不同初始场资料对台风“桑美”数值模拟的影响
|
摘要
以2006年超强台风"桑美"为个例,分别以GFS(全球预报系统)再分析资料和JMA(日本气象厅)区域客观再分析资料为初始场,利用中尺度模式WRF(Weather Research and Forecasting Model)对台风"桑美"进行高分辨率数值模拟,分析不同初始场资料对台风内部结构和移动路径的影响。结果表明:对于500hPa高度场和850hPa水汽、风场等预报,GFS再分析资料和JMA区域客观再分析资料均能较好地把握台风整体的流场形势。从700hPa风场、近地面风速、降水、雷达反射率、最小海平面气压和最大风速等模拟效果来看,JMA区域客观再分析资料均优于GFS再分析资料。对于台风路径的预报,前15h内JMA区域客观再分析资料较GFS再分析资料要好,而15h之后,以这两种资料作为初始场的台风预报路径与实况均有较大偏差。
The GFS(Global Forecasting System)reanalysis and JMA(Japan Meteorological Agency)reanalysis data are applied as the initial conditions for the simulation of the super Typhoon Saomai in 2006 respectively in this study.Based on the WRF(Weather Research and Forecasting)Model,numerical simulations were conducted to analyze the influence of different initial conditions on the internal structure and movement path for Saomai.The results show:For the forecasts of the 500 hPa geopotential field and the composite field(such as water vapor and temperature)of 850 hPa,GFS and JMA data are able to well grasp the overall flow field situation.JMA data are superior to GFS data for simulating fields such as the wind speed(700 hPa and near-surface),precipitation,radar reflectivity,minimum sea level pressure,and maximum wind speed.For the typhoon track forecast,JMA data in the first 15 hours are better than GFS data,but after 15 hours,both forecasting fields have a significant deviation.
The GFS(Global Forecasting System)reanalysis and JMA(Japan Meteorological Agency)reanalysis data are applied as the initial conditions for the simulation of the super Typhoon Saomai in 2006 respectively in this study.Based on the WRF(Weather Research and Forecasting)Model,numerical simulations were conducted to analyze the influence of different initial conditions on the internal structure and movement path for Saomai.The results show:For the forecasts of the 500 hPa geopotential field and the composite field(such as water vapor and temperature)of 850 hPa,GFS and JMA data are able to well grasp the overall flow field situation.JMA data are superior to GFS data for simulating fields such as the wind speed(700 hPa and near-surface),precipitation,radar reflectivity,minimum sea level pressure,and maximum wind speed.For the typhoon track forecast,JMA data in the first 15 hours are better than GFS data,but after 15 hours,both forecasting fields have a significant deviation.
引文
[1]郝鹏飞.我国台风灾害损失分类与估计[D].哈尔滨:哈尔滨工业大学,2008.
[2]刘青松.不同初始场条件对同化多普勒雷达资料效果的影响[C]∥创新驱动发展提高气象灾害防御能力---S12航空与航天气象技术研究与应用.中国气象学会,2013:8.
[3]李得勤,段云霞,周晓珊,等.两种初始场同化雷达资料对辽宁省一次暴雨预报的影响[J].高原气象,2015,34(4):1107-1118.
[4]孙逸涵,何晓凤,周荣卫.不同初始场近地层风速的预报效果检验[J].资源科学,2013,35(12):2481-2490.
[5]陈静.“5.7”广州突发特大暴雨中尺度集合预报初始场条件的影响分析[C]∥中国气象学会第34届中国气象学会年会S2副热带季风与极端天气气候事件论文集.中国气象学会,2017:1.
[6]公颖,李俊.不同初始场条件下AREM模式预报效果评估分析[J].气象科技,2009,37(1):1-8.
[7]Hu H,Zhang Q,Xie B,et al.Predictability of an Advection Fog Event over North China.Part I:Sensitivity to Initial Condition Differences[J].Monthly Weather Review,2014,142(5):1803-1822.
[8]沈菲菲,闵锦忠,陈鹏,等.多普勒雷达资料同化在台风“桑美”预报中的应用研究[J].海洋学报,2015,37(3):25-36.
[9]陈丽芳.相似台风“泰利”和“桑美”的数值模拟和对比分析[J].气象科技,2008,36(3):262-267.
[10]张宁.WRF模式云微物理参数化方案预报效果分析[J].气象与环境科学,2016,39(3):50-59.
[11]崔锦,周晓珊,阎琦,等.WRF模式不同微物理过程对东北降水相态预报的影响[J].气象与环境学报,2014,30(5):1-6.
[12]张果,薛海乐,徐晶,等.东亚区域陆面过程方案Noah和NoahMP的比较评估[J].气象,2016,42(9):1058-1068.
[13]饶莉娟.YSU与MYNN边界层方案的黄海海雾模拟效果比较[D].青岛:中国海洋大学,2014.
[14]王德立.积云对流参数化方案诊断和初步改进研究[D].北京:中国气象科学研究院,2012.
[2]刘青松.不同初始场条件对同化多普勒雷达资料效果的影响[C]∥创新驱动发展提高气象灾害防御能力---S12航空与航天气象技术研究与应用.中国气象学会,2013:8.
[3]李得勤,段云霞,周晓珊,等.两种初始场同化雷达资料对辽宁省一次暴雨预报的影响[J].高原气象,2015,34(4):1107-1118.
[4]孙逸涵,何晓凤,周荣卫.不同初始场近地层风速的预报效果检验[J].资源科学,2013,35(12):2481-2490.
[5]陈静.“5.7”广州突发特大暴雨中尺度集合预报初始场条件的影响分析[C]∥中国气象学会第34届中国气象学会年会S2副热带季风与极端天气气候事件论文集.中国气象学会,2017:1.
[6]公颖,李俊.不同初始场条件下AREM模式预报效果评估分析[J].气象科技,2009,37(1):1-8.
[7]Hu H,Zhang Q,Xie B,et al.Predictability of an Advection Fog Event over North China.Part I:Sensitivity to Initial Condition Differences[J].Monthly Weather Review,2014,142(5):1803-1822.
[8]沈菲菲,闵锦忠,陈鹏,等.多普勒雷达资料同化在台风“桑美”预报中的应用研究[J].海洋学报,2015,37(3):25-36.
[9]陈丽芳.相似台风“泰利”和“桑美”的数值模拟和对比分析[J].气象科技,2008,36(3):262-267.
[10]张宁.WRF模式云微物理参数化方案预报效果分析[J].气象与环境科学,2016,39(3):50-59.
[11]崔锦,周晓珊,阎琦,等.WRF模式不同微物理过程对东北降水相态预报的影响[J].气象与环境学报,2014,30(5):1-6.
[12]张果,薛海乐,徐晶,等.东亚区域陆面过程方案Noah和NoahMP的比较评估[J].气象,2016,42(9):1058-1068.
[13]饶莉娟.YSU与MYNN边界层方案的黄海海雾模拟效果比较[D].青岛:中国海洋大学,2014.
[14]王德立.积云对流参数化方案诊断和初步改进研究[D].北京:中国气象科学研究院,2012.