scheme (DynRt) and one with the static root water uptake scheme (StcRt), which is based on the default root representation in Noah‐MP, with slight modifications, primarily in vegetation‐related parameters. Both DynRt and StcRt simulations were conducted with a small ensemble of three members to account for variations in physical parameterizations, initial and boundary forcing and model setup. When compared with reference data sets, the DynRt simulations show improved results than the StcRt simulations, reducing biases in the simulated leaf area index, surface energy fluxes, soil moisture and precipitation. Two different mechanisms through which roots affect land‐atmosphere coupling have been identified. Over the transitional climate zone between the dry and wet climate, the dynamic root scheme affects surface climate and land‐atmosphere coupling mainly through changes in soil moisture through hydraulic redistribution by plant root system. Over the energy‐limited mesic zone, the dynamic root affects regional land‐atmosphere coupling mainly through changes in carbon allocation. This work highlights the importance of dynamic root representation in improving vegetation‐atmosphere simulations by enhancing predictions of water, energy, and carbon fluxes.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