Search

Quantitative precipitation forecast (QPF) verification stands out as one of the most formidable endeavors in the realm of forecast verification. Traditional verification methods are not suitable for high-resolution forecasting products in some cases. Therefore, the SAL (structure, amplitude and location) method was proposed as a method of object-based spatial verification that studies precipitation verification in a certain range, which is combined with factors including structure, amplitude and location of the targets. However, the setting of the precipitation threshold would affect the result of the verification. This paper presented an improved method for determining the precipitation threshold using the QPF from ECMWF, which is an ensemble forecast model and three-source fusion product that was used in China from 1 July to 31 August 2020, and then the results obtained with this method were compared with the other two traditional methods. Furthermore, the SAL and the traditional verification methods were carried out for geometric, simulated and real cases, respectively. The results showed the following: (1) The proposed method in this paper for determining the threshold was more accurate at identifying the precipitation objects. (2) The verification area size was critical for SAL calculation. If the area selected was too large, the calculated SAL value had little significance. (3) ME (Mean Error) could not identify the displacement between prediction and observation, while HSS (Heidke Skill Score) was sensitive to the displacement of the prediction field. (4) Compared with the traditional verification methods, the SAL method was more straight forward and simple, and it could give a better representation of prediction ability. Therefore, forecasters can better understand the model prediction effect and what needs to be improved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Current studies report inconsistent results about the impacts of Saharan dust on the development of African Easterly Waves (AEWs), the African Easterly Jet (AEJ), and tropical cyclones (TCs). We present a modeling case study to further elucidate the direct radiative impacts of dust on the early development stage of a TC. We conducted experiments using the Weather Research and Forecasting model coupled with chemistry (WRF-Chem-V3.9.1) to simulate Hurricane Earl (2010) which was influenced by the dusty Saharan Air Layer (SAL). We used the aerosol product from ECMWF MACC-II as the initial and boundary conditions to represent aerosol distribution, along with typical model treatment of its radiative and microphysical effects in WRF. Our simulations at 36-km resolution show that, within the first 36 h, the presence of dust weakens the low-pressure system over North Africa by less than 1 hPa and reduces its mean temperature by 0.03 K. Dust weakens and intensifies the AEJ at its core and periphery, respectively, with magnitudes less than 0.2 m/s. Dust slightly shifts the position of 600 hPa AEW to the south and reduces its intensity prior to impacting the TC. Finally, TC with dust remains weaker.

Current studies report inconsistent results about the impacts of Saharan dust on the development of African Easterly Waves (AEWs), the African Easterly Jet (AEJ), and tropical cyclones (TCs). We present a modeling case study to further elucidate the direct radiative impacts of dust on the early development stage of a TC. We conducted experiments using the Weather Research and Forecasting model coupled with chemistry (WRF-Chem-V3.9.1) to simulate Hurricane Earl (2010) which was influenced by the dusty Saharan Air Layer (SAL). We used the aerosol product from ECMWF MACC-II as the initial and boundary conditions to represent aerosol distribution, along with typical model treatment of its radiative and microphysical effects in WRF. Our simulations at 36-km resolution show that, within the first 36 h, the presence of dust weakens the low-pressure system over North Africa by less than 1 hPa and reduces its mean temperature by 0.03 K. Dust weakens and intensifies the AEJ at its core and periphery, respectively, with magnitudes less than 0.2 m/s. Dust slightly shifts the position of 600 hPa AEW to the south and reduces its intensity prior to impacting the TC. Finally, TC with dust remains weaker. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]