设为首页
加入收藏
Comparative Analysis on Tropical Cyclone Numerical Forecast Errors of T213 and T639 Models
-
摘要: 应用国家气象中心全球谱模式T213L31(简称T213) 及其升级版本T639L60(简称T639) 对2009—2010年西北太平洋热带气旋数值预报的结果进行对比。结果表明：T213与T639模式24～120 h预报平均距离误差基本相近，但由于T639模式分辨率较高，T639模式的热带气旋强度预报明显好于T213模式。从分类误差来看，T639模式对于西北行登陆及转向热带气旋的路径预报好于T213模式，但对西行及北上热带气旋预报误差偏大。对于异常路径热带气旋预报，T639模式能较好预报环流形势的突然调整，对路径突变的热带气旋预报比T213模式有明显优势；从登陆类热带气旋预报的移向误差来看，T213模式存在东北偏北向系统性偏差，T639模式存在东北偏东向系统性偏差。Abstract: The vortex initialization scheme used in the operational global model T213L31 for tropical cyclone (TC) track prediction is implemented in higher resolution global spectral model T639L60 in 2009, which is the new generation model for medium range forecast in National Meteorological Center. The vortex initialization scheme used in T213L31 typhoon model includes three parts. One part processes the initial vortex formation using bogus vortex technique when TC being first named in the northwest Pacific Ocean, another part relocates the vortex in the following backgrounds according to the correct position analyzed by the forecasters, and the third part modifies the intensity according to the maximum wind or the minimum sea level pressure analyzed by the forecasters. The comparative analysis of the performance of TC track forecasts for T639L60 and T213L31 typhoon models is carried out using the TC track data from 2009 to 2010 in order to evaluate the ability of TC track prediction of T639L60. The results show that the mean distance errors of T213L31 and T639L61 are close within 72 h forecast, but for 96 h and 120 h forecasts, T639L61 brings a little bit larger errors. The errors of T213L31 and T639L61 for No.0907—No.0922 and No.1001—No.1014 TCs are 120.2 km and 124.8 km (24 h), 211 km and 203.8 km (48 h), 314.7 km and 320.7 km (72 h), 416.3 km and 436.6 km (96 h), 556.3 km and 602.1 km (120 h). The intensity errors of T639L60 are much smaller than those of T213L31 because of the higher resolution of T639L60. The track errors are also analyzed by group all the TCs into five different types of tracks: North-westward moving, northward moving, westward moving, recurvature and unusual track TCs. The results show that T639L60 has better performance for the north-westward moving and recurvature TCs than T213L31, but the track errors are much larger for the northward moving TCs and west moving TCs especially the west moving TCs in the South China Sea. For abnormal track TC forecasts, T639L60 can well forecast the adjustment of the environmental flow and has much smaller mean track errors than T213L31. For the systematic direction errors of landing TC forecasts, T213L31 has the systematic bias of northeast-north and T639L60 has the systematic bias of northeast-east.
-
Key words:
- T213L31;
- T639L60;
- track forecast comparison;
- intensity forecast comparison
-
图 1 T213与T639模式不同时效热带气旋路径预报误差
Fig. 1 The mean track errors for tropical cyclones of T213 and T639
图 2 T213与T639模式不同预报时效的热带气旋平均强度误差
Fig. 2 The mean intensity errors for tropical cyclones of T213 and T639
图 4 T213与T639模式对异常路径热带气旋路径及强度预报的平均误差
Fig. 4 Mean errors of track and intensity for abnormal track tropical cyclones of T213 and T639
图 5 T213与T639模式在超强台风鲇鱼 (1013) 不同预报时效路径预报误差对比
Fig. 5 The mean track errors in different period of validity for super typhoon Megi (1013) of T213 and T639
表 1 T213与T639模式对各类路径热带气旋在不同预报时效的平均距离误差 (单位:km)
Table 1 The mean track errors for different kinds of tropical cyclones of T213 and T639(unit:km)
