风暴潮增水长期模拟结果的订正方法研究-海洋预报

风暴潮增水长期模拟结果的订正方法研究

单位：1. 国家海洋局海洋灾害预报技术研究重点实验室, 北京100081;
2. 国家海洋环境预报中心, 北京100081

分类号：P731.23

出版年·卷·期（页码）：2015·32·第五期（35-44）

摘要：

利用7 个验潮站逐时观测数据与国家海洋环境预报中心业务化风暴潮模式结果进行对比分析,分别采用趋势订正(TSC法)和统计偏差订正(SBC法)两种方法对模拟的风暴潮增水长时间序列进行订正,以提高模拟结果的可靠性。研究结果表明:模拟的风暴潮较观测频次明显偏多且强度偏强,2008—2011 年期间模拟的7 个站点发生50 cm以上风暴潮的年平均总频次较观测高估238%,且年最大增水值的年平均较观测偏高28.7—104.7 cm。经过TSC和SBC两种方法订正后,其误差显著性减小,年平均总频次分别较观测(226.5 次)偏少2%和47%,年最大增水值的年平均偏差分别在-9.8—17.3 cm和-23.7—4.3 cm之间。另外,TSC方法订正后的风暴潮频次和最大增水在数值上较SBC方法更接近于观测,而SBC方法订正后的风暴潮频次、最大增水的季节变化趋势与观测更为一致,其与观测的相关系数在一些站点由订正前的0.2左右提升到0.8以上。

Based on the hourly observations at the 7 tidal gauges, the modeled results from National Marine Environmental Forecasting Center operational storm surge model is analyzed, and the simulated longtime series storm surge elevation is corrected by using trend correction (TSC) and statistical bias correction (SBC) method in order to improve the reliability of simulations. The results show that the frequency/intensity of simulated storm surge is obviously more/stronger than observations. The number of annual mean storm surge occurrence of the total 7 sites derived from simulations is 238 % more than observations, with the annual mean maximum storm surge elevation about 28.7-104.7 cm higher than observations. After TSC and SBC correction, the annual mean total frequency at the 7 sites are 2% and 47% less than observations (226.5 times), respectively, and the mean biases of annual maximum storm surge elevation are range in -9.8-17.3 cm and -23.7-4.3 cm. It shows that the biases between simulation and observation have significantly reduced. Numerically, the frequencies and maximum values of storm surge derived from TSC correction are more matched with the observations than that derived from SBC correction. The seasonal variation of frequencies and maximum surges derived from SBC correction are more consistent with observations, its relative coefficients increased to >0.8 from ~0.2 before correction at some sites.

参考文献：

[1] Worth K. North Sea storm surge statistics based on projections in a warmer climate: How important are the driving GCM and the chosen emission scenario? [J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 2005, 32(22): L22708, doi: 10.1029/2005GL023762.
[2] Weisse R, Plüβ A. Storm-related sea level variations along the North Sea coast as simulated by a high-resolution model 1958-2002 [J]. Ocean Dynamics, 2006, 56(1): 16-25.
[3] Weisse R, Günther H, Callies U, et al. The coastDat data set and its potential for coastal and offshore applications [C]//Proceedings of Chinese-German Joint Symposium on Hydraulic and Ocean Engineering. Darmstadt, 2008.
[4] Hallegatte S, Ranger N, Mestre O, et al. Assessing climate change impacts, sea level rise and storm surge risk in port cities: A case study on Copenhagen [J]. Climate Change, 2011, 104(1): 113-137.
[5] Lionello P, Galati M B, Elvini E. Extreme storm surge and wind wave climate scenario simulations at the Venetian littoral [J]. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C, 2012, 40-41: 86-92.
[6] 汪景庸. 东中国海中风暴潮的一次数值模拟[J]. 山东海洋学院学报, 1985, 15(3): 40-47.
[7] 端义宏, 秦曾灏. 气象因子对风暴潮数值模拟精度的影响[J]. 大气科学研究与应用, 1996, (1): 1-8.
[8] 于福江, 张占海. 一个东海嵌套网格台风暴潮数值预报模式的研制与应用[J]. 海洋学报, 2002, 24(4): 23-33.
[9] 于福江, 张占海, 林一骅. 一个稳态Kalman 滤波风暴潮数值预报模式[J]. 海洋学报, 2002, 24(5): 26-35.
[10] 端义宏, 朱建荣, 秦曾灏, 等. 一个高分辨率的长江口台风风暴潮数值预报模式及其应用[J]. 海洋学报, 2005, 27(3): 11-19.
[11] 董剑希, 仉天宇, 付翔, 等. 福建省沙埕港百年一遇台风风暴潮的计算[J]. 海洋通报, 2008, 27(1): 9-16.
[12] 李杰, 于福江, 李洋, 等. 珠江口地区台风风暴潮的数值模拟试验[J]. 海洋预报, 2009, 26(2): 1-6.
[13] 李涛, 吴少华, 侯京明, 等. 宁波台风风暴潮数值模拟与风险计算[J]. 海洋学报, 2013, 35(2): 9-14.
[14] 董剑希, 付翔, 吴玮, 等. 中国海高分辨率业务化风暴潮模式的业务化预报检验[J]. 海洋预报, 2008, 25(2): 11-17.
[15] Takahashi K. Distribution of pressure and wind in a typhoon circulation [J]. Journal of the Meteorological Society of Japan, 1939, 17(2): 417-421.
[16] Fujita T. Pressure distribution within typhoon [J]. Geophysical Magazine, 1952, 23(4): 437-451.
[17] Ueno T. Numerical computation of the storm surges in Tosa Bay[J]. Journal of the Oceanographical Society of Japan, 1981, 37(2): 61-73.
[18] 风暴潮灾害及其对沿海地区社会经济发展影响综合评价[Z]. 国家海洋环境预报中心, 2011.
[19] Piani C, Weedon G P