Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Evaluation of Three Numerical Weather Prediction Models for Short and Medium Range Agrohydrological Applications
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Evaluation of Three Numerical Weather Prediction Models for Short and Medium Range Agrohydrological Applications
Do you wish to request the book?
Evaluation of Three Numerical Weather Prediction Models for Short and Medium Range Agrohydrological Applications
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Evaluation of Three Numerical Weather Prediction Models for Short and Medium Range Agrohydrological Applications
2010
Overview
The skill and accuracy of the quantitative precipitation forecasts by CCAM, UM and NCEP-MRF models are verified using various statistical scores at the Mgeni catchment in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. The CCAM model is capable of identifying a rainfall event, but with a tendency of under-estimating its magnitude. The UM model is capable of distinguishing rainy days from non-rainy days, but with a significant over-estimation of rainfall amount. There is no significant difference between the 1 and 2 day lead time UM forecasts. Statistical comparisons show that there is an acceptable skill in the CCAM forecasts, but the forecast skill of the UM model is low and unreliable. The role of the initial hydrological conditions in affecting the accuracy of CCAM and UM streamflows forecasts was significant. The results show that the under-estimation of the CCAM forecasts was reduced from −44% to −10%, while the over-estimation in the UM forecasts was reduced from 291% to only 59% when the ACRU agrohydrological model was initialised with observed rainfalls up to the previous day at each forecast run within the study period. The combined use of the CCAM and UM models by a “weighted averaging” had little effect in improving the skill as it is overshadowed more by the over-estimation of the UM forecasts than the under-estimation of the CCAM forecasts. Results obtained for a continuous period of 92 days showed that the NCEP-MRF rainfall forecasts were significantly over-predicted. The NCEP-MRF rainfall forecast is found to be totally unskillful, although the skill was seen to slightly increase with decreasing lead time.
Publisher
Dordrecht : Springer Netherlands,Springer Netherlands,Springer,Springer Nature B.V
We currently cannot retrieve any items related to this title. Kindly check back at a later time.