Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
P13A.4 Presented at the 91 AMS Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA, January 22-28, 2011
John B. Settelmaier*
Digital Techniques Meteorologist
NOAA/NWS SR Headquarters, Fort Worth, TX
Alex Gibbs
Forecaster
NOAA/NWS, Tallahassee, FL
Pablo Santos
Meteorologist In Charge
NOAA/NWS, Miami, FL
Tony Freeman
Information Technology Officer
NOAA/NWS, Tallahassee, FL
Douglas Gaer
Information Technology Officer
NOAA/NWS SR Headquarters, Forth Worth, TX
1
th
P13A.4 Presented at the 91 AMS Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA, January 22-28, 2011
2
th
P13A.4 Presented at the 91 AMS Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA, January 22-28, 2011
the Delft University of Technology (The SWAN - Preparing the code to make it work within,
Team, 2010a,b). Computations within the model or integrate, with our operational AWIPS
directly address the previously-listed issues environment (security issues)
regarding the highly-variable - Achieving parallelism using MPI in 64-bit
elevations/topography and accounts for wave mode. This was an important milestone as
propagation and transitions from deep to shallow it allowed us to set up high resolution
water at finite depths by solving the spectral wave model domains with the ability to run them
action balance equation. This equation includes out to 5 days, enough to cover the entire
each source term: wind input, nonlinear marine forecast period and area of
interactions, whitecapping, bottom friction and responsibility typical of a WFO.
depth induced breaking. - Using very high resolution gridded data
from the Coastal Relief Model for
Over the past several years, efforts led by bathymetry input along complex coastal
WFO Eureka with follow-ups by WFOs Wakefield, locations
VA, Newport/Morehead City, and Wilmington, NC, - Domain decision/choices (location, size,
in combination with the U.S. Army Corp of less land, etc.), consideration/use of sub
Engineers (Devaliere et al. 2007, 2008, 2009; domains or nests at sub-kilometer
Nicolini and Crawford, 2005; Willis et al., 2010), resolutions
have resulted in a SWAN package that other field - Transitioning from stationary runs to non-
WFOs can benefit from. THE NWSSR SWAN stationary computational mode for more
effort built on this by developing the package realistic output across larger domains
further resulting in the following enhancements: 1) during rapidly-changing weather events
development of documentation, 2) building a - Providing the forecaster with the ability to
baseline set of configuration as well as installation choose several forcing options (winds
scripts for the package (allowing any office in the edited by the forecaster, winds directly
region to set up an operational domain within an from a model source, spectral input at the
hour), 3) configuring and implementing a non- grid boundaries using the WaveWatch III
stationary computational version of the model multi-gridded data produced by NCEP,
allowing for better simulations associated with Gulf Stream integration through RTOFS,
rapidly changing wind conditions, 4) added creating model web graphics, etc.
RTOFS Gulf Stream coupling, 5) re-compiled and - Creating modularity in the code
built the model in a 64-bit platform in multi-thread - Exploring operating systems (OS),
mode allowing the setup of longer/higher hardware (last-minute need for more
resolution runs, 6) added a standard, free plotting memory), software (ideally remove any
package using the Grid Analysis and Display non-free code), and software-refresh
System (GrADS), and 7) developed configuration options (SVN for ease of
scripts to display the model output in its native maintenance/patch releases)
resolution in the WFOs AWIPS D2D systems. This - Communicating/Implementing this across
package (referred to as SRSWAN) has allowed for 13 coastal offices
the quick deployment of the model across all of - Providing training for implementation
the SR offices during 2010, including a version of - Present/Future challenges (integration
the model running at NWSSR covering all of the back to/with NCEP, even more code
Gulf of Mexico and SW Atlantic. modularity, added system independence,
move to wave partitioning, etc.)
