1. NOAH LAND SURFACE MODEL – MP UPGRADE
A Performance Evaluation of the Noah-MP
Land Surface Model
Marcel Caron
Undergraduate Student, University of MD, College Park
Advised by E. Hugo Berbery, Ph. D.
Director, CICS-MD
Omar V. Müller
CEVARCAM
December 8, 2016

2. Goals
Ø Does
Noah-­‐MP
improve
mesoscale
forecasts?
Ø Conduct
qualita-ve
and
quan-ta-ve
analyses
of
the
Noah-­‐MP
LSM
forecast
performance
using
a
coupled
system
Ø Understand
skill
and
biases
of
temperature
and
precipita-on
simula-ons
over
CONUS
Ø Compare
Noah-­‐MP
and
Noah
v3.4
simula-ons
Ø Support
implementa.on
of
Noah-­‐MP
in
Next
Genera.on
Global
Predic.on
System
(NGGPS)
2
NOAA

3. N:
Na-onal
Centers
for
Environmental
Predic-on
(NCEP)
O:
Oregon
State
University
-­‐
Dpt.
AOS
A:
Air
Force
H:
Hydrology
Lab
-­‐
NWS
Noah
LSM
processes:
Ø Heat
fluxes
Ø Radia-on
fluxes
Ø Momentum
exchange
Ø Hydrological
Cycle
3
NCAR,
2004
LSM
–
Land
Surface
Model

4. 4
Noah
“MP”
Inclusion
of
Land
Surface
Processes
in
NWP
Solid
Black:
Pre-­‐2005
GFS
Dashed:
GFS
w
LSM
upgrade
Bias
Score
Gilbert
Skill
Score
“24-­‐hour
precip.
threshold
(in.)”
“24-­‐hour
precip.
threshold
(in.)”
Mitchell
et
al.,
2005

5. Land
Surface
Model
MoBvaBon:
Ø Land
Surface
Processes
Quan-fied
Ø Quan--es
provided
to
parent
model…
Ø …as
Lower
Boundary
Condi-on
to
mesoscale
NWP
models
5
USGS
30-­‐second
global
24-­‐category
vegeta-on
(land-­‐use)
data,
ORNL
Key
input
Ø Land
use
type
Ø Soil
texture
Ø Slope
Derived
from
Remote
Sensing
Data
(AVHRR)

6. Data
for
This
Project
Ø Noah/WRF-­‐NMM
coupled
system
Ø Original
research
version
of
WRF-­‐NMM
released
in
2003
Ø Boundary
Condi-ons
provided
by
NAM
6
Noah
LSM
NAM
NAM
NMM
–
NonHydrosta9c
Mesoscale
Model
NOAA,
DTC,
2014

7. Previous
version:
Noah
v
3.4
Ø Root
uptake
from
Water
Table
Ø Vegeta-on
+
soil
layer
Ø Snow
+
soil
layer
7
[2012
Average
of
Monthly
Precip.
Totals]
Observed
LS
Data
[NOAA/OAR/ESRL
PSD]
Noah
3.4/
WRF
3.5
Data
millimeters
Niu
et
al.,
2011

8. Now:
Noah
“MP”
Upgrade
Baseline
Noah
LSM
with
op-ons
that
allow
for:
Ø Water
Table
depth
esBmates
Ø Mul9-­‐layer
snow
and
canopy
8
[2012
Average
of
Monthly
Precip.
Totals]
Observed
LS
Data
[NOAA/OAR/ESRL
PSD]
Noah-­‐MP
1.1/WRF
3.5
Data
millimeters
MP
–
Mul9parameteriza9on
Niu
et
al.,
2011

9. Water
Table
Concept
9
hhp://www.walldevil.com/wallpapers/a84/tree-­‐field-­‐rain-­‐rainbow-­‐cloud-­‐sky.jpg
Ø Moisture
Flux
Ø Soil
Moisture
Ø Transpira-on
Ø Evapora-on
Ø Runoff
(Surface
+
Underground)
Ø Groundwater
Transfer
Ø Root
Uptake

