ACPD Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussions ACPD 1680-7375 Copernicus GmbH Göttingen, Germany 10.5194/acpd-10-20461-2010 Investigating the sensitivity of high-resolution mesoscale models to microphysical parameters by the use of polarimetric radar observations Ferretti R. 1 De Sanctis K. 1 6 Molini L. 2 Parodi A. 2 Montopoli M. 1 3 Marzano F. S. 1 4 Siccardi F. 2 5 CETEMPS – Department of Physics, University of L'Aquila, L'Aquila, Italy CIMA Research Foundation, University Campus, Savona, Italy DIEI, University of L'Aquila, L'Aquila, Italy DIE, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy DIST, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy now at: HIMET s.r.l, L'Aquila, Italy 27 08 2010 10 8 20461 20514 This is an open-access article ditributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. This article is available from http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/10/20461/2010/acpd-10-20461-2010.html The full text article is available as a PDF file from http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/10/20461/2010/acpd-10-20461-2010.pdf

An improved methodology for investigating mesoscale model microphysics is presented and discussed for a case study. Polarimetric radar data are used to assess numerical weather prediction (NWP) model's skill in reproducing the microphysical features of severe rainfall. To this aim, an event of deep convection, developed on 20 May 2003 in the Po Valley (Italy), is analyzed. During the selected case study, two weather radars, sited in Gattatico and San Pietro Capofiume (near Bologna, Italy), detected a deep-convective and hail cell with a large inner graupel core which reached the ground, as was reported by local weather authorities and citizens. A hydrometeor classification algorithm, based on a Bayesian approach and a radar simulator model, are used to retrieve the vertical structure of the storm and characterize its ground effects. These products are used for evaluating the sensitivity of NWP models with respect to the graupel density, described in terms of the intercept parameter of the graupel size distribution and its depositional velocity. To this purpose two mesoscale NWP models, specifically COSMO-LAMI and MM5-V3, are used at high spatial resolution. Their ability in reproducing the vertical and the horizontal structure and the microphysical distribution of the major convective cell is evaluated. Both models show large sensitivity to different microphysical settings and a capability to reproduce fairly well the observed hail cell. Ground-radar reflectivity fields and the hydrometeor vertical structure are correctly simulated by both NWP models as opposed to a failure in reproducing the graupel distribution near the ground.

 References Alberoni,~P P., Andersson,~T., Mezzasalma,~P., Michelson,~D B., and Nanni,~S.: Use of the vertical reflectivity profile for identification of anomalous propagation, Meteorol. Appl., 8, 257–266, 2001. Bernardo,~J M. and Smith,~A F M.: Bayesian Theory, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, New York 608~pp., 1994. Blossey,~P N., Bretherton,~C S., Cetrone,~J., and Khairoutdinov,~M.: Cloud-resolving model simulations of KWAJEX: Model sensitivities and comparisons with satellite and radar observations, J. Atmos. Sci., 64, 1488–1508, 2007. De Sanctis,~K.: Mesoscale meteorological modeling at high-spatial resolution: Microphysical sensitivity and polarimetric radar analysis, PhD Thesis at University of Basilicata, 2008. Doms,~G. and Schättler,~U.: The Nonhydrostatic Limited-Area Model LM of DWD: Part I. Scientific Documentation, DWD, Offenbach, Germany 172 pp., 1999. Dudhia,~J.: A~nonhydrostatic version of the Penn State-NCAR mesoscale model: validation tests and simulation of an Atlantic cyclone and cold front, Mon. Weather Rev., 129, 1493–1513, 1993. Cheng,~L., English,~M., and Wong,~R.: Hailstone size distributions and their relationship to storm thermodynamics, J. Appl. Meteorol., 24, 1059–1067, 1985. Cohen,~C., and McCaul,~E W.: The sensitivity of simulated convective storms to variations in prescribed single-moment microphysics parameters that describe particle distributions, sizes, and numbers, Mon. Weather Rev., 134, 2547–2565, 2006. Cotton,~W R., Stephens,~M A., Nehrkorn,~T., and Tripoli,~G J.: Colorado State University three-dimensional cloud/mesoscale model – 1982, Part 2, An ice phase parameterization, J. Rech. Atmos., 16, 295–320, 1982. Droegemeier, K. K., Smith, J. D.,Businger, S., Doswell III, C., Doyle, J., Duffy, C., Foufoula-Georgiou, E., Graziano, T., James, L. D., Krajewski, V., LeMone, M.,Lettenmaier, D., Mass, C., Pielke Sr., R., Ray, P., Rutledge, S., Schaake, J., and Zipserp, E.: Hydrological aspects of weather prediction and flood warnings: Report of the ninth prospectus development team of the~US Weather Research Program, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 81, 2665–2680, 2000. Ferrier,~B S., Tao,~W.