预报时效/h 西行路径 西行路径 转向路径 北上路径 异常路径 T213 T639 T213 T639 T213 T639 T213 T639 T213 T639 24 156.7 116.8 131.9 130.4 127.0 118.6 118.3 149.3 94.6 107.6 48 252.8 168.4 235.8 208.5 258.3 188.2 210.6 272.2 156.7 176.0 72 399.2 237.2 322.3 378.6 327.5 269.8 340.6 482.6 243.7 253.0 96 290.3 309.9 399.5 509.1 432.1 426.8 453.6 729.9 362.7 301.9 120 514.9 635.9 651.9 744.4 450.0 1083.9 553.8 371.8 
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] 管成功, 陈起英, 佟华, 等.T639L60全球中期预报系统预报试验和性能评估.气象, 2008, 34(6):11-16. doi: 10.7519/j.issn.1000-0526.2008.06.002 [2] Kurihara Y, Bender M A, Rosss R J. A initialization scheme of hurricane model by vortex specification. Mon Wea Rev, 1993, 121: 2030-2045. doi: 10.1175/1520-0493(1993)121<2030:AISOHM>2.0.CO;2 [3] Kurihara Y, Bender M A. Improvements in the GFDL hurricane prediction system. Mon Wea Rev, 1995, 123: 2791-2801. doi: 10.1175/1520-0493(1995)123<2791:IITGHP>2.0.CO;2 [4] 闫敬华, 丁伟钰, 徐建平."非bogus初值"热带气旋数值预报及其性能.应用气象学报, 2004, 15(5):513-522. http://qikan.camscma.cn/jams/ch/reader/view_abstract.aspx?file_no=20040564&flag=1 [5] 瞿安祥, 麻素红.非对称台风bogus方案设计和初步试验.应用气象学报, 2007, 18(3):380-387. http://qikan.camscma.cn/jams/ch/reader/view_abstract.aspx?file_no=20070361&flag=1 [6] 瞿安祥, 麻素红, Liu Qingfu, 等.全球数值模式中的台风初始化Ⅰ:方案设计.气象学报, 2009, 67(5):716-726. doi: 10.11676/qxxb2009.072 [7] 瞿安祥, 麻素红, 李娟, 等.全球数值模式中的台风初始化Ⅱ:业务应用.气象学报, 2009, 67(5):727-735. doi: 10.11676/qxxb2009.073 [8] 陈联寿, 徐祥德, 罗哲贤, 等.热带气旋动力学引论.北京:气象出版社, 2002:37-41. [9] 牛若芸.2008年12月至2009年2月T639与ECMWF及日本模式中期预报性能检验.气象, 2009, 35(5):112-119. doi: 10.7519/j.issn.1000-0526.2009.05.016 [10] 麻素红, 瞿安祥, 张眙.台风路径数值预报模式的并行化及路径预报误差分析.应用气象学报, 2004, 15(3):322-328. http://qikan.camscma.cn/jams/ch/reader/view_abstract.aspx?file_no=20040341&flag=1 [11] 吴俞, 麻素红, 肖天贵, 等.T213L31模式热带气旋路径数值预报误差分析.应用气象学报, 2011, 22(2):182-193. doi: 10.11898/1001-7313.20110207 [12] 朱振铎, 端义宏, 陈德辉.GRAPES2TCM业务试验结果分析.气象, 2007, 33(7):44-54. doi: 10.7519/j.issn.1000-0526.2007.07.005 [13] Carr L E III, Elsberry R L. Dynamical tropical cyclone track forecast errors. Part Ⅰ: Tropical region errors. Wea Forecasting, 2000, 15:641-661. doi: 10.1175/1520-0434(2000)015<0641:DTCTFE>2.0.CO;2 [14] Carr L E III, Elsberry R L. Dynamical tropical cyclone track forecast errors. Part Ⅱ: Midlatitude circulation influences. Wea Forecasting, 2000, 15: 662-681. doi: 10.1175/1520-0434(2000)015<0662:DTCTFE>2.0.CO;2 [15] Tracy J D. Accuracy of Atlantic tropical cyclone forecasts. Mon Wea Rev, 1966, 94:407-418. doi: 10.1175/1520-0493(1966)094<0407:AOATCF>2.3.CO;2 [16] 陈联寿, 丁一汇.西太平洋台风概论.北京:科学出版社, 1979. [17] 陈联寿. 热带气旋运动研究和业务预报的现状和发展//台风会议文集 (1985). 北京: 气象出版社, 1987: 6-30. [18] 张胜军, 陈联寿, 徐祥德.Helen台风 (9505) 异常路径的诊断分析与数值模拟.大气科学, 2005, 29(6):937-946. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DQXK200506008.htm [19] 魏应植, 汤达章, 许健民, 等.多普勒雷达探测"艾利"台风风场不对称结构.应用气象学报, 2007, 18(3):285-294. http://qikan.camscma.cn/jams/ch/reader/view_abstract.aspx?file_no=20070350&flag=1 [20] 许映龙.超强台风鲶鱼路径北翘预报分析.气象, 2011, 37(7): 821-826. doi: 10.7519/j.issn.1000-0526.2011.07.006 [21] 丑纪范, 任宏利.数值天气预报——另类途径的必要性和可行性.应用气象学报, 2006, 17(2):240-244. doi: 10.11898/1001-7313.20060216 [22] Wu Chun-chieh. Interaction of typhoon Shanshan (2006) with the midlatitude trough from both adjoint-derived sensitivity steering vector and potential vorticity perspectives. Mon Wea Rev, 2008, 137:852-862. doi: 10.1175/2008MWR2585.1 [23] 谭晓伟, 陈德辉, 张庆红.一种新型的适应性观测资料应用对台风预报的影响试验研究.热带气象学报, 2006, 22(1):18-25. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-RDQX200601002.htm -
图(5) / 表(1)
计量
- 摘要浏览量: 3419
- HTML全文浏览量: 1070
- PDF下载量: 1801
- 被引次数: 0
