Super-Regional Testbed for Improving Forecasts of Environmental Processes for the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of

Mexico Coasts

The Role of the SURA Testbed in the Improvement of U.S. Coastal and

Estuarine PredictionJohn Harding, Northern Gulf Institute

Carl Friedrichs, Virginia Institute of Marine ScienceRick Luettich, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Rich Signell, United States Geological Survey

Coastal Zone 201119 July2011

U.S.

1. Build a common infrastructure for access, analysis and visualization of all ocean model data produced by the Federal Backbone and the IOOS Regions.

2. Develop skill metrics and assess models in three different regions and dynamical regimes

3. Transition models, tools, toolkits and other capabilities to federal operational facilities

4. Build stronger relationships between academia and operational centers through collaboration

Super-Regional Testbed Goals

U.S.

http://testbed.sura.org/

IOOS Testbed Team Structure

Rick Luettich, UNC-CHJohn Harding, NGICarl Friedrichs, VIMS

Rich Signell, USGS

Eoin Howlett, ASA

Don Wright, SURA

Doug Levin, NOAA/IOOS Liz Smith, SURA

25 members

21 members 20 members 17 members

8 members

U.S.

http://testbed.sura.org/

Inundation Extra-tropical – Gulf of MaineTropical – Gulf of Mexico

- 4 models: 3 unstructured grid +1 structured grid- Coupled wave-storm surge-inundation (TWL)- Consistent forcing, validation and skill assessment using existing IMEDS tool -Extensive observational data sets for historical storms Ike and Rita in standard formats-SURA has secured NSF TeraGrid supercomputer resources

Extratropical Grid

Tropical Grids for Galveston Bay

Domains

Gulf of Maine with high resolution nesting in Scituate, MA

Nested

5620 nodes10 m – 1 km horiz resolution

CI Challenge (unstructured grids & multi-plots)

IMEDS – Interactive Model Evaluation and Diagnostics System

•Stand-alone desktop model validation toolkit•Based on NOAA standards•Robust error metrics: Erms, bias, Scatter Index, Skill Score•Explore model errors as a function of time, space, event

Statistical AnalysesTemporal correlationQuantile-Quantile (distributions)Peak event (peak over threshold)

Parameters Added To-Date

Error MetricsRMS ErrorBias, Angular biasScatter IndexCircular correlationPerformance (Skill) Scores

Winds Speed, DirectionWaves (Windsea and swell) Height, Period, DirectionStorm Surge Water level, High water marks

CI Challenge (tools)

April 2007 “Patriot’s Day Storm”Interesting Science & CI Challenge (multi-plots)

Currents w/o waves Currents w waves

April 18, 04 AM (GMT)

Estuarine Hypoxia Chesapeake Bay

1. Estuary:– 5 Hydrodynamic models (so far)– 6 Hydro-DO model pairs (so far)– 2004 data from up to 40 CBP stations– Comparing T, S, max (dS/dz), DO via target diagrams2. Shelf: OBCs 5 hydrodynamic models

Models doing better on oxygen than stratification!

Stratification (dS/Dz) Dissolved Oxygen

Std dev of observations

Std dev of observations

Map of Late July 2004

Observed Dissolved Oxygen [mg/L]

~ 40 EPA Chesapeake Bay stationsEach sampled ~ 20 times in 2004

Temperature, Salinity, Dissolved Oxygen

Data set for model skill assessment:

(http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/ChesapeakeBay)

Observations: S and DO from Up to 40 CBP station locationsCI Challenge (data storage and formats)

Skill Metrics: Target diagram

(modified from M. Friedrichs)

Dimensionless version of plot normalizes by standard deviation of observations

CI Challenge (tools)

(by M. Scully)

Dissolved Oxygen: Top-to-Bottom DS and Bottom DO in Central Chesapeake Bay

ChesROMS-1term model

- All models reproduce DO better than they reproduce stratification.- If stratification is not controlling DO, what is?

Interesting Science & CI Challenge (tools & multi-plots)

Shelf Hypoxia Gulf of MexicoCompare Hydrodynamic & biogeochemical hindcast comparisons of hypoxia model (stand alone) coupled to 3 different Gulf of Mexico hydrodynamic modelsEvaluate two shelf hypoxia formulations (NOAA & EPA)Assist transition of Navy AMSEAS Gulf Forecasts and NOAA OceanNOMADS data server

Preliminary analyses indicate no systematic differences among simulations

Compare simulated surface chlorophyll and SeaWiFS climatology (June example).

Clim b.c.

SeaWiFS

HYCOM b.c.

IASFNFS b.c.

IASNFS b.c.

Corr = 0.84

HYCOM b.c.

Corr = 0.71Corr = 0.72

Clim b.c.

Log(chl) model

Log(

chl)S

eaW

iFS

Interesting Science & CI Challenge (tools & multi-plots)

Courtesy Katja Fennel

Where Does Hypoxic Bottom Water Come From? Interesting Science & CI Challenge (Lagrangian tools)

Oxygen (mg/l)1 7

Courtesy Bruce Lipphardt, U. Delaware

Model Evaluations – AMSEAS-GOM – Forecast Days 1 – JUNE 2010

Sonic Layer Depth (SLD) with Temperature and

Salinity at Surface & 100m

Courtesy Frank Bub, NAVOCEANO

CI Challenge (tools & multi-plots)

http://www.northerngulfinstitute.org/edac/ocean_nomads.php

NCEP OPC for Near-Term Ocean Prediction Access

EDAC for Long-Term Archive & NCEP Backup

NGI & NCDDC EDAC/ OceanNOMADSImprove Access to Gulf Data & Predictions

FY11 NODC OceanNOMADS Transition Milestone & CI Challenge (distributed data)

Surface Currents

1. Build a common infrastructure for access, analysis and visualization of all ocean model data produced by the Federal Backbone and the IOOS Regions.

2. Develop skill metrics and assess models in three different regions and dynamical regimes

3. Transition models, tools, toolkits and other capabilities to federal operational facilities

4. Build stronger relationships between academia and operational centers through collaboration

Super-Regional Testbed Goals

U.S.

http://testbed.sura.org/node/429