-K., and Simpson,~J.: A~double-moment multiple phase four-class bulk ice scheme, Part II: Simulations of convective storms in different large-scale environments and comparisons with other bulk parameterizations, J. Atmos. Sci., 52, 1001–1033, 1995. Garvert,~M F., Woods,~C P., Colle,~B A., Mass,~C F., Hobbs,~P V., Stoelinga,~M T., and Wolfe,~J B.: The 13–14 December 2001 IMPROVE-2 event, Part II: Comparison of MM5 model simulations of clouds and precipitation with observations, J. Atmos. Sci., 62, 3520–3534, 2005. Gilmore,~M S., Straka,~J M., and Rasmussen,~E N.: Precipitation uncertainty due to variations in precipitation particle parameters within a~simple microphysics scheme, Mon. Weather Rev., 132, 2610–2627, 2004. Grell,~G., Dudhia,~S., Stauffer,~D R.: A~description of the fifth generation of Penn State/NCAR mesoscale model (MM5). NCAR/TN-398+STR, Natl. Cent. For Atmos. Res., Boulder, Colorado, 1994. Haase,~G. and Crewell,~S.: Simulation of radar reflectivities using a~mesoscale weather forecast model, Water Resour. Res., 36, 2221–2230, 2001. Hong,~S.-Y. and Pan,~H.-L.: Nonlocal boundary layer vertical diffusion in medium-range forecast model, Mon. Weather Rev., 124, 2322–2339, 1996. Fritsch,~J. and Kain,~J.: Convective parameterization for mesoscale models: the Kain-Fritsch scheme, The Representation of Cumulus in Numerical Models, Meteor. Monogr., No. 46, American Meteorological Society, 165–177, 1993. Heymsfield,~A J. and Kajikawa,~M.: An improved approach to calculating terminal velocities of plate-like crystals and graupel, J. Atmos. Sci., 44, 1088–1099, 1987. Liebe,~H J.: MPM-An atmospheric millimeter-wave propagation model, Int. J. Infrared Milli., 10, 631–650, 1989. Lillesand,~T M. and Kiefer,~R W.: Remote Sensing and Image Interpretation, 3rd edn., John Wiley & Sons., Inc. New York, 750~pp., 1994. Lin,~Y.-L., Farley,~R D., and Orville,~H D.: Bulk parameterization of the snow field in a~cloud model, J. Clim. Appl. Meteorol., 22, 1065–1092, 1983. Lynn,~B H., Khain,~A P., Dudhia,~J., Rosenfeld,~D., Pokrovsky,~A., and Seifert,~A.: Spectral (bin) microphysics coupled with a~mesoscale model (MM5), Part I: Model description and first results, Mon. Weather Rev., 133, 44–58, 2005a. Lynn,~B H., Khain,~A P., Dudhia,~J., Rosenfeld,~D., Pokrovsky,~A., and Seifert,~A.: Spectral (bin) microphysics coupled with a~mesoscale model (MM5), Part II: Simulation of a~Cape rain event with a~squall line, Mon. Weather Rev., 133, 59–71, 2005b. Luo,~Y., Krueger,~S K., and Mace,~G G.: Cirrus cloud properties from a~cloud-resolving model simulation compared to cloud radar observations, J. Atmos. Sci, 60, 510–525, 2003. Luo,~Y L., Xu,~K M., Wielicki,~B A., Wong,~T., and Eitzen,~Z A.: Statistical analyses of satellite cloud object data from CERES, Part III: Comparison with cloud-resolving model simulations of tropical convective clouds, J. Atmos. Sci., 64, 762–785, 2007. May~R M., Biggerstaff,~M I., and Xue,~M.: A~doppler radar emulator with an application to the detectability of tornadic signatures, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 24, 1973–1996, 2007. Marzano,~F S., Mugnai,~A., Panegrossi,~G., Pierdicca,~N., Smith,~E A., and Turk,~J.: Bayesian estimation of precipitating cloud parameters from combined measurements of spaceborne microwave radiometer and radar, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., 37, 596–613, 1999. Marzano,~F S., Scaranari,~D., Montopoli,~M., and Vulpiani,~G.: Supervised classification and estimation of hydrometeors from c-band dual-polarized radars: a~Bayesian approach, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., 46, 85–98, 2008. Marzano,~F S., Scaranari,~D., and Vulpiani,~G.: Supervised classification of hydrometeors using a~C-band dual-polarized radar network, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., 45, 3784–3799, 2007. McCumber,~M., Tao,~W.