邓琳, 端义宏, 高文华, 张兴海. 2016: 超强台风“威马逊”(2014)云微物理特征的模拟与对比分析. 气象学报, (5): 697-714. DOI: 10.11676/qxxb2016.058
引用本文: 邓琳, 端义宏, 高文华, 张兴海. 2016: 超强台风“威马逊”(2014)云微物理特征的模拟与对比分析. 气象学报, (5): 697-714. DOI: 10.11676/qxxb2016.058
DENG Lin, DUAN Yihong, GAO Wenhua, ZHANG Xinghai. 2016: Numerical simulation and comparison of cloud microphysical features of super typhoon Rammasun (2014). Acta Meteorologica Sinica, (5): 697-714. DOI: 10.11676/qxxb2016.058
Citation: DENG Lin, DUAN Yihong, GAO Wenhua, ZHANG Xinghai. 2016: Numerical simulation and comparison of cloud microphysical features of super typhoon Rammasun (2014). Acta Meteorologica Sinica, (5): 697-714. DOI: 10.11676/qxxb2016.058

超强台风“威马逊”(2014)云微物理特征的模拟与对比分析

Numerical simulation and comparison of cloud microphysical features of super typhoon Rammasun (2014)

  • 摘要: 采用中尺度数值模式WRFv3.5对2014年超强台风“威马逊”进行数值模拟。利用雷达、卫星、自动站逐时降水资料,对比单参数WSM6云方案和双参数WDM6云方案在模拟台风路径、强度、降水分布及水成物含量上的差异,分析雨滴粒子的谱型特征及微物理源、汇项对云中雨水含量的影响。与上海台风研究所的最佳路径数据对比显示,两方案均较好地模拟出了台风“威马逊”的移动路径,WDM6方案的整体路径误差更小;模拟的强度差异则较为显著,WDM6方案的海平面最低气压值偏高,强度偏弱。两方案模拟的累积降雨分布虽与自动站实测资料基本一致,但WDM6方案模拟的强降水概率偏高,弱降水概率偏低。两方案模拟的对流区雪、霰、雨水含量均大于TRMM卫星反演结果,且WDM6方案的对流云较多,总体雨水含量偏高;两方案均模拟出了雷达回波分布的整体特征,但眼区尺度偏大,WDM6方案在融化层以下缺少眼墙之外的弱回波区且大于39 dBz的强回波区偏多,同样显示了雨水含量(或尺度)偏大。由于WDM6方案为暖雨(云、雨水)双参数模式,对云滴活化、云雨转换及云、雨谱型有一定的改进,其能较合理地模拟出雨滴谱随台风发展的演变特征;模拟显示,云、雨滴的收集碰并及固态粒子的融化是雨水的主要源项,WDM6方案增加了云雨水自动转化率及雨水碰并云水率,导致该方案的空中雨水含量偏高,且随高度的降低快速减小;此外,由于WDM6方案使用简单的寇拉公式进行云滴活化,初始云凝结核数的变化即可造成雪、霰、云雨水含量的改变,故建议在具体大气气溶胶条件下,对方案中的云滴生成参数化过程做相应的调整。

     

    Abstract: Super typhoon Rammasun (2014) is simulated using the Advanced Weather Research Forecasting model (WRFv3.5). The simulated typhoon track, intensity, precipitation and contents of hydrometeors using the WRF Single-Moment 6-class (WSM6) scheme and WRF Double-Moment 6-class (WDM6) scheme are compared with observations of radar and satellite and rain gauge data. The drop size distribution and several critical source-sink terms that contribute to rain are analyzed. The difference between the simulated track and the CMA best-track data of the storm is less significant than the difference in the intensity between simulations and observation. The spatial distribution of accumulated precipitation simulated by both schemes is quite consistent with the rain gauge data. However, the strong (weak) rainfall rate is overestimated (underestimated) by the WDM6 scheme. Compared with observations retrieved from satellite data, contents of the five hydrometeors (cloud ice, snow, graupel, cloud water, rain) in convective area are overestimated in both the simulations using the two schemes. Note that overestimations of the convective area and the rain-water mixing ratio aloft are especially large in the simulation using the WDM6 scheme. The overall distribution of radar echo reflectivity can be simulated by both schemes except over the tropical cyclone eye area, where the reflectivity is overestimated. The WDM6 scheme cannot simulate the weak reflectivity outside the eyewall below the melting layer, but overestimates the reflectivity in the eyewall region, which reflects more (larger) content (drop size) of rain. The WDM6 scheme is a warm-rain double-moment cloud microphysical scheme. Parameterization functions of cloud activation, dropsize distribution and conversion of cloud water to rain in the WDM6 scheme are different to that in the WSM6, which lead to more realistic simulation of evolution of rain-drop during the development of Rammasun. However, the WDM6 overestimates the rain water content in the middle-lower troposphere and simulates a steep decline in mixing ratio at the ground. Moreover, the simple Kohler function adopted by WDM6 scheme to activate the cloud-droplet should be adjusted according to the realistic condition of the cloud condensation nuclei in the atmosphere.

     

/

返回文章
返回