Welcome

Welcome to the RTMA/URMA VLab community!

The purpose of this community is to facilitate feedback and discussion on the RTMA/URMA system. 

Meeting notes are available under the Google Drive Folder linked above.

To learn more about our next upgrade, see the asset publication below.

Use the System Overview to learn more about the system in general.

Use the forum to ask questions about the system and join the discussion with other users and the development team. 

Note that there are two forums: one for precipitation issues and one for all other variables.

You can post to the precip issues forum by sending an email to qpe.rtma.urma.feedback.vlab@noaa.gov.  For all other issues, you can post by sending an email to rtma.feedback.vlab@noaa.gov.  Please note that you must have a user account to post to the forum.  If you do not have an account, please contact matthew.t.morris@noaa.gov.

We recently added the ability for NWS Regional or WFO personnel to request that stations be removed from the analysis.  To access this, click on the "Station Reject Lists and Requests" tab.

There has been recent interest in knowing exact station locations, especially those of METAR sites.  Our METAR information table is under the "METAR Location Info" tab.

Users may also be interested in the National Blend of Models VLab community.

We appreciate any feedback on how this page or community could be improved.  You can submit such feedback via the above email handle or forum.

 

Forums

Back

Horribly Hot Mesonet Degradation of RTMA/URMA/NBM/HeatRisk

RSS (Opens New Window)(Opens New Window)
KM
Kristian Mattarochia, modified 10 Months ago.

Horribly Hot Mesonet Degradation of RTMA/URMA/NBM/HeatRisk

Youngling Posts: 5 Join Date: 4/7/16 Recent Posts
Hello,

I just submitted several stations to be removed from the WFO HNX office.

However, I'm not sure if that will cure the problem. 

Look at the MaxT image below for today. These spots on our grid should be upper 90s at best, they are about 15F too warm. This is also polluting the HeatRisk. I believe that station TSHC1 (38.49, -118.83) is leading to this horrible issue but I'm not sure. We've had issues with this station TSHC1 (Ash Mountain) before, and it is in the list of blacklisted stations. Could you provide any further insight?

Thank you. 




--
Kris Mattarochia (he/him/his)
Science and Operations Officer 
National Weather Service San Joaquin Valley - HNX
Hanford, CA
(559) 584-0583 x224

Attachments:

Attachment

MM
Matthew Morris, modified 10 Months ago.

RE: Horribly Hot Mesonet Degradation of RTMA/URMA/NBM/HeatRisk

Youngling Posts: 169 Join Date: 12/6/17 Recent Posts
Hi Kris,

The requested stations have been added to the SDM reject list, effective with today's 12Z URMA.

The NBM bias corrects directly to select observations (e.g., METAR, RAWS) at the corresponding grid point.  This process is likely responsible for the hot pixels in the attached figure.  I would suggest reaching out to the NBM team for assistance with identifying the problematic station(s).  We can then have them removed on our end, which should also remove them from the bias correction.

TSHC1 was added to the reject list in July 2019.  Based on this, the station should not be used in the NBM bias correction.

Thanks,
Matt

On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 9:26 AM VLab Notifications <VLab.Notifications@noaa.gov> wrote:
Hello,

I just submitted several stations to be removed from the WFO HNX office.

However, I'm not sure if that will cure the problem. 

Look at the MaxT image below for today. These spots on our grid should be upper 90s at best, they are about 15F too warm. This is also polluting the HeatRisk. I believe that station TSHC1 (38.49, -118.83) is leading to this horrible issue but I'm not sure. We've had issues with this station TSHC1 (Ash Mountain) before, and it is in the list of blacklisted stations. Could you provide any further insight?

Thank you. 




--
Kris Mattarochia (he/him/his)
Science and Operations Officer 
National Weather Service San Joaquin Valley - HNX
Hanford, CA
(559) 584-0583 x224


--
Kristian Mattarochia RTMA/URMA Discussion Group Virtual Lab Forum http://vlab.noaa.gov/web/715073/home/-/message_boards/view_message/37879598VLab.Notifications@noaa.gov


--
Matthew Morris
SAIC at NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMC
5830 University Research Ct., Rm. 2038
College Park, MD 20740
301-683-3758
MM
Matthew Morris, modified 9 Months ago.

RE: Horribly Hot Mesonet Degradation of RTMA/URMA/NBM/HeatRisk

Youngling Posts: 169 Join Date: 12/6/17 Recent Posts
Hi Kris,

Upon further examination, this behavior can be traced back to two observations being assimilated in URMA.  Please see the attached slide deck for our findings:
First, recall that the maxT background for URMA is derived by taking the maximum of the hourly background and analysis fields valid 7A-7P LST.  For June 13th, this corresponds to 14Z June 13th through 02Z June 14th.  The maxT background and analysis for this particular case are shown on slide 3.  The pixel in question has a background value between 116 and 120F, which is cooled only slightly in the analysis to 112 to 116F.

A review of the hourly temperature background and analysis fields traced this hot pixel to the 22Z analysis (see slide 7).

A bias correction technique is applied to the first guess fields for the URMA 2-m temperature analyses.  The bias correction figure valid 22Z June 13th is shown on slide 10.  There is a positive adjustment of ~7-8 degrees Celsius at the pixel in question.  It appears that two observations are responsible for this behavior.  Slides 11-12 show the KML file output for the same cycle.  Note: The "BG VALUE" listed in the screenshots is valid after the bias correction has been applied, so these observations were having a considerable impact on the analyses.

You can view the recent evolution of the bias correction valid at 22Z on slides 13-17.  Since flagging KMPC1 on June 14th, it appears that the situation has improved somewhat, as the station's influence on the bias correction will decrease over time.  However, there is likely still some influence from the nearby station (EKIC1).  With your approval, we would like to add this station to the reject list for temperature observations.

Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention, and please let us know if you have any questions/comments.

Thanks,
Matt

On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 3:14 PM Matthew Morris - NOAA Affiliate <matthew.t.morris@noaa.gov> wrote:
Hi Kris,

The requested stations have been added to the SDM reject list, effective with today's 12Z URMA.

The NBM bias corrects directly to select observations (e.g., METAR, RAWS) at the corresponding grid point.  This process is likely responsible for the hot pixels in the attached figure.  I would suggest reaching out to the NBM team for assistance with identifying the problematic station(s).  We can then have them removed on our end, which should also remove them from the bias correction.

TSHC1 was added to the reject list in July 2019.  Based on this, the station should not be used in the NBM bias correction.

Thanks,
Matt

On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 9:26 AM VLab Notifications <VLab.Notifications@noaa.gov> wrote:
Hello,

I just submitted several stations to be removed from the WFO HNX office.

However, I'm not sure if that will cure the problem. 

Look at the MaxT image below for today. These spots on our grid should be upper 90s at best, they are about 15F too warm. This is also polluting the HeatRisk. I believe that station TSHC1 (38.49, -118.83) is leading to this horrible issue but I'm not sure. We've had issues with this station TSHC1 (Ash Mountain) before, and it is in the list of blacklisted stations. Could you provide any further insight?

Thank you. 




--
Kris Mattarochia (he/him/his)
Science and Operations Officer 
National Weather Service San Joaquin Valley - HNX
Hanford, CA
(559) 584-0583 x224


--
Kristian Mattarochia RTMA/URMA Discussion Group Virtual Lab Forum http://vlab.noaa.gov/web/715073/home/-/message_boards/view_message/37879598VLab.Notifications@noaa.gov


--
Matthew Morris
SAIC at NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMC
5830 University Research Ct., Rm. 2038
College Park, MD 20740
301-683-3758


--
Matthew Morris
SAIC at NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMC
5830 University Research Ct., Rm. 2038
College Park, MD 20740
301-683-3758
KM
Kristian Mattarochia, modified 9 Months ago.

RE: Horribly Hot Mesonet Degradation of RTMA/URMA/NBM/HeatRisk

Youngling Posts: 5 Join Date: 4/7/16 Recent Posts
Thanks for the quick response. Feel free to add that station. 

