Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-1235
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2022-1235
30 Jan 2023
 | 30 Jan 2023

A Model Instability Issue in the NCEP Global Forecast System Version 16 and Potential Solutions

Xiaqiong Zhou and Hann-Ming Henry Juang

Abstract. The National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) Global Forecast System (GFS) version 16 encountered a few model instability failures during the pre-operational real-time parallel runs. The model forecasts failed when an extremely small thickness depth appeared at the model’s lowest layer when strong tropical cyclones made landfall. A quick solution was to increase the value of minimum thickness depth, an arbitrary parameter introduced to prevent the occurrence of extremely thin model layers, thus numerical instability. This modification solved the issue of the model's numerical instability with a small impact on forecast skills. It was adopted in GFSv16 to help implement this version of the operational system as planned.

Further investigation showed that the extremely small thickness depth occurred after the advection of geopotential heights at the interfaces of model layers. In the FV3 dynamic core, the horizontal winds at interfaces for advection are calculated from the layer-mean values by solving a tridiagonal system of equations in the entire vertical column based on the Parabolic Spline Method (PSM) with high-order boundary conditions (BCs). We replaced the high-order BCs with zero-gradient BCs for the interface-wind reconstruction. The impact of the zero-gradient BCs was investigated by performing sensitivity experiments with GFSv16, idealized mountain ridge tests, and the Rapid Refresh Forecast System (RRFS). The results showed that zero-gradient BCs can fundamentally solve the instability and have little impact on the forecast performances and the numerical solution of idealized mountain tests. This option has been added to FV3 and will be utilized in the GFS (GFSv17/GEFSv13) and RRFS for operations in 2024.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.

Journal article(s) based on this preprint

12 Jun 2023
A model instability issue in the National Centers for Environmental Prediction Global Forecast System version 16 and potential solutions
Xiaqiong Zhou and Hann-Ming Henry Juang
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 3263–3274, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3263-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3263-2023, 2023
Short summary
Xiaqiong Zhou and Hann-Ming Henry Juang

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
  • RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-1235', Anonymous Referee #1, 28 Feb 2023
    • AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Xiaqiong Zhou, 07 Mar 2023
  • RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-1235', Anonymous Referee #2, 04 Apr 2023
    • AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Xiaqiong Zhou, 13 Apr 2023
  • EC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-1235', Simon Unterstrasser, 11 Apr 2023
    • AC3: 'Reply on EC1', Xiaqiong Zhou, 13 Apr 2023

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
  • RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-1235', Anonymous Referee #1, 28 Feb 2023
    • AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Xiaqiong Zhou, 07 Mar 2023
  • RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-1235', Anonymous Referee #2, 04 Apr 2023
    • AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Xiaqiong Zhou, 13 Apr 2023
  • EC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-1235', Simon Unterstrasser, 11 Apr 2023
    • AC3: 'Reply on EC1', Xiaqiong Zhou, 13 Apr 2023

Peer review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision | EF: Editorial file upload
AR by Xiaqiong Zhou on behalf of the Authors (13 Apr 2023)  Author's response   Author's tracked changes   Manuscript 
ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (23 Apr 2023) by Simon Unterstrasser
AR by Xiaqiong Zhou on behalf of the Authors (30 Apr 2023)  Author's response   Author's tracked changes   Manuscript 
ED: Publish as is (15 May 2023) by Simon Unterstrasser
AR by Xiaqiong Zhou on behalf of the Authors (16 May 2023)  Manuscript 

Journal article(s) based on this preprint

12 Jun 2023
A model instability issue in the National Centers for Environmental Prediction Global Forecast System version 16 and potential solutions
Xiaqiong Zhou and Hann-Ming Henry Juang
Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 3263–3274, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3263-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-3263-2023, 2023
Short summary
Xiaqiong Zhou and Hann-Ming Henry Juang

Data sets

initial conditions EMC/NCEP/NOAA https://www.ftp.ncep.noaa.gov/data/nccf/com/gfs/prod/

Model code and software

The model code, compilation script, the scripts to run the model and the namelist setting are available EMC/NOAA https://github.com/NOAA-EMC/global-workflow/tree/gfs.v16.2.2

Xiaqiong Zhou and Hann-Ming Henry Juang

Viewed

Total article views: 438 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
332 88 18 438 1 1
  • HTML: 332
  • PDF: 88
  • XML: 18
  • Total: 438
  • BibTeX: 1
  • EndNote: 1
Views and downloads (calculated since 30 Jan 2023)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 30 Jan 2023)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 434 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 434 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 

Cited

Latest update: 03 Sep 2024
Download

The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.

Short summary
GFS is one of the most important operational global weather forecast systems at NCEP/EMC. The stability of GFS on model integration is as important as its forecast skills to deliver dependable real-time products to its users and downstream forecast systems. The model instability issue of GFSv16 caught our attention when several cases in its real-time parallel runs failed to finish 16-day forecasts. Potential solutions were proposed to fix the model instability issue.