Sensitivity of Typhoon Lingling (2019) simulations to horizontal mixing length and planetary boundary layer parameterizations

doi:10.1007/s11707-021-0890-0

Front. Earth Sci.

2022, Vol. 16

Issue (2) : 304-322 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11707-021-0890-0

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Sensitivity of Typhoon Lingling (2019) simulations to horizontal mixing length and planetary boundary layer parameterizations

Siqi CHEN^1,², Feng XU^1,², Yu ZHANG^1,^2,³(

), Guiling YE^1,², Jianjun XU^1,^2,³, Chunlei LIU^1,^2,³

¹. College of Ocean and Meteorology, Guangdong Ocean University, Zhanjiang 524088, China
². South China Sea Institute of Marine Meteorology, Zhanjiang 524088, China
³. Shenzhen Institute of Guangdong Ocean University, Shenzhen 518120, China

Download: PDF(10971 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks

Abstract

Forecasting the intensity of typhoons is a difficult problem in numerical weather prediction. It is subject to many factors, among which the selection of physical parameterization schemes for the model is a hot topic of research. In this study, the effects of horizontal mixing length (represented by h_diff) and planetary boundary layer (PBL) schemes were investigated. Six idealized and four operational sensitivity experiments were designed based on simulation of the typhoon Lingling, which occurred over the western Pacific in 2019, using the Hurricane Weather Research and Forecasting model. The results of the idealized experiments showed that, as h_diff was increased, the slope of the typhoon eye area also increased, and its intensity became stronger. On the other hand, the results of the sensitivity experiments indicated that the intensity of the simulated typhoon was sensitive to the choice of PBL scheme, with the forecast bias of the QNSE (Quasi-Normal Scale Elimination) scheme being smaller than that of the GFDL (Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory) scheme. Angular momentum budget analyses indicated that, when increasing the h_diff, the convergence of angular momentum was larger in the boundary layer, which led to a faster spin-up of the vortex, further increasing the intensity of the typhoon. From the calculated horizontal and vertical vortex spread it was found that, when the h_diff was increased, the corresponding horizontal and vertical diffusion eddies also showed an increasing trend, which was also the reason for the strengthening of the typhoon. Meanwhile, the forecast bias decreased significantly with increasing horizontal mixing length when using the same PBL scheme.

Keywords Hurricane Weather Research and Forecasting model planetary boundary layer western Pacific typhoon horizontal diffusion

Corresponding Author(s): Yu ZHANG

About author:

Tongcan Cui and Yizhe Hou contributed equally to this work.

Online First Date: 13 August 2021 Issue Date: 26 August 2022

Cite this article:

Siqi CHEN,Feng XU,Yu ZHANG, et al. Sensitivity of Typhoon Lingling (2019) simulations to horizontal mixing length and planetary boundary layer parameterizations[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2022, 16(2): 304-322.

URL:

https://academic.hep.com.cn/fesci/EN/10.1007/s11707-021-0890-0
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fesci/EN/Y2022/V16/I2/304

