# MM5 Model Performance Great Lakes Region: 2002-04 Kirk Baker June 2005 Ad-Hoc Meteorological Modeling Meeting – Denver, CO MM5 simulations: 2002 MatthewJohnson, Iowa DNR 2004Wusheng Ji,Wisconsin DNR 2003Wusheng Ji; Steven King, Illinois EPA; Kirk Bakerk(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-- No Moist Physics Table Analysis nudging on above PBL 4-D Data Assimilation No Shallow convection Pleim-Xu Multi-Layer Soil Model RRTM Radiation Pleim-Chang (ACM) PBL Kain-Fritsch 2 Cumulus Mixed Phase (ReisnerI) Explicit Moisture 36km and 12km Domains Configuration

# 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

# DailyWind 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

# (Tryingto) Relate PM Modeling System Performanceto 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– obsand 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
• Examinetrends in daily error and bias metricsforthe Great Lakes region

• Sulfate and nitrate ions most likelyto be associatedwith 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