10. Water
Table
Concept
10
hhp://www.walldevil.com/wallpapers/a84/tree-­‐field-­‐rain-­‐rainbow-­‐cloud-­‐sky.jpg
Ø Moisture
Flux
Ø Soil
Moisture
Ø Transpira-on
Ø Evapora-on
Ø Runoff
(Surface
+
Underground)
Ø Groundwater
Transfer
Ø Root
Uptake
WATER
TABLE

11. Water
Table
Concept
11
hhp://www.walldevil.com/wallpapers/a84/tree-­‐field-­‐rain-­‐rainbow-­‐cloud-­‐sky.jpg
Ø Moisture
Flux
Ø Soil
Moisture
Ø TranspiraBon?
Ø EvaporaBon
Ø Runoff
(Surface
+
Underground)
Ø Groundwater
Transfer
Ø Root
Uptake
WATER
TABLE
Yuan
et.
al,
2008

12. Methodology:
First
Steps
Ø Qualita-ve
Comparison,
30-­‐Year
Average
to
2012
Ø Iden-fy
Observed
2012
Anomalies
Ø Key
Features
we
want
to
see
in
Noah-­‐MP/WRF
simula-ons
12
NOAA/OAR/ESRL
PSD
Data
°Celsius
Observed
Mean
JJA
Temperature
(°C)
1982
–
2012
Average
2012

13. Methodology
ConBnued
Ø QualitaBve
Analysis:
Anomaly
Fields
Ø QuanBtaBve
Analysis:
Root
Mean
Squared
Error
Ø Annual,
Summer,
Winter
Ø Temperature
&
Precipita-on
13
hhp://www.clipartkid.com/images/808/up-­‐north-­‐trees-­‐clip-­‐art-­‐at-­‐clker-­‐com-­‐vector-­‐clip-­‐art-­‐online-­‐royalty-­‐0MXeeV-­‐clipart.png

14. Value
For
This
Project
14
NCAR’s
Research
Data
Archive
NWS’s
Environmental
Modeling
Center
NOAA’s
Earth
System
Research
Laboratory
Ø Noah-­‐LSM
in
NWP:
Ø NAM
(short-­‐range,
12km)
Ø GFS
(med-­‐range,
24km)
Ø CFS
(long-­‐range/seasonal)
Ø Future:
Ø Next
GeneraBon
Global
PredicBon
System
(NGGPS)
-­‐
2018

15. 15
Does
Noah-­‐MP
improve
mesoscale
forecasts?
Ø Given
physics
upgrades,
we
expect
it
to
Ø Areas
of
Deteriora-on?
Ø Methods
for
analysis
will
aim
to
gain
quanBtaBve
and
qualitaBve
understanding
of
changes
Ø NGGPS
will
run
with
Noah-­‐MP
in
2018