-K., Simpson,~J., Penc,~R., and Soong,~S T.: Comparison of ice-phase microphysical parameterization schemes using numerical simulations of tropical convection, J. Appl. Meteorol., 30, 985–1004, 1991. Michalakes,~J., Chen,~S., Dudhia,~J., Hart,~L., Klemp,~J., Middlecoff,~J., and Skamarock,~W.: Development of a~next-generation regional weather research and forecast model, Developments in Teracomputing, edited by: Zweiflhofer,~W. and Kreitz,~N., World Scientific, 269–276, 2001. Mishchenko,~M.: Diffuse and coherent backscattering by discrete random media-i. radar reflectivity, polarization ratios, and enhancement factors, for a~half-space of polydisperse, nonabsorbing and absorbing spherical particles,~J. Quant. Spectrosc. Ra., 56(5), 673–702, 1996. Molini,~L., Parodi,~A., and Siccardi,~F.: An observing system simulation experiment for the study on attenuation of C-band radar measurements, Meteorol. Appl., 15(4), 523–533, 2008. Morrison,~H., Curry,~J A., and Khvorostyanov,~V I.: A~double-moment microphysics parameterization for application in cloud and climate models, Part I: Description, J. Atmos. Sci., 62, 1665–1677, 2005. Proctor,~F H.: Numerical simulations of an isolated microburst, Part I: Dynamics and structure, J. Atmos. Sci., 45, 3137–3160, 1988. Proctor,~F H.: Numerical simulations of an isolated microburst, Part II: Sensitivity experiments, J. Atmos. Sci., 46, 2143–2165, 1989. Reinhardt,~T. and Seifert,~A.: A~three categories-ice scheme for LMK, Cosmo Newsletter 6, 115–120, 2006. Reisner,~J., Rasmussen,~R., and Bruintjes,~R.: Explicit forecasting of supercooled liquid water in winter storms using the MM5 mesoscale model, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 124, 1071–1107, 1998. Richards,~J A. and Jia,~X.: Remote sensing digital image analysis: an introduction, 4th edn., Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 476~pp., 2006. Rutledge,~S. and Hobbs,~P V.: The mesoscale and microscale structure and organization of clouds and precipitation in midlatitude cyclones, J. Atmos. Sci., 41, 2949–2973, 1984. Serafin,~S. and Ferretti,~R.: Sensitivity of a~mesoscale model to microphysical parameterizations in the MAP SOP Events IOP2b and IOP8, J. Appl. Meteorol. Climatol., 46, 1438–1454, 2007. Smith,~P L., Meyers,~C G., and Orville,~H D.: Radar reflectivity factor calculations in numerical cloud models using bulk parameterization of precipitation, J. Appl. Meteorol., 14, 1156–1165, 1975. Steppeler,~J., Doms,~G., Schättler,~U., Bitzer,~H W., Gassmann,~A., Damrath,~U., and Gregoric,~G.: Meso-gamma scale forecasts using the nonhydrostatic model LM, Meteorol. Atmos. Phys., 82, 75–96, 2003. Stoelinga, M. T., Hobbs, P. V., Mass, C. F., Locatelli, J. D., Colle, B. A., Houze Jr., R. A., Rangno, A. L., Bond, N. A., Smull, B. F., Rasmussen, R. M., Thompson, G., and Colman, B. R.: Improvement of Microphysical Parameterization through Observational Verification Experiment (IMPROVE), B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 84, 1807–1826, 2003. Straka,~J M. and Anderson,~J R.: Numerical simulations of microburst-producing storms: some results from storms observed during COHMEX, J. Atmos. Sci., 50, 1329–1348, 1993. Tong,~M. and Xue,~M.: Simultaneous estimation of microphysical parameters and atmospheric state with simulated radar data and ensemble square root Kalman filter, Part I: Sensitivity analysis and parameter identifiability, Mon. Weather Rev., 136, 1630–1648, 2008. Thompson,~G., Rasmussen,~R M., and Manning,~K.: Explicit forecasts of winter precipitation using an improved bulk microphysics scheme, Part I: Description and sensitivity analysis, Mon. Weather Rev., 119, 734–754, 2004. Thompson,~G., Hall,~B., Field,~P., and Rasmussen,~R.: A~New Bulk Microphysical Parameterization in WRF, 7th WRF User's Workshop, Boulder CO, 2006. Troen,~I B. and Mahrt,~L.: A~simple model of the atmospheric boundary layer; sensitivity to surface evaporation, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 37, 129–148, 1986. Zrni\'c,~D S., Ryzhkov,~A V., Straka,~J., Liu,~Y., and Vivekanandan,~J.: Testing a~procedure for automatic classification of hydrometeor types, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 18, 892–913, 2001. Xue,~M. et al.: The Advanced Regional Prediction System (ARPS) – a~multiscale nonhydrostatic atmospheric simulation and prediction tool, Part II: Model physics and applications, Meteorol. Atmos. Phys., 76, 134–165, 2001. Van den Heever,~S C. and Cotton,~W R.: The impact of hail size on simulated supercell storms, J. Atmos. Sci., 61, 1596–1609, 2004.