1	M M Bell, M T Montgomery, K A Emanuel (2012). Air–sea enthalpy and momentum exchange at major hurricane wind speeds observed during CBLAST. J Atmospheric Sci, 69: 3197–3222
2	M K Biswas, Coauthors (2018). 2018: Hurricane Weather Research and Forecasting (HWRF) Model: 2018. Scientific Documentation
3	S A Braun, W K Tao (2000). Sensitivity of high-resolution simulations of Hurricane Bob (1991) to planetary boundary layer parameterizations. Mon Weather Rev, 128(12): 3941–3961 https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(2000)129<3941:SOHRSO>2.0.CO;2
4	G H Bryan (2012). Effects of surface exchange coefficients and turbulence length scales on the intensity and structure of numerically simulated hurricanes. Mon Weather Rev, 140(4): 1125–1143 https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-11-00231.1
5	National Centers for Environmental Prediction/National Weather Service/NOAA/U.S. Department of Commerce (2015). NCEP GFS 0.25 Degree Global Forecast Grids Historical Archive https://doi.org/10.5065/D65D8PWK
6	K A Emanuel (1995). Sensitivity of tropical cyclones to surface exchange coefficients and a revised steady-state model incorporating eye dynamics. J Atmos Sci, 52(22): 3969–3976 https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1995)052<3969:SOTCTS>2.0.CO;2
7	K A Emanuel (1997). Some aspects of hurricane inner-core dynamics and energetics. J Atmos Sci, 54(8): 1014–1026 https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1997)054<1014:SAOHIC>2.0.CO;2
8	K A Emanuel (1986). An air–sea interaction theory for tropical cyclones. Part I: steady-state maintenance. J Atmos Sci, 43(6): 585–605 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1986)043<0585:AASITF>2.0.CO;2
9	R Gelaro, W McCarty, M J Suárez, R Todling, A Molod, L Takacs, C Randles, A Darmenov, M G Bosilovich, R Reichle, K Wargan, L Coy, R Cullather, C Draper, S Akella, V Buchard, A Conaty, A da Silva, W Gu, G K Kim, R Koster, R Lucchesi, D Merkova, J E Nielsen, G Partyka, S Pawson, W Putman, M Rienecker, S D Schubert, M Sienkiewicz, B Zhao (2017). The modern-era retrospective analysis for research and applications, Version 2 (MERRA-2). J Clim, 30(14): 5419–5454 https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0758.1 pmid: 32020988
10	W M Gray, E Ruprecht, R Phelps (1975). Relative humidity in tropical weather systems. Mon Weather Rev, 103(8): 685–690 https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1975)103<0685:RHITWS>2.0.CO;2
11	B W Green, F Zhang (2014). Sensitivity of tropical cyclone simulations to parametric uncertainties in air–sea fluxes and implications for parameter estimation. Mon Weather Rev, 142(6): 2290–2308 https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-13-00208.1
12	K B R R Hariprasad, C V Srinivas, A B Singh, S Vijaya Bhaskara Rao, R Baskaran, B Venkatraman (2014). Numerical simulation and intercomparison of boundary layer structure with different PBL schemes in WRF using experimental observations at a tropical site. Atmos Res, 145–146: 27–44 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2014.03.023
13	Z I Janjić (1990). The step-mountain coordinate: physical package. Mon Weather Rev, 118(7): 1429–1443 https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1990)118<1429:TSMCPP>2.0.CO;2
14	G Kilroy, R K Smith, M T Montgomery (2016). Why do model tropical cyclones grow progressively in size and decay in intensity after reaching maturity? J Atmos Sci, 73(2): 487–503 https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-15-0157.1
15	K R Knapp, M C Kruk, D H Levinson, H J Diamond, C J Neumann (2010). The international best track archive for climate stewardship (IBTrACS). Bull Am Meteorol Soc, 91(3): 363–376 https://doi.org/10.1175/2009BAMS2755.1
16	Z Ma, J Fei, X Huang, X Cheng (2018). Sensitivity of the simulated tropical cyclone intensification to the boundary-layer height based on a K-profile boundary-layer parameterization scheme. J Adv Model Earth Syst, 10(11): 2912–2932 https://doi.org/10.1029/2018MS001459
17	Z Ma, J Fei, Y Lin, X Huang (2020).Modulation of clouds and rainfall by tropical cyclone’s cold wakes. Geophys Res Lett, 47: e2020GL-088873 https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL088873
18	J S Malkus, H Riehl (1960). On the dynamics and energy transformations in steady-state hurricanes. Tellus, 12(1): 1–20 https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusa.v12i1.9351
19	D S Nolan, D P Stern, J A Zhang (2009). Evaluation of planetary boundary layer parameterizations in tropical cyclones by comparison of in situ observations and high-resolution simulations of hurricane Isabel (2003). Part II: inner-core boundary layer and eyewall structure. Mon Weather Rev, 137(11): 3675–3698 https://doi.org/10.1175/2009MWR2786.1