In the follow subsections we discuss briefly some
of the issues encountered as part of this process. 3.2 Domains
3.1 Science and Technology Challenges Domains across the NWSSR coastal offices
were configured with a default 1.5 km resolution
A number of science and technology and 24/24 (directions/frequencies) for spectral
challenges have been encountered. Some have resolution. The size of each domain was chosen to
been solved, while others are still being worked on expand at least 50 to 75 km beyond a given
as we move forward to make use of the SWAN offices outermost marine zones of responsibility,
model at our Southern Region coastal forecast which typically expands 111 km offshore. The
offices. In more detail, these include: reason for this is to populate the official Significant
Wave Height grid element of the offices National
3
th
P13A.4 Presented at the 91 AMS Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA, January 22-28, 2011
4
th
P13A.4 Presented at the 91 AMS Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA, January 22-28, 2011
One of the key issues identified during the Figure 5 illustrates a sequence of wind
model setup across SR was that of running the forecasts valid on 21 UTC 10 December 2009 and
model in stationary versus non-stationary mode. In 00 UTC 11 December 2009, respectively, in the
the SWAN model documentation, it states that top two images. The bottom two images show the
running in non-stationary mode should be resulting significant wave height forecasts from the
considered for model domains exceeding 100 model in stationary and non-stationary mode,
square km. That is the case with all primary respectively also. Notice that the stationary run
SWAN domains across all of the SR offices. The resulted in wave heights of 6 to 7 feet (yellow)
issue is illustrated nicely in the sequence of across NE areas of the domain whereas in the
images shown in Fig. 5. same areas the non-stationary run yielded 2 to 4
feet (light blue). Across NW areas of the domain
the same sequence shows heights in excess of 7
feet versus 4 to 6 feet. Non published results by
the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (email
communication with Eve Devaliere and Jeff
Hanson) corroborate this based on verification
5
th
P13A.4 Presented at the 91 AMS Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA, January 22-28, 2011
Figure 5. Sequence of wind forecasts valid at 21 Some offices across the SR, most notably
UTC on 10 December 2009 (top) and 00 UTC WFOs Key West, Miami, and Melbourne, have the
on 11 December 2009 (second from top). The Gulf Stream current cutting across much of their
bottom two images that follow are the forecasts Marine Area of Responsibility (MAOR), or marine
of significant wave height from SWAN in zones. Proper wave forecasts mandate accounting
Stationary mode and Non Stationary mode, for wave and Gulf Stream current interactions.
respectively, valid on 00 UTC 11 December SWAN accounts for these interactions, if inclusion
2009. of Gulf Stream current input is specified. As part of
6
th
P13A.4 Presented at the 91 AMS Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA, January 22-28, 2011
the SRSWAN package, software was added to on that, and quasi-operational use of this data at
extract real-time Gulf Stream forecasts from WFOs Miami and Key West for almost a year now,
RTOFS which writes it into a format that SWAN we believe SWAN is properly accounting for the
can ingest. This software package was written and wave/Gulf Stream interactions.
developed by the Florida Institute of Technology
(FIT), under the auspices of the NWS 3.5 SWAN Output
Collaborative Science, Technology, and Applied
Research (CSTAR) Program (Lazarus and Splitt, SRSWAN provides output of significant wave
2010), and incorporated into the SRSWAN. height, peak period and direction, and a scalar
called SWAN Swell, which is simply the significant
SWAN Hs/Peak Dir wave height for wave components with a period of
North Wind 15KTS Case 10 seconds or greater. Additionally, the model
provides output for the input Wind and Gulf
Without Gulf Stream Data With Gulf Stream Data Stream forcing information. Figure 7 provides a
sample output of these parameters from WFO
Miami.
7
th
P13A.4 Presented at the 91 AMS Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA, January 22-28, 2011
interrogate the output in greater detail and to Georgia and Florida east coast were evaluated
quickly analyze and compare output parameters and compared to the SWAN model output through
and boundary input from the WWIII solution the simulation. There was an initial model spin-up
through 4-panel procedures readily available in period due to the lower resolution NARR wind
their operational display system--D2D. input at the WRF boundaries, which resulted in
initial wind speed output typically lower than the
4. PRELIMINARY VERIFICATION observed values. The 12 km WRF, however,
quickly began to phase with the observed data at
Now that SWAN has been deployed in every the selected buoy platforms around the 24 hour
coastal WFO across the SR, the emphasis is forecast period. Thus, these data from March 13,
shifting to verification, as well as future 1993 through March 14, 1993 were used to verify
enhancements while offices complete their training the SWAN model output. Total mean error through
and operational spin-up of this new tool. This this selected period was 0.4407 m for the total
section will describe different verification efforts significant wave height output and 2.349 ms-1 for
currently under way. the NARR/WRF wind speed. Below are the
details of the model configuration used for this
4.1 Verification based on hindcasts hindcast:
The SWAN model performance has been Domain: 18.2N -98.2 35.8N -79.00
evaluated during high-end marine events such as Spatial Resolution (SWAN): 12km
winter gales and tropical cyclones through Spectral (Direction/Frequency) Resolution: 31/31
hindcasts of historic events. The SWAN forcing for Bathymetry: 1 minute (~1.8km) gridded ETOPO1
these events was generated by the Advanced data
Research WRF (ARW) model, which was Temporal Resolution (SWAN): 1800s
initialized by the North American Regional Spatial Resolution of WRF wind input: 12km
Reanalysis (NARR) data. In each hindcast Spatial Resolution of NARR: 32km
scenario, a gridded spatial resolution of 12 km was Model Init: 1993MAR12_1500z
used over the Gulf of Mexico and portions of the
East Coast. These runs did not account for wave The total mean error for the SWAN Hs
Gulf Stream interactions and were primarily forced forecasts for all buoys combined was .4407 m and
by the wind output from the NARR/WRF 2.349 ms-1 for the NARR/WRF wind speed.
