Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “intercomparison”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 469 records · Page 26

Evaluation and Intercomparison of Wildfire Smoke Forecasts from Multiple Modeling Systems for the 2019 Williams Flats Fire

Wildfire smoke is one of the most significant concerns of human and environmental health, associated with its substantial impacts on air quality, weather, and climate. However, biomass burning emissions and smoke remain among the largest sources of uncertainties in air quality forecasts. In this study, we evaluate the smoke emissions and plume forecasts from 12 state-of-the-art air quality forecasting systems during the Williams Flats fire in Washington State, US, August 2019, which was intensively observed during the Fire Influence on Regional to Global Environments and Air Quality (FIREX-AQ) field campaign. Model forecasts with lead times within 1 d are intercompared under the same framework based on observations from multiple platforms to reveal their performance regarding fire emissions, aerosol optical depth (AOD), surface PM2.5, plume injection, and surface PM2.5 to AOD ratio. The comparison of smoke organic carbon (OC) emissions suggests a large range of daily totals among the models, with a factor of 20 to 50. Limited representations of the diurnal patterns and day-to-day variations of emissions highlight the need to incorporate new methodologies to predict the temporal evolution and reduce uncertainty of smoke emission estimates. The evaluation of smoke AOD (sAOD) forecasts suggests overall underpredictions in both the magnitude and smoke plume area for nearly all models, although the high-resolution models have a better representation of the fine-scale structures of smoke plumes. The models driven by fire radiative power (FRP)-based fire emissions or assimilating satellite AOD data generally outperform the others. Additionally, limitations of the persistence assumption used when predicting smoke emissions are revealed by substantial underpredictions of sAOD on 8 August 2019, mainly over the transported smoke plumes, owing to the underestimated emissions on 7 August. In contrast, the surface smoke PM2.5 (sPM2.5) forecasts show both positive and negative overall biases for these models, with most members presenting more considerable diurnal variations of sPM2.5. Overpredictions of sPM2.5 are found for the models driven by FRP-based emissions during nighttime, suggesting the necessity to improve vertical emission allocation within and above the planetary boundary layer (PBL). Smoke injection heights are further evaluated using the NASA Langley Research Center's Differential Absorption High Spectral Resolution Lidar (DIAL-HSRL) data collected during the flight observations. As the fire became stronger over 3–8 August, the plume height became deeper, with a day-to-day range of about 2–9 km a.g.l. However, narrower ranges are found for all models, with a tendency of overpredicting the plume heights for the shallower injection transects and underpredicting for the days showing deeper injections. The misrepresented plume injection heights lead to inaccurate vertical plume allocations along the transects corresponding to transported smoke that is 1 d old. Discrepancies in model performance for surface PM2.5 and AOD are further suggested by the evaluation of their ratio, which cannot be compensated for by solely adjusting the smoke emissions but are more attributable to model representations of plume injections, besides other possible factors including the evolution of PBL depths and aerosol optical property assumptions. By consolidating multiple forecast systems, these results provide strategic insight on pathways to improve smoke forecasts.

AOD↗

Intercomparison of Ground and Aerial Systems for Urban Advanced Air Mobility Wind Field Campaigns

The need for accurate wind measurement data in urban areas is a rising concern for advanced air mobility such as uncrewed aircraft systems (UAS) and urban air mobility. The lack of quality observations of wind fields and other parameters presents a challenge for operability. Urban areas provide additional difficulty because of the complex terrain and varying building geometry and their associated flow fields. This has led to an extensive knowledge gap when it comes to real-time urban measurements. This paper focuses on comparison of available systems and the types of measurements for urban wind field campaigns. LiDARs and SoDARs are two of many ground instruments capable of gathering the necessary wind field information. UAS is also a viable technique of obtaining aerial wind measurements. Each of these all have specific strengths that make their measurements more suitable than others. Ground based and airborne systems are evaluated and compared to provide a thorough look into which system or instrument might provide the most accurate and definitive results for urban wind field campaigns.

Tyler L Willhite↗

Model Evaluation and Intercomparison Using Data Collected by the Langley Mobile Ozone Lidar in Hampton, Virginia

Throughout the year 2022, the Langley Mobile Ozone Lidar (LMOL) has been frequently collecting ozone and aerosol measurements in the lower troposphere. The lidar is located in the parking lot behind the Atmospheric Sciences building at NASA Langley in Hampton, Virginia, approximately 37.095 N, -76.389 W. The data was collected during a range of several distinct atmospheric conditions, including stratospheric intrusions, surface frontal passages, and long-range transported wildfire smoke plumes. We use this data to evaluate and intercompare the forecast accuracy of two atmospheric chemistry models: the GEOS Composition Forecasting model (GEOS-CF) and the Weather Research and Forecasting model with Chemistry (WRF-Chem). Both models make daily three-dimensional forecasts of many trace gases and species for the contiguous United States. Over a range of ten distinct collection events, each spanning 36 hours to nearly seven days, the forecast models predict tropospheric ozone at NASA Langley with reasonable accuracy. The models best predict the timing and shape of the observed stratospheric intrusions in the middle troposphere but often vary in the magnitude of the ozone mixing ratios. For other atmospheric conditions, there is more variability in the model accuracy. Here, we summarize the accuracy of the models for all events and investigate reasons for differences between the models and the lidar.