20	K Ooyama (1969). Numerical simulation of the life cycle of tropical cyclones. J Atmos Sci, 26(1): 3–40 https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1969)026<0003:NSOTLC>2.0.CO;2
21	J Persing, M T Montgomery (2003). Hurricane superintensity. J Atmos Sci, 60(19): 2349–2371 https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2003)060<2349:HS>2.0.CO;2
22	J R Rajeswari, C V Srinivas, T N Rao, B Venkatraman (2020). Impact of land surface physics on the simulation of boundary layer characteristics at a tropical coastal station. Atmospheric Res, 238: 104888
23	S L Rosenthal (1971). The response of a tropical cyclone model to variations in boundary layer parameters, initial conditions, lateral boundary conditions, and domain size. Mon Weather Rev, 99(10): 767–777 https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1971)099<0767:TROATC>2.3.CO;2
24	R Rotunno, G H Bryan (2012). Effects of parameterized diffusion on simulated hurricanes. J Atmos Sci, 69(7): 2284–2299 https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-11-0204.1
25	R Rotunno, Y Chen, W Wang, C Davis, J Dudhia, G J Holland (2009). Large-eddy simulation of an idealized tropical cyclone. Bull Am Meteorol Soc, 90(12): 1783–1788 https://doi.org/10.1175/2009BAMS2884.1
26	R K Smith, M T Montgomery, Van N Sang(2009). Tropical cyclone spin-up revisited. Q J R Meteorol Soc, 135(642): 1321–1335 https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.428
27	B Stevens, C H Moeng, P P Sullivan (1999). Large-eddy simulations of radiatively driven convection: sensitivities to the representation of small scales. J Atmos Sci, 56(23): 3963–3984 https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1999)056<3963:LESORD>2.0.CO;2
28	J Tang, J A Zhang, S D Aberson, F D Marks, X Lei (2018a). Multilevel tower observations of vertical eddy diffusivity and mixing length in the tropical cyclone boundary layer during landfalls. J Atmos Sci, 75(9): 3159–3168 https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-17-0353.1
29	J Tang, J A Zhang, C Kieu, F D Marks (2018b). Sensitivity of hurricane intensity and structure to two types of planetary boundary layer parameterization schemes in idealized HWRF simulations. Trop Cyclone Res Rev, 7: 201–211 https://doi.org/10.6057/2018TCRR04.01
30	Y Wang (1995). An inverse balance equation in sigma coordinates for model initialization. Mon Weather Rev, 123(2): 482–488 https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1995)123<0482:AIBEIS>2.0.CO;2
31	M Xue, J Schleif, F Kong, K W Thomas, Y Wang, K Zhu (2013). Track and intensity forecasting of hurricanes: impact of convection-permitting resolution and global ensemble Kalman filter analysis on 2010 Atlantic season forecasts. Weather Forecast, 28(6): 1366–1384 https://doi.org/10.1175/WAF-D-12-00063.1
32	J A Zhang, M T Montgomery (2012). Observational estimates of the horizontal eddy diffusivity and mixing length in the low-level region of intense hurricanes. J Atmos Sci, 69(4): 1306–1316 https://doi.org/10.1175/JAS-D-11-0180.1
33	J A Zhang, E W Uhlhorn (2012). Hurricane sea surface inflow angle and an observation-based parametric model. Mon Weather Rev, 140(11): 3587–3605 https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-11-00339.1
34	J A Zhang, F D Marks (2015). Effects of horizontal diffusion on tropical cyclone intensity change and structure in idealized three-dimensional numerical simulations. Mon Weather Rev, 143(10): 3981–3995 https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-14-00341.1
35	J A Zhang, F D Marks, J A Sippel, R F Rogers, X Zhang, S G Gopalakrishnan, Z Zhang, V Tallapragada (2018). Evaluating the impact of improvement in the horizontal diffusion parameterization on hurricane prediction in the operational hurricane weather research and forecast (HWRF) Model. Weather Forecast, 33(1): 317–329 https://doi.org/10.1175/WAF-D-17-0097.1
36	J A Zhang, E A Kalina, M K Biswas, R F Rogers, P Zhu, F D Marks (2020). A review and evaluation of planetary boundary layer parameterizations in hurricane weather research and forecasting model using idealized simulations and observations. Atmosphere, 11(10): 1091 https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos11101091
37	Y Zhang, Y Xie, H Wang, D Chen, Z Toth (2016). Ensemble transform sensitivity method for adaptive observations. Adv Atmos Sci, 33(1): 10–20 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-015-5031-9