On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 8:36 AM Matthew Morris - NOAA Affiliate <matthew.t.morris@noaa.gov> wrote:
Hi Kris,

Upon further examination, this behavior can be traced back to two observations being assimilated in URMA.  Please see the attached slide deck for our findings:
First, recall that the maxT background for URMA is derived by taking the maximum of the hourly background and analysis fields valid 7A-7P LST.  For June 13th, this corresponds to 14Z June 13th through 02Z June 14th.  The maxT background and analysis for this particular case are shown on slide 3.  The pixel in question has a background value between 116 and 120F, which is cooled only slightly in the analysis to 112 to 116F.

A review of the hourly temperature background and analysis fields traced this hot pixel to the 22Z analysis (see slide 7).

A bias correction technique is applied to the first guess fields for the URMA 2-m temperature analyses.  The bias correction figure valid 22Z June 13th is shown on slide 10.  There is a positive adjustment of ~7-8 degrees Celsius at the pixel in question.  It appears that two observations are responsible for this behavior.  Slides 11-12 show the KML file output for the same cycle.  Note: The "BG VALUE" listed in the screenshots is valid after the bias correction has been applied, so these observations were having a considerable impact on the analyses.

You can view the recent evolution of the bias correction valid at 22Z on slides 13-17.  Since flagging KMPC1 on June 14th, it appears that the situation has improved somewhat, as the station's influence on the bias correction will decrease over time.  However, there is likely still some influence from the nearby station (EKIC1).  With your approval, we would like to add this station to the reject list for temperature observations.

Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention, and please let us know if you have any questions/comments.

Thanks,
Matt

On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 3:14 PM Matthew Morris - NOAA Affiliate <matthew.t.morris@noaa.gov> wrote:
Hi Kris,

The requested stations have been added to the SDM reject list, effective with today's 12Z URMA.

The NBM bias corrects directly to select observations (e.g., METAR, RAWS) at the corresponding grid point.  This process is likely responsible for the hot pixels in the attached figure.  I would suggest reaching out to the NBM team for assistance with identifying the problematic station(s).  We can then have them removed on our end, which should also remove them from the bias correction.

TSHC1 was added to the reject list in July 2019.  Based on this, the station should not be used in the NBM bias correction.

Thanks,
Matt

On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 9:26 AM VLab Notifications <VLab.Notifications@noaa.gov> wrote:
Hello,

I just submitted several stations to be removed from the WFO HNX office.

However, I'm not sure if that will cure the problem. 

Look at the MaxT image below for today. These spots on our grid should be upper 90s at best, they are about 15F too warm. This is also polluting the HeatRisk. I believe that station TSHC1 (38.49, -118.83) is leading to this horrible issue but I'm not sure. We've had issues with this station TSHC1 (Ash Mountain) before, and it is in the list of blacklisted stations. Could you provide any further insight?

Thank you. 




--
Kris Mattarochia (he/him/his)
Science and Operations Officer 
National Weather Service San Joaquin Valley - HNX
Hanford, CA
(559) 584-0583 x224


--
Kristian Mattarochia RTMA/URMA Discussion Group Virtual Lab Forum http://vlab.noaa.gov/web/715073/home/-/message_boards/view_message/37879598VLab.Notifications@noaa.gov


--
Matthew Morris
SAIC at NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMC
5830 University Research Ct., Rm. 2038
College Park, MD 20740
301-683-3758


--
Matthew Morris
SAIC at NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMC
5830 University Research Ct., Rm. 2038
College Park, MD 20740
301-683-3758


--
Kris Mattarochia (he/him/his)
Science and Operations Officer 
National Weather Service San Joaquin Valley - HNX
Hanford, CA
(559) 584-0583 x224

MM
Matthew Morris, modified 9 Months ago.

RE: Horribly Hot Mesonet Degradation of RTMA/URMA/NBM/HeatRisk

Youngling Posts: 169 Join Date: 12/6/17 Recent Posts
Hi Kris,

EKIC1 has been added to the reject list for temperature, effective with today's 12Z URMA.

Thanks,
Matt

On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 11:38 AM Kristian Mattarochia - NOAA Federal <kristian.mattarochia@noaa.gov> wrote:
Thanks for the quick response. Feel free to add that station. 

On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 8:36 AM Matthew Morris - NOAA Affiliate <matthew.t.morris@noaa.gov> wrote:
Hi Kris,

Upon further examination, this behavior can be traced back to two observations being assimilated in URMA.  Please see the attached slide deck for our findings:
First, recall that the maxT background for URMA is derived by taking the maximum of the hourly background and analysis fields valid 7A-7P LST.  For June 13th, this corresponds to 14Z June 13th through 02Z June 14th.  The maxT background and analysis for this particular case are shown on slide 3.  The pixel in question has a background value between 116 and 120F, which is cooled only slightly in the analysis to 112 to 116F.

A review of the hourly temperature background and analysis fields traced this hot pixel to the 22Z analysis (see slide 7).

A bias correction technique is applied to the first guess fields for the URMA 2-m temperature analyses.  The bias correction figure valid 22Z June 13th is shown on slide 10.  There is a positive adjustment of ~7-8 degrees Celsius at the pixel in question.  It appears that two observations are responsible for this behavior.  Slides 11-12 show the KML file output for the same cycle.  Note: The "BG VALUE" listed in the screenshots is valid after the bias correction has been applied, so these observations were having a considerable impact on the analyses.

You can view the recent evolution of the bias correction valid at 22Z on slides 13-17.  Since flagging KMPC1 on June 14th, it appears that the situation has improved somewhat, as the station's influence on the bias correction will decrease over time.  However, there is likely still some influence from the nearby station (EKIC1).  With your approval, we would like to add this station to the reject list for temperature observations.

Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention, and please let us know if you have any questions/comments.

Thanks,
Matt

On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 3:14 PM Matthew Morris - NOAA Affiliate <matthew.t.morris@noaa.gov> wrote:
Hi Kris,

The requested stations have been added to the SDM reject list, effective with today's 12Z URMA.

The NBM bias corrects directly to select observations (e.g., METAR, RAWS) at the corresponding grid point.  This process is likely responsible for the hot pixels in the attached figure.  I would suggest reaching out to the NBM team for assistance with identifying the problematic station(s).  We can then have them removed on our end, which should also remove them from the bias correction.

TSHC1 was added to the reject list in July 2019.  Based on this, the station should not be used in the NBM bias correction.

Thanks,
Matt

On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 9:26 AM VLab Notifications <VLab.Notifications@noaa.gov> wrote:
Hello,

I just submitted several stations to be removed from the WFO HNX office.

However, I'm not sure if that will cure the problem. 

Look at the MaxT image below for today. These spots on our grid should be upper 90s at best, they are about 15F too warm. This is also polluting the HeatRisk. I believe that station TSHC1 (38.49, -118.83) is leading to this horrible issue but I'm not sure. We've had issues with this station TSHC1 (Ash Mountain) before, and it is in the list of blacklisted stations. Could you provide any further insight?

Thank you. 




--
Kris Mattarochia (he/him/his)
Science and Operations Officer 
National Weather Service San Joaquin Valley - HNX
Hanford, CA
(559) 584-0583 x224


--
Kristian Mattarochia RTMA/URMA Discussion Group Virtual Lab Forum http://vlab.noaa.gov/web/715073/home/-/message_boards/view_message/37879598VLab.Notifications@noaa.gov


--
Matthew Morris
SAIC at NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMC
5830 University Research Ct., Rm. 2038
College Park, MD 20740
301-683-3758


--
Matthew Morris
SAIC at NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMC
5830 University Research Ct., Rm. 2038
College Park, MD 20740
301-683-3758


--
Kris Mattarochia (he/him/his)
Science and Operations Officer 
National Weather Service San Joaquin Valley - HNX
Hanford, CA
(559) 584-0583 x224



--
Matthew Morris
SAIC at NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMC
5830 University Research Ct., Rm. 2038
College Park, MD 20740
301-683-3758

Bookmarks

Info Icon Descriptive
  • Items Selected
Info Recycle Bin

Home

Folder
# of Items

3

There are no bookmarks in this folder.