Radar data assimilation with WRF 4D-Var. Part II: Comparison with 3D-Var for a squall line over the U.S. Great Plains

The Weather Research and Forecasting Model (WRF) four-dimensional variational data assimilation (4D-Var) system described in Part I of this study is compared with its corresponding three-dimensional variational data assimilation (3D-Var) system using a Great Plains squall line observed during the International H2O Project. Two 3D-Var schemes are used in the comparison: a standard 3D-Var radar data assimilation (DA) that is the same as the 4D-Var except for the exclusion of the constraining dynamical model and an enhanced 3D-Var that includes a scheme to assimilate an estimated in-cloud humidity field. The comparison is made by verifying their skills in 0–6-h quantitative precipitation forecast (QPF) against stage-IV analysis, as well as in wind forecasts against radial velocity observations. The relative impacts of assimilating radial velocity and reflectivity on QPF are also compared between the 4D-Var and 3D-Var by conducting data-denial experiments. The results indicate that 4D-Var substantially improves the QPF skill over the standard 3D-Var for the entire 6-h forecast range and over the enhanced 3D-Var for most forecast hours. Radial velocity has a larger impact relative to reflectivity in 4D-Var than in 3D-Var in the first 3 h because of a quicker precipitation spinup. The analyses and forecasts from the 4D-Var and 3D-Var schemes are further compared by examining the meridional wind, horizontal convergence, low-level cold pool, and midlevel temperature perturbation, using analyses from the Variational Doppler Radar Analysis System (VDRAS) as references. The diagnoses of these fields suggest that the 4D-Var analyzes the low-level cold pool, its leading edge convergence, and midlevel latent heating in closer resemblance to the VDRAS analyses than the 3D-Var schemes.