Daniel B. Phoenix↗

On the Remote Impacts of Mid-Holocene Saharan Vegetation on South American Hydroclimate: A Modeling Intercomparison

Proxy reconstructions from the mid-Holocene (MH: 6,000 years ago) indicate an intensification of the West African Monsoon and a weakening of the South American Monsoon, primarily resulting from orbitally-driven insolation changes. However, model studies that account for MH orbital configurations and greenhouse gas concentrations can only partially reproduce these changes. Most model studies do not account for the remarkable vegetation changes that occurred during the MH, in particular over the Sahara, precluding realistic simulations of the period. Here, we study precipitation changes over northern Africa and South America using four fully coupled global climate models by accounting for the Saharan greening. Incorporating the Green Sahara amplifies orbitally-driven changes over both regions, and leads to an improvement in proxy-model agreement. Our work highlights the local and remote impacts of vegetation and the importance of considering vegetation changes in the Sahara when studying and modeling global climate.

Paleoclimate modeling↗

A Single-Point Modeling Approach for the Intercomparison and Evaluation of Ozone Dry Deposition Across Chemical Transport Models (Activity 2 of AQMEII4)

A primary sink of air pollutants and their precursors is dry deposition. Dry deposition estimates differ across chemical transport models, yet an understanding of the model spread is incomplete. Here, we introduce Activity 2 of the Air Quality Model Evaluation International Initiative Phase 4 (AQMEII4). We examine 18 dry deposition schemes from regional and global chemical transport models as well as standalone models used for impact assessments or process understanding. We configure the schemes as single-point models at eight Northern Hemisphere locations with observed ozone fluxes. Single-point models are driven by a common set of site-specific meteorological and environmental conditions. Five of eight sites have at least 3 years and up to 12 years of ozone fluxes. The interquartile range across models in multiyear mean ozone deposition velocities ranges from a factor of 1.2 to 1.9 annually across sites and tends to be highest during winter compared with summer. No model is within 50 % of observed multiyear averages across all sites and seasons, but some models perform well for some sites and seasons. For the first time, we demonstrate how contributions from depositional pathways vary across models. Models can disagree with respect to relative contributions from the pathways, even when they predict similar deposition velocities, or agree with respect to the relative contributions but predict different deposition velocities. Both stomatal and nonstomatal uptake contribute to the large model spread across sites. Our findings are the beginning of results from AQMEII4 Activity 2, which brings scientists who model air quality and dry deposition together with scientists who measure ozone fluxes to evaluate and improve dry deposition schemes in the chemical transport models used for research, planning, and regulatory purposes.

Dry deposition↗

Global Intercomparison of hyper-resolution ECOSTRESS coastal sea surface temperature measurements from the Space Station with VIIRS-N20

The ECOSTRESS multi-channel thermal radiometer on the Space Station has an unprecedented spatial resolution of 70 m and a return time of hours to 5 days. It resolves details of oceanographic features not detectable in imagery from MODIS or VIIRS, and has open-ocean coverage, unlike Landsat. We calibrated two years of ECOSTRESS sea surface temperature observations with L2 data from VIIRS-N20 (2019–2020) worldwide but especially focused on important upwelling systems currently undergoing climate change forcing. Unlike operational SST products from VIIRS-N20, the ECOSTRESS surface temperature algorithm does not use a regression approach to determine temperature, but solves a set of simultaneous equations based on first principles for both surface temperature and emissivity. We compared ECOSTRESS ocean temperatures to well-calibrated clear sky satellite measurements from VIIRS-N20. Data comparisons were constrained to those within 90 min of one another using co-located clear sky VIIRS and ECOSTRESS pixels. ECOSTRESS ocean temperatures have a consistent 1.01 ◦C negative bias relative to VIIRS-N20, although deviation in brightness temperatures within the 10.49 and 12.01 µm bands were much smaller. As an alternative, we compared the performance of NOAA, NASA, and U.S. Navy operational split-window SST regression algorithms taking into consideration the statistical limitations imposed by intrinsic SST spatial autocorrelation and applying corrections on brightness temperatures. We conclude that standard bias-correction methods using already validated and well-known algorithms can be applied to ECOSTRESS SST data, yielding highly accurate products of ultra-high spatial resolution for studies of biological and physical oceanography in a time when these are needed to properly evaluate regional and even local impacts of climate change.

Nicolas Weidberg↗

The Hourly GHI, DHI and DNI: Intercomparison of the CERES-Based Data and the NSRDB Data through Comparison with the Ground-Based BSRN Data

The NASA Clouds and the Earth’s Radiant Energy System (CERES) SYN1deg(Ed4.1) provides hourly global horizontal irradiance (GHI), diffuse horizontal irradiance (DHI) and direct horizontal irradiance (DirHI) at 1-degree latitude by 1-degree longitude resolution, and the time span is from March 2000 to near present. While the GHI agrees well with the ground-based Baseline Surface Radiation Network (BSRN) data, the DHI and DirHI are, respectively, positively and negatively biased against the BSRN data, and so is the direct normal irradiance (DNI) derived simply by dividing the DirHI by the cosine of the hourly solar zenith angle (SZA). We found that the biases tend to be well-defined functions of cos(SZA) and the cloud fraction (CLFR). We thus performed a bias-correction on the hourly DHI and DNI in the latitude-cos(SZA)-CLFR phase space, and therefrom, we derived the hourly global tilted irradiance (GTI) at a number of tilt angles using the isotropic diffuse irradiance model, and the results agree well with the GTI derived from the original BSRN near-instantaneous records. Meanwhile, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) has produced the National Solar Radiation Database (NSRDB) with finer spatiotemporal resolution using its Physical Solar Model (PSM) and surface-based measured data, model results and satellite-based data as inputs. Now the NSRDB data covers not only the United States and its neighboring regions, but Europe, Africa, Asia and Oceania. The available temporal resolutions are 5, 10, 15, 30 and 60 minutes and the spatial resolutions are 2, 4 and 10 km, depending on the selected region. In this presentation, we compare both the CERES-based and NSRDB GHI, DHI and DNI with their BSRN counterparts and show how finer spatial resolution may give us an advantage in data accuracy and usability.

Taiping Zhang↗