Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14191/Atmos.2012.22.3.345

The Improvement of Forecast Accuracy of the Unified Model at KMA by Using an Optimized Set of Physical Options  

Lee, Juwon (Forecast Research Laboratory, National Institute of Meteorological Research, KMA)
Han, Sang-Ok (Forecast Research Laboratory, National Institute of Meteorological Research, KMA)
Chung, Kwan-Young (Forecast Research Laboratory, National Institute of Meteorological Research, KMA)
Publication Information
Atmosphere / v.22, no.3, 2012 , pp. 345-356 More about this Journal
Abstract
The UK Met Office Unified Model at the KMA has been operationally utilized as the next generation numerical prediction system since 2010 after it was first introduced in May, 2008. Researches need to be carried out regarding various physical processes inside the model in order to improve the predictability of the newly introduced Unified Model. We first performed a preliminary experiment for the domain ($170{\times}170$, 10 km, 38 layers) smaller than that of the operating system using the version 7.4 of the UM local model to optimize its physical processes. The result showed that about 7~8% of the improvement ratio was found at each stage by integrating four factors (u, v, th, q), and the final improvement ratio was 25%. Verification was carried out for one month of August, 2008 by applying the optimized combination to the domain identical to the operating system, and the result showed that the precipitation verification score (ETS, equitable threat score) was improved by 9%, approximately.
Keywords
Unified Model; Physical process; Improvement ratio;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 강전호, 서명석, 곽종흠, 나득균, 2005: 지면물리과정이 MM5 모델의 집중호우 모의에 미치는 영향, 한국기상학회, 2005년 한국기상학회 봄철 학술대회 논문집.
2 김동준, 박훈, 이해진, 주상원, 유희동, 2010: 기상청 통합모델 운영현황 및 향후 계획, 한국기상학회 봄 학술대회 논문집, 241-242.
3 김동준, 박훈, 주상원, 임정옥, 박병권, 유희동, 조주영, 2009: 기상청 통합수치예보시스템의 예비성능평가, 한국기상학회, 2009년 한국기상학회 봄 학술대회 논문집, 218-219.
4 이해진, 주상원, 김동준, 손주형, 유희동, 2009: 통합수치예측 시스템의 예측 특성, 한국기상학회, 2009년 한국기상학회 가을 학술대회 논문집, 334-335.
5 Brooks M. E., R. J. Hogan, and A. J. Illingworth, 2005: Parameterizing the difference in cloud fraction defined by area and by volume as observed with radar and lidar. J. Atmos. Sci., 62, 2248-2260.   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Brown, P. R. A. and P. N. Francis, 1995: Improved measurements of the ice water content in cirrus using a total-water probe. J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol., 12, 410-414.   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Cusack, S., 2002: The empirically adjusted cloud fraction modification to the cloud scheme. Met Office internal note.
8 Derbyshire, S. H., 1997: Recommendations for UM parameterization of stable boundary layers. Cardington Tech Note 38.
9 Gallus, W. A., Jr., 1999: Eta simulations of three extreme rainfall events: Impact of resolution and choice of convective scheme. Wea. Forecasting, 14, 405-426.   DOI
10 Gregory, D. and P. R. Rowntre, 1990: A mass flux convection scheme with representation of cloud ensemble characteristics and stability-dependent closure, Mon. Wea. Rev., 118, 1483-1506.   DOI
11 Jankov, I. and W. A. Gallus Jr. 2005: The impact of different WRF model physical parameterizations and their interactions on warm season MCS rainfall. Wea. Forecasting, 20, 1048-1060.   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Lock, A., 2007: The parameterization of boundary layer processes, Unified Model Documentation Paper, Met office, No. 24.
13 Lock, A. P., 2001: The numerical representation of entrainment in parameterizations of boundary layer turbulent mixing, Mon. Wea. Rev., 129, 1148-1163.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Lock, A. P., A. R. Brown, M. R. Bush, G. M. Martin, and R. N. B. Smith, 2000: A new boundary layer mixing scheme. Part : Scheme description and single column model tests, Mon. Wea. Rev., 128, 3187-3199.   DOI   ScienceOn
15 Miao, J. F., D. Cgebm, J. Wtser, K. Borne, J. Lindgren, M. K. S. Strandevall, S. Thorsson, C.Achberger, and E. Almkvist, 2008: Evaluation of MM5 mesoscale model at local scale for air quality applications over the Swedish west coast: Influence of PBL and LSM parameterizations. Meteor. and Atmos. Phys., 99(DOI 10), 77-103.   DOI
16 Louis, J.-F. 1979: A parameteric model of vertical eddy fluxes in the atmosphere. Bound. Layer Meteor., 17, 187-202.   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Maidens, A. and R. Stratton, 2006: Convective scheme, Unified Model Documentation Paper, Met Office, No. 27.
18 Met Office, 2004: Unified Model User Guide. p243.
19 Schaefer, J. T., 1990: The critical success index as an indicator of watning skill. Wea. Forecasting, 5, 570-575.   DOI
20 Seaman, N. L. 2000: Meteorological modeling for air-quality assessments. Atmos. Environ., 26(6), 965-981.
21 Wang, W., and N. L. Seaman, 1997: A Comparison study of convective schemes in a mesoscale model. Mon. Wea. Rev., 125, 252-278.   DOI   ScienceOn
22 Wilkinson, J., D. Wilson, and R. Forbes, 2010: The Large-Scale Precipitation Parameterization Scheme, Unified Model Documentation Paper, Met Office, No. 26.
23 Wilson, D., 2007: The Large-scale Cloud Scheme and Saturated Specific Humidity, Unified Model Documentation Paper, Met Office, No. 29.
24 Wilson, D. R. and S. P. Ballard, 1999. A microphysically based precipitation scheme for the UK Meteorological Office Unified Model. Quart. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc., 125, 1607-1636.   DOI
25 Zhang, D. L., and W. Z. Zheng, 2004: Diurnal cycles of surface winds and temperatures as simulated by five boundary layer parameterizations. J. Appl. Meteor., 43, 157-169.   DOI   ScienceOn