[1]	Jing ZHU, Yi LU, Fumin REN, John L McBRIDE, Longbin YE. Typhoon disaster risk zoning for China’s coastal area[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2022, 16(2): 291-303.
[2]	Zixi RUAN, Jiangnan LI, Fangzhou LI, Wenshi LIN. Effects of local and non-local closure PBL schemes on the simulation of Super Typhoon Mangkhut (2018)[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2022, 16(2): 277-290.
[3]	Jiakai ZHU, Jianhua DAI. A rain-type adaptive optical flow method and its application in tropical cyclone rainfall nowcasting[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2022, 16(2): 248-264.
[4]	Fen XU, X. San LIANG. Drastic change in dynamics as Typhoon Lekima experiences an eyewall replacement cycle[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2022, 16(1): 121-131.
[5]	Cong ZHOU, Peiyan CHEN, Shifang YANG, Feng ZHENG, Hui YU, Jie TANG, Yi LU, Guoming CHEN, Xiaoqing LU, Xiping ZHANG, Jing SUN. The impact of Typhoon Lekima (2019) on East China: a postevent survey in Wenzhou City and Taizhou City[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2022, 16(1): 109-120.
[6]	He FANG, William PERRIE, Gaofeng FAN, Zhengquan LI, Juzhen CAI, Yue HE, Jingsong YANG, Tao XIE, Xuesong ZHU. High-resolution sea surface wind speeds of Super Typhoon Lekima (2019) retrieved by Gaofen-3 SAR[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2022, 16(1): 90-98.
[7]	Shengming TANG, Yun GUO, Xu WANG, Jie TANG, Tiantian LI, Bingke ZHAO, Shuai ZHANG, Yongping LI. Validation of Doppler Wind Lidar during Super Typhoon Lekima (2019)[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2022, 16(1): 75-89.
[8]	Guomin CHEN, Xiping ZHANG, Qing CAO, Zhihua ZENG. Evaluation of forecast performance for Super Typhoon Lekima in 2019[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2022, 16(1): 17-33.
[9]	Seung-Woo LEE, Sung Hyun NAM, Duk-Jin KIM. Estimation of marine winds in and around typhoons using multi-platform satellite observations: Application to Typhoon Soulik (2018)[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2022, 16(1): 175-189.
[10]	Hiroshi TAKAGI, Atsuhei TAKAHASHI. Short-fetch high waves during the passage of 2019 Typhoon Faxai over Tokyo Bay[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2022, 16(1): 206-219.
[11]	Rong GUO, Hui YU, Zifeng YU, Jie TANG, Lina BAI. Application of the frequency-matching method in the probability forecast of landfalling typhoon rainfall[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2022, 16(1): 52-63.
[12]	Md. Rezuanul ISLAM, Hiroshi TAKAGI. Typhoon parameter sensitivity of storm surge in the semi-enclosed Tokyo Bay[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2020, 14(3): 553-567.
[13]	Gefei DENG, Yongming SHEN, Changping LI, Jun TANG. Computational investigation on hydrodynamic and sediment transport responses influenced by reclamation projects in the Meizhou Bay, China[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2020, 14(3): 493-511.
[14]	Linna ZHAO, Xuemei BAI, Dan QI, Cheng XING. BMA probability quantitative precipitation forecasting of land-falling typhoons in south-east China[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2019, 13(4): 758-777.
[15]	Jia ZHU, Jiong SHU, Xing YU. Improvement of typhoon rainfall prediction based on optimization of the Kain-Fritsch convection parameterization scheme using a micro-genetic algorithm[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2019, 13(4): 721-732.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed