Use of NWP / EPS Products in

Severe Weather Forecasting

HO Chun-kit
Scientific Officer

SWFP-SeA Training Desk on Severe Weather Forecasting

RFSC Ha Noi
December 2019
 Content

• NWP / EPS guidance for severe weather forecasting

– Display for forecasters
– Products for forecasting extreme weather
– New products available from modelling centres

• Post-processed products
• Interpreting NWP / EPS output
 NWP Viewer: Prognostic chart display

• Interactive display of prognostic charts for different models, model initial time,
valid time etc.
 NWP Viewer: Prognostic chart display

• Interactive display of prognostic charts for different models, model initial time,
valid time etc.
 NWP Viewer: Prognostic chart display

• Interactive display of prognostic charts for different models, model initial time,
valid time etc.
 NWP Viewer: Prognostic chart display

• Interactive display of prognostic charts for different models, model initial time,
valid time etc.
NWP Model Time Series

Based on ECMWF high-frequency data

 NWP Time Cross and Tephigram

Based on ECMWF high-frequency data

QPF Summary Table

• Summary of QPF by different

models and PoP for the next 10
days
• Display minimum, average and
maximum over all grid points in
the HK area
QPF Summary Table

• Comparison of QPF for the same

day from successive model runs
QPF Summary Table

• Map view for forecasters to

appreciate spatial pattern
of precipitation depicted by
different NWP models
EPS Meteogram
 EPS probability products

• Probability products for threshold exceedances in winds

and precipitation by ECMWF and JMA EPS
EPS probability products
Visual inspection of ensemble members
Visual inspection of ensemble members
 Products supporting forecasting of convective development

Lightning flash density:

Total of C-C and C-G flashes in units of flashes per
100km2 per hour

Parameterization estimates based on convective

hydrometeor amounts, CAPE and convective cloud
base height
(Reference:
https://www.ecmwf.int/en/newsletter/155/meteorology/promising-
results-lightning-predictions)
 Use of EFI/SOT in extreme weather forecasting

ECMWF Online learning resources:

https://www.ecmwf.int/assets/elearning/efi/efi1/story_html5.html
Use of EFI/SOT in extreme weather forecasting
EFI=+1 (-1) when all EPS members forecast values above
(below) the absolute minimum in M-climate

User guide to ECMWF forecast products:

“… EFI of 0.5-0.8 (irrespective of sign) can be generally regarded
as indicator of “unusual” weather is likely and values above 0.8
representing “very unusual” or “extreme” weather”
Use of EFI/SOT in extreme weather forecasting
- SOT compliments EFI that defines how far the extreme
members are above the M-climate
- Note SOT ~ 0 is quite common due to limited no. of ensemble
members to construct the model climate and atmospheric
variability represented by EPS

Positive EFI; Negative SOT(90) Positive EFI; Positive SOT(90)

90th percentile EPS

M-climate M-climate

EPS

Wind Wind
Qc (90) Qc (99) speed
Qc (90) Qc (99) speed
Qf (90)
Qf (90)
Example: Precipitation forecasting for TC Mangkhut
Example: Precipitation forecasting for TC Mangkhut
 Why do we need model post-processing?
• Remove model forecast errors
– systematic error (bias) due to insufficient representativeness of orography, physical
processes and model resolution
– non-systematic forecast errors due to stochastic nature of physical processes (e.g.
initiation, movement and intensification/dissipation of convective storms)
• Calibrate direct model output (DMO) or probability density function of EPS
• Generate non model-predicting parameters
• Using calibrated model output as inputs to another model
– e.g. hydrological and wind power prognoses
• Weather “generator” and adding realistic spatial and temporal variations
– e.g. digital forecast system
• Statistical and dynamical downscaling of DMO to better represent small-scale
effects
– e.g. terrain, canopy, coastal boundaries
• A more practical aspect to forecaster
– more accurate forecast guidance (or GoG: guidance of guidance) with added-value to
model DMO at inexpensive computational cost
Objective consensus forecast
Objective consensus forecast
Automatic regional weather forecast
 Analogue forecast system (AFS) for precipitation
• Search for past cases based on ERA-Interim data (1979-2011) with similarities in synoptic pattern
using geopotential heights and moisture, then rank the scores according to linear combination of
“similarity” factors

Reference: https://www.weather.gov.hk/tc/publica/reprint/files/r1097.pdf
 Characteristics of AFS
• Assumptions:
– “History repeats itself”
– a perfect prognosis by NWP model

• Features of AFS:
– automatically search good matching case(s) w.r.t. real-time NWP model forecast
– specially tuned for heavy rain event

• Compare the similarities between (real-time) model forecast and historical

cases
– Similarity metrics (a total of 11 parameters on matching criteria):
• Pattern matching of upper-air conditions (geopotential heights on selected levels)
• Matching of synoptic pattern
• Matching on spatial gradient of geopotential height fields
• Water vapour

• Selection process
– To determine the weighting of metrics and their relative importance
– Need to handle non-linearity dependency
AFS similarity metric: Matching of synoptic patterns
Forecasting severe convective weather
 Stability indices

https://www.spc.noaa.gov/sfctest/help/sfcoa.html
Thunderstorm potential (PoTS): Leveraging value of EPS
• Consider favourable parameters, based on
local knowledge of weather hazard such as
initiation and development of
thunderstorms
– stability parameters: K-index, CAPE
– low-level jet (LLJ)
– low-level moisture
– low-level vorticity
– upper-level divergence

• Frequency counts of above “ingredients” in

each EPS member, every grid point, then
take consensus (probability matching) to
generate PoTS

• Incorporates uncertainties on the above

“ingredients” from ECMWF EPS
Thunderstorm potential (PoTS): An example
Thunderstorm potential (PoTS): An example
Thunderstorm potential (PoTS): An example
 Interpreting NWP model output
• NWP models provide “details” on synoptic patterns and mesoscale features with
increasing spatial resolution
• Deterministic NWP models - because of higher resolution, continual improvement in
data assimilation and model physics, giving users a very certain (or even reliable in
some sense) on weather changes
• BUT … NWP models can change its “story” (and sometimes drastically)
Forecast “jumpiness”
 Interpreting NWP model output
• Interpretation of model products
– DON’T just tell what you see directly from model output, try explain the underlying weather processes
and/or possible factors that give rise to changes in weather elements

– verification statistics

– comparison with observations and monitoring of actual weather changes

• Alternative scenarios from different models, EPSs, and forecast runs at different initial
times (jumpiness)
• Make use of model uncertainties (spread among different models and EPSs)
• Be critical and “disregard” the model outputs when necessary
– reduce forecast “jumpiness”
 Dealing with uncertainties
• Make good use of the ensemble, especially (but not only) at longer lead-times.
• Give more weight to the more recent forecasts, but don't exclude results from previous runs.
• Larger spread implies larger errors.
• Jumpiness is not a good indicator of likely error.
• Dynamical sensitivity can increase jumpiness at short ranges and should be investigated.
• Do not extrapolate trends.
• Make more use of the ensemble mean (EM), rather than the ensemble control (CTRL) or HRES,
especially at longer lead times (say ≥ ~ 4 days), to reduce jumpiness.
• At short ranges the ensemble mean (EM) and control CTRL tend to “jump together” more often, so
the strategy of following the EM, rather than CTRL (or HRES), is less beneficial at those ranges.
• Note that strong gradients are always weakened in the ensemble mean (EM).
• Consider each case according to the synoptic situation and other aspects (eg timing, rapid
development).
Source: ECMWF Forecast User Guide Chapter 7.4
https://confluence.ecmwf.int/display/FUG/Forecast+User+Guide
Thank you!