simulations. Topography over the region was Figures 8, 9, and 10 show comparisons of
derived from the one minute (~1.8km) gridded observed versus forecast Hs as well as input wind
database (ETOPO1) provided by NGDC. Non- forcing. The general pattern in these figures
stationary compute mode was used in these indicate SWAN is sensitive to errors in the input
SWAN simulations, so an initial model spin-up wind forcing but this sensitivity is location-
period was accounted for. Several National Data dependant and that, in general, when the wind
Buoy Center (NDBC) stations within the domain forcing is closest to observed, SWAN errors are
were used for verification purposes. Wind speed small. Additionally, there was an intial slow spin-
(WSPD) and total significant wave height (Hs) up period noticed in the wave fields approaching
model parameters were evaluated at each station. the peak of the curve due to the large propagation
Model results strongly indicated that SWAN was time step of 1800s. Further simulations will include
highly dependent on the model wind input. Total comparisons to the output using a temporal
mean error values were very small when the wind resolution of 900s and 300s.
input was accurate.
8
th
P13A.4 Presented at the 91 AMS Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA, January 22-28, 2011
4.2 Verification efforts at WFO Miami 7 km. Its applications include wind speed as well
as significant wave height (Hs) retrievals over
A second verification effort is also underway oceans. For this study SWAN model archives from
more specifically across the WFO Miami SWAN April to October of 2010 were matched in space
domain shown in Fig. 1. This verification effort and time for each forecast hour against buoys, as
makes use of buoy data within the domain, but well as ESR2-RA data. Given the resolution of the
given this data is very limited, it also uses the SWAN (1.5km) model output, the data was
European Space Agency (ESA) ESR2 Radar averaged to closely match the footprint resolution
Altimeter (RA) data. The ESR2-RA is a nadir- of the ESR2-RA. Furthermore, ESR2-RA data was
looking polar orbiting instrument with a sampling quality-controlled to remove unrealistic radar
interval of 1 second and a spatial resolution of 6 to
9
th
P13A.4 Presented at the 91 AMS Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA, January 22-28, 2011
10
th
P13A.4 Presented at the 91 AMS Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA, January 22-28, 2011
11
th
P13A.4 Presented at the 91 AMS Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA, January 22-28, 2011
As technology and computing power continue Additional possibilities, that are currently
to advance, additions to the SRSWAN package ongoing at WFOs TAE and LIX, include integrating
could also include probabilistic marine forecasts at the newly-available one arc-second (~30m
the local and regional scale. The ability to provide resolution) and one-third arc-second (~10m
timely wave model guidance with different model resolution) gridded bathymetry data of the Coastal
members (i.e. NAM, GFS, ECMWF, WRF, etc.) Relief Model (CRM) as input to the high-resolution
will provide the marine forecaster multiple inner nest options. Currently, these additional
possibilities for the official forecast. This is areas covered by the CRM include: the northern-
significantly important, due to the fact that wave central Gulf Coast (Fig. 14) from New Orleans to
development and generation is very sensitive to Panama, City (~30m option), Lake Pontchartrain
wind forcing. Providing multiple guidance options (Fig. 15), Panama City and Tampa Bay (~10m
to the marine forecaster, combined with wave options).
height probability forecasts across the local marine
area and the ability to express periods of greater 6.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
uncertainty will not only enhance the forecasts, but
provide the marine user and decision maker the Over the past, year the NWSSR has enabled the
capability to make clear and decisive operational development and deployment of a local high
plans over the coastal waters. Figure 13 illustrates resolution wave model using SWAN at each
and example of a simple SWAN wave ensemble coastal office. This effort included supplying each
forecast based on 4 different wind inputs: office a modeling machine and facilitating the
WRF/ARW 12 km, NAM 12 km, GFS, and development of a package that offices could use
ECMWF. to implement the model operationally. The
package was distributed using a managed
configuration which made it easier to not only
12
th
P13A.4 Presented at the 91 AMS Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA, January 22-28, 2011
7.0 REFERENCES
Figure 14. WFOs LIX, MOB and TAE each have Devaliere, E., J. Hanson, and R. Luettich, 2007:
the option to move forward using 1/3 and 1 arc- Evaluation of wave model performance in a
second gridded bathymetry data as input to the North Carolina Test Bed. Proceedings 10th
SWAN model. The outer domain represents the International Wave Hindcasting and
1 arc-second domain and the inner 3 domains Forecasting Workshop, North Shore, HI.
represent the 1/3 arc-second domains.
Devaliere, E., R. Leuttich, M. Willis, and J.
Hanson, 2008: A High Resolution Near-Shore
Wave Model for the Mid Atlantic Coast, UCAR
S07-66810 COMET Project Year 1 Report.
13
th
P13A.4 Presented at the 91 AMS Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA, January 22-28, 2011
http://swanmodel.sourceforge.net/online_doc/s
wanuse/swanuse.html]
8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
14