16. References
Cai,
X.
et
al.,
Hydrological
evalua-on
of
the
Noah-­‐MP
land
surface
model
for
the
Mississippi
River
Basin,
J.
Geophys.
Res.-­‐Atmos.,
119,
1,
23-­‐38,
doi:
10.1002/2013JD020792,
2014.
Clark,
M.
P.,
D.
Kavetski,
and
F.
Fenicia,
Pursuing
the
method
of
mul-ple
working
hypotheses
for
hydrological
modeling,
Water
Resour.
Res.,
47,
W09301,
doi:10.1029/2010WR009827,
2011.
De
Ridder,
K.
and
Schayes,
G.,
The
IAGL
Land
Surface
Model,
J.
Appl.
Meteor.,
36,
167-­‐182,
doi:
10.1175/1520-­‐0450(1997)036<01667:TILSM>2.0.CO;2,
1997.
Dirmeyer,
P.
A.,
et
al.
Land
Surface
Modeling
in
Support
of
Numerical
Weather
Predic-on
and
Sub-­‐Seasonal
Climate
Predic-on,
Cola/GMU,
hhp://
cola.gmu.edu/lsm/GMU_KIAPS_White_Paper.pdf,
2013.
Ek,
M.
B.
and
Jasper,
M.:
Land
Surface
Modeling
(presenta-on).
hhp://slideplayer.com/slide/3852992/,
2015.
Ek,
M.
B.,
et
al.
Implementa-on
of
Noah
land
surface
model
advances
in
the
Na-onal
Centers
for
Environmental
Predic-on
opera-onal
mesoscale
Eta
model.
J.
Geophys.
Res.,
108,
D22,
doi:
10.1029/2002JD003296,
2003.
Luo,
Y.,
Berbery,
E.
H.,
and
Mitchell,
K.
E.
The
Opera-onal
Eta
Model
Precipita-on
and
Surface
Hydrologic
Cycle
of
the
Columbia
and
Colorado
Basins,
J.
Hydrometeo.,
6,
341-­‐370,
doi:
10.1175/JHM435.1,
2005.
Mitchell,
K.
et
al.
NCEP
Implements
Major
Upgrade
to
Its
Medium-­‐Range
Global
Forecast
System,
Including
Land-­‐Surface
Component,
GEWEX,
15,
4,
8-­‐9,
hhp://www.gewex.org/gewex-­‐content/files_mf/1432207652Nov2005.pdf#page=8
2005.
Murray,
S.
J.,
I.
M.
Watson,
and
I.
C.
Pren-ce,
The
use
of
dynamic
global
vegeta-on
models
for
simula-ng
hydrology
and
the
poten-al
integra-on
of
satellite
observa-ons,
Prog.
Phys.
Geogr.,
37(1),
63–97,
doi:
10.1177/0309133312460072,
2013.
Niu,
G.-­‐Y.,
et
al.
The
community
Noah
land
surface
model
with
mul-parameteriza-on
op-ons
(Noah-­‐MP):
1.
Model
descrip-on
and
evalua-on
with
local-­‐scale
measurements,
J.
Geophys.
Res.,
116,
D12109,
doi:
10.1029/2010JD015139,
2011.
NOAA,
Developmental
Testbed
Center
(DTC),
User’s
Guide
for
the
NMM
Core
of
the
Weather
Research
and
Forecast
(WRF)
Modeling
System
Version
3,
Chapter
5:
WRF
NMM
Model,
www.dtcenter.org/wrf-­‐nmm/users/docs/user_guide/V3/users_guide_nmm_chap5.pdf,
2014.
Teuling,
A.
J.,
et
al.
Contras-ng
response
of
European
forest
and
grassland
energy
exchange
to
heatwaves,
Nat.
Geosci.,
3,
722-­‐727,
doi:
10.1038/
ngeo950,
2010.
Yang,
Z.-­‐L.,
et
al.,
The
community
Noah
land
surface
model
with
mul-parameteriza-on
op-ons
(Noah-­‐MP):
2.
Evalua-on
over
global
river
basins,
J.
Geophys.
Res.,
116,
D12110,
doi:10.1029/2010JD015140,
2011.
16

17. 17
Extra:
Current
Progress
Annual
Cycle
Comparison
–
PrecipitaBon,
Total
Monthly
(mm)

18. Extra:
EvaluaBng
Model
Performance:
ConBngency
Tables
18
False
Alarm
Correct
Nega-ve
Hit
Miss
Modeled
Observed
Shuherstock
Image

19. Extra:
EvaluaBng
Model
Performance:
ConBngency
Tables
19
Fowler
et
al.,
2012

20. Extra:
Comparing
Theory
to
ObservaBon
Ø Previous
test
regions
Ø River
Basins
Ø Hydrological
Cycle
20
Müller
et.
al,
2016

21. Extra:
Comparison
of
Noah
v3.5
and
Noah-­‐
MP
Features
Noah
v.
3.5
Noah-­‐MP
Vegeta-on
+
soil
combined
layer
Canopy
Layers
op-on
Snowpack
+
soil
combined
layer
Snow
Pack
Layers
op-on
Groundwater
Transfer
&
Storage
Permeable
Frozen
Soil
Ball-­‐Berry
Stomatal
Resistance
21

22. Extra:
MODIS
Land
Cover
Type
Product
(MCD12Q1)
Ø Maps
global
land
cover
Ø Categorized
into
Land
Surface
Type
Ø Uses
MODIS
spectral
and
temporal
data
Ø Incl.
reflectance,
land
surface
temperature
Ø Input
“database
is
a
‘living’
database”
22
Friedl
et
al.,
2012