MM5 Model Performance

Great Lakes Region: 2002-04

Kirk Baker

June 2005

Ad-Hoc Meteorological Modeling Meeting – Denver, CO

MM5 simulations: 2002 Matthew Johnson, Iowa DNR

2004 Wusheng Ji, Wisconsin DNR

2003 Wusheng Ji; Steven King, Illinois EPA; Kirk Baker
k(MM5) sigma press.(mb) height(m) depth(m)

34 0.000 10000 14662 1841

33 0.050 14500 12822 1466

32 0.100 19000 11356 1228

31 0.150 23500 10127 1062

30 0.200 28000 9066 939

29 0.250 32500 8127 843

28 0.300 37000 7284 767

27 0.350 41500 6517 704

26 0.400 46000 5812 652

25 0.450 50500 5160 607

24 0.500 55000 4553 569

23 0.550 59500 3984 536

22 0.600 64000 3448 506

21 0.650 68500 2942 480

20 0.700 73000 2462 367

19 0.740 76600 2095 266

18 0.770 79300 1828 259

17 0.800 82000 1569 169

16 0.820 83800 1400 166

15 0.840 85600 1235 163

14 0.860 87400 1071 160

13 0.880 89200 911 158

12 0.900 91000 753 78

11 0.910 91900 675 77

10 0.920 92800 598 77

9 0.930 93700 521 76

8 0.940 94600 445 76

7 0.950 95500 369 75

6 0.960 96400 294 74

5 0.970 97300 220 74

4 0.980 98200 146 37

3 0.985 98650 109 37

2 0.990 99100 73 36

1 0.995 99550 36 36

0 1.000 100000 0 --SURF-- Moist Physics Table No

4-D Data Assimilation Analysis nudging on above PBL

Shallow convection No

Multi-Layer Soil Model Pleim-Xu

Radiation RRTM

PBL Pleim-Chang (ACM)

Cumulus Kain-Fritsch 2

Explicit Moisture Mixed Phase (Reisner I)

Configuration 36km and 12km Domains
Daily Humidity Error
Daily Humidity Bias
Daily Temperature Bias

* Summer over-predictions dominated by over-night overpredictions; summer daytime peaks tend to be slightly

under-predicted.
Daily Temperature Error
Daily Wind Direction Bias
Daily Wind Direction Error
Daily Wind Speed Bias
Daily Wind Speed Error
Total March Rainfall

OBS (top) and MM5 (bottom)

2002

2002

2003 2004

2003 2004
Total July Rainfall

OBS (top) and MM5 (bottom)

2001 2002 2003 2004

2001 2002 2003 2004
Closing Remarks

• MM5 model performance in Great Lakes region

at 36 km consistent between all 3 annual

simulations

• Summer rainfall over-predicted

• Summer humidity biased high

• Early Fall high wind speed bias

• Temperatures biased low in winter and high in

summer

• Wind direction error highest in summer months
(Trying to) Relate PM Modeling System

Performance to MM5 Performance

Kirk Baker

June 2005

Ad-Hoc Meteorological Modeling Meeting – Denver, CO
Background

• Relating ambient concentrations and wet

deposition performance to MM5 rainfall

– Examine monthly total rainfall plots – obs and MM5

– Examine monthly average PM sulfate ion bias

– Examine monthly average sulfate deposition

• Wind Field performance

• Relating sub-domain averaged daily metrics

between MM5 and photochemical model
Ambient Monthly Bias Wet Dep. Monthly Bias

June 2002
Ambient Monthly Bias Wet Dep. Monthly Bias

July 2002
August 2002
SO4 NO3 SOIL

SO4 NO3 SOIL

November 2002 Monthly Average Wet Deposition Bias

May 2002 Monthly Average Wet Deposition Bias
•Long range transport of pollutants

•Indicator of wind field performance

•Performance at remote Class I area

monitors for PM sulfate ion to see if

synoptic weather patterns are

captured

Wind Field Performance
Relationships in Daily Metrics

• Examine trends in daily error and bias

metrics for the Great Lakes region

• Sulfate and nitrate ions most likely to be

associated with met model performance

• Nitrate relationships confounded by

emissions, deposition, and chemistry


Other Relationships in Daily Metrics

• Currently not using met

data to drive dust

emissions – so no

relationship is expected

• Currently missing some

important pathways of

SOA production and

polymerization – so no

relationship is expected