the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
The three-dimensional structure of fronts in mid-latitude weather systems as represented by numerical weather prediction models
Andreas A. Beckert
Lea Eisenstein
Annika Oertel
Tim Hewson
George C. Craig
Marc Rautenhaus
Abstract. Atmospheric fronts are a widely used conceptual model in meteorology, most encountered as two-dimensional (2-D) front lines on surface analysis charts. The three-dimensional (3-D) dynamical structure of fronts has been studied in the literature by means of “standard” 2-D maps and cross-sections and is commonly sketched in 3-D illustrations of idealized weather systems in atmospheric science textbooks. However, only recently the feasibility of objective detection and visual analysis of 3-D frontal structures and their dynamics within numerical weather prediction (NWP) data has been proposed, and such approaches are not yet widely known in the atmospheric science community. In this article, we investigate the benefit of objective 3-D front detection for case studies of extratropical cyclones and for comparison of frontal structures between different NWP models. We build on a recent gradient-based detection approach, combined with modern 3-D interactive visual analysis techniques, and adapt it to handle data from state-of-the-art NWP models including those run at convection-permitting kilometer-scale resolution. The parameters of the detection method (including data smoothing and threshold parameters) are evaluated to yield physically meaningful structures. We illustrate the benefit of the method by presenting two case studies of frontal dynamics within mid-latitude cyclones. Examples include joint interactive visual analysis of 3-D fronts and warm conveyor belt (WCB) trajectories, and identification of the 3-D frontal structures characterising the different stages of a Shapiro-Keyser cyclogenesis event. The 3-D frontal structures show agreement with 2-D fronts from surface analysis charts and augment the surface charts by providing additional pertinent information in the vertical dimension. A second application illustrates the relation between convection and 3-D cold front structure by comparing data from simulations with parameterised and explicit convection. Finally, we consider “secondary fronts” that commonly appear in UK Met Office surface analysis charts. Examination of a case study shows that for this event the secondary front is not a temperature-dominated but a humidity-dominated feature. We argue that the presented approach has great potential to be beneficial for more complex studies of atmospheric dynamics and for operational weather forecasting.
Andreas A. Beckert et al.
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
CEC1: 'Comment on gmd-2022-278', Juan Antonio Añel, 10 Mar 2023
Dear authors,Unfortunately, after checking your manuscript, it has come to our attention that it does not comply with our "Code and Data Policy".https://www.geoscientific-model-development.net/policies/code_and_data_policy.htmlYou have archived your code on GitLab. However, GitLab is not an acceptable repository. You must store the code used in your manuscript in other long-term archival alternatives, such as Zenodo, PANGAEA, etc.Therefore, you must reply to this comment with the relevant information (link and DOI) for the new repositories, as we request that you make it already available before submission and, of course, before the Discussions stage.Also, please, include in the repository the relevant primary input/output data for your manuscript and the documentation you currently store in another two repositories that are not acceptable either.Moreover, you must include in a potentially revised version of your manuscript the modified 'Code and Data Availability' section, with the DOI of the code (and another DOI for the dataset if necessary).Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Exec. EditorCitation: https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2022-278-CEC1 -
RC1: 'Comment on gmd-2022-278', Anonymous Referee #1, 21 Mar 2023
Re-Review of "The three-dimensional structure of fronts in mid-latitude weather systems as represented by numerical weather prediction models"
Note for context: my review of the original submission to Weather and Climate Dynamics can be found under https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-2022-36-RC1 .
By chosing GMD over WCD and restructuring the manuscript, the authors have successfully mitigated my concerns with the original submission. Specifically, it has become more clear in which respects the authors improve the front detection beyond Kern et al. (2019).
I personally find it a pity that the authors chose to go this route rather than applying the new methodology in more detailled meteorological analyses that would have fit into WCD. But this is certainly not a detriment for the present submission, which I am happy to endorse with some few minor revisions. And I would be happy to see an application of this method published in WCD at some point.
Minor issues
L282-285: Not quite true, because there is no equivalent mapping of theta_e gradients to theta_w gradients. Thus, any filtering threshold applied to a derivative of the thermal parameter will yield (unavoidable) differences in detections between theta_e and theta_w.
L343-349: I suggest to remove the repetitition. The method description with the same info in more detail is only a page or two above.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2022-278-RC1 -
RC2: 'Comment on gmd-2022-278', Anonymous Referee #2, 03 Apr 2023
This paper documents the use of a method of identifying atmospheric fronts at different levels in the atmosphere along with 3-D visualisation to investigate features of these systems. The topic of the paper seems very relevant to GMD. The editor has raised issues with the code/data availability, but I trust these will be resolved. I have only a few minor comments. I really enjoyed looking at the 3-D images of the frontal structures and believe this does add to the interpretation of frontal features and associated weather.
- I’m slightly unsure of the title, since it suggests there is some model evaluation (“as represented by”). Could this be changed to just “in”?
- Section 2.1 - is there an ideal vertical resolution to use? Or a minimum vertical resolution?
- Line 158: “at both THE cold and warm SIDES…”
- Line 168: Could this be made clearer with “The filter based on the average frontal strength along the normal curve…”?
- Line 341: I wonder if this additional feature is important - is there any surface weather associated with the feature?
- Line 403: “purpose”, I think should maybe be “propose”.
- Line 449: “choose” should be replaced with “have” since they are not aware.
- Line 527: “idealized” - do you mean “conceptual” model?
- Line 541: I think the Figure 4 reference should be for Figure 11.
- Line 583: “the secondary front detected….” Would be clearer if “…in theta w” was added.
- Line 608: “atmosphere” -> “atmospheric”.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2022-278-RC2 -
AC1: 'Response to the two anonymous referees, the editors, and the MS record notification.', Andreas Beckert, 08 May 2023
We would like to thank both anonymous referees and the editors for taking the time to review our manuscript and for providing us with valuable feedback. We greatly appreciate your help in improving our work on the three-dimensional structure of fronts in mid-latitude weather systems. We have revised the article following your suggestions. Please see the attached document for our detailed response.
Andreas A. Beckert et al.
Model code and software
Met.3D - Code Repository Fronts Marc Rautenhaus, Andreas A. Beckert et al. https://gitlab.com/wxmetvis/met.3d/-/tree/devel_fronts
Video supplement
Interactive front analysis of storm Friederike using the open-source meteorological 3-D visualization framework "Met. 3D" Andreas A. Beckert, Lea Eisenstein, Annika Oertel, Tim Hewson, George C. Craig, Marc Rautenhaus https://doi.org/10.5446/57944
Comparison of objectively detected 3-D fronts in wet-bulb potential temperature and potential temperature of Friederike on 18 January 2018, 12:00 UTC Andreas A. Beckert, Lea Eisenstein, Annika Oertel, Tim Hewson, George C. Craig, Marc Rautenhaus https://doi.org/10.5446/57600
Development of 3-D frontal structures, jet stream and WCB trajectories of Vladiana Andreas A. Beckert, Lea Eisenstein, Annika Oertel, Tim Hewson, George C. Craig, Marc Rautenhaus https://doi.org/10.5446/57570
Andreas A. Beckert et al.
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
357 | 141 | 13 | 511 | 8 | 2 |
- HTML: 357
- PDF: 141
- XML: 13
- Total: 511
- BibTeX: 8
- EndNote: 2
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1