Zhuotong Nan ([email protected])

Stage II

Be produced directly from the real-time gauge and WSR-88D radar data received at NCEP.

raingauges:

• from ~1450 ASOS sites from near-real time METAR file
• and from ~5500 HADS automated gauge reports via the GEOS data Collection Platform.

Radar:

• Hourly real-time Digital Precipitation Arrays (DPAs) from 140 ConUS WSR-88D radar sites.

The primary input to the ETA/EDAS precipitation assimilation before 2003.

Stage IV

A mosaic of regional multi-sensor analysis produced by NWS River Forecast Centers (RFCs) and benefits from the RFCs’ manual quality control step

mosaicked from the regional multi-sensor 1h and 6h analyses produced by the 12 ConUS RFCs.

The primary input to the ETA/EDAS precipitation assimilation after 2003. Stage II is only used when Stage IV is unavailable.

In summary,

Since Stage IV benefits from manual QC at the local RFCs, it is generally better than Stage II, which has no manual QC. There are a number of other issues for your consideration:

1. Coverage period: Stage II began to be archived at NCAR on 1 May 1996. Stage IV did not began to be archived until 1 Jan 2002. (NOTE: we have data from 1997 on for OHIO river basin. I guess this statement is for entire continuous continental, rather than for an individual RFC. -Zhuotong)

2. Do you need hourly or 6-hourly analysis? For 6-hourlies, Stage IV is the one to use (if you don’t need the pre-2002 data). Stage IV hourlies have some coverage problem since we do not receive the local analyses from all the RFCs for all hours.

3. How soon do you need the analysis to be available? Stage II hourly analysis is made at 35 minutes after the top of the hour, then re-made twice at 6 hours and 18 hours later. Stage VI runs each hour at approximately 35 minutes past the top of the hour.

4. If I choose Stage II, which type should I use? We recommend the multi-sensor analysis with the exception of early spring – early Aug 2000, when the radar coverage was bad. You might want to use the gauge-only analysis for that time period.

Validation examples:

figure 1 24 hour precipitation accumulative amount on OCT 10, 2004, Stage II (left) and Stage IV (right).

figure 2 Left: Stage II; Right: Stage VI. On Jun 28 2005. Here we can see the variance between them.

References:

1. https://nanzt.info/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/stage2-4.19hydro.pdf
2. http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/ylin/pcpanl/QandA/
3. http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/ylin/pcpverif/daily/

南卓铜([email protected])

西部数据中心目前提供的网筝驱动程序v2（20060927）安装后不能正常卸载。我们已经向软件提供商反映此问题。这些提供了一个临时的解决方案。

1. 在开始菜单，找到“卸载网筝NK-800”，点击“属性”，copy目标里的内容。

2. 找到从westdc上下载来的驱动文件，如果是压缩包，请解压缩到一个目录，比如c:tempnk800目录下。这个路径以下有用。

3. 打开command窗口（开始->运行，键入cmd），将步骤1里目标内容，粘贴到命令行下（右键，粘贴），如下：

移动鼠标，更改

“C:Program FilesIn
stallShield Installation Information{9147E0F5-074A-4D73-B8EA-63FDE7C70330}Setu
p.exe”　（注意，{}内的可能不一样）

为步骤2找到的位置（该目录下应该有原始的Setup.exe等文件）。我这里是，

“c:tempnk800Setup.exe”

现在完整命令如下所示，

C:WINDOWSsystem32RunDll32.exe C:PROGRA
~1COMMON~1INSTAL~1engine6INTEL3~1Ctor.dll,LaunchSetup “c:tempnk800Setu
p.exe”  -uninst  -f

4. 运行。按照出现的图形界面提示，完成卸载。

在Group meeting上给大家演示用multifractal＋wavelet的方法做time-space downscaling。讲的稀里糊涂，听的也是云里雾里。其实在看的时候就有好多问题发现，但没有时间进一步去看相关文献。L老师提的问题又太过涉及公式本身。
不过这个paper proposed的方法估计本身也有问题，尽管结论说downscale还不错。但作者在此文发表后的后续工作又重新time和space分开来做downscaling了，估计也是意识到time和space结合在一起很难找到完美的方法。

忙了一周，终于将2个基金07年度进展报告按时提交上去了，这边的L老板已经对我very
disappointed了，如果花的时候再多一点，估计要抓狂了。在美国做研究压力真是很大
的，有句老话说的说错，万恶的资本主义国家里，雇主都使劲剥削着受雇人员，科研行
当的老板们也使劲push下面的人干活，每周要meeting一次，每次要一两个小时，每周
还要有个group meeting，讨论进展。恨不得大家7/24的干活，而不必付更多的工资。
不过好在以后国内的事象这样需要比较长时间来做的，不会常出现，这边的工作还可以
比较focused了。我还是比较喜欢concentrate on到某件事情，深入做些东西。08年也
应该多发点paper了，博士毕业后基本上是混过来的，事干了不少（我相信同事们都还
是看到的），但见成绩的东西都没有出来，自己也郁闷。这边的事情怎么说还是比较有
challenge的，老板虽然比较tough，但学术水平还是比较high的，在这个小圈子里还是
有点名气。
(不要嘲笑我写的夹杂英文了，现在还处在英语加强阶段，这样整会有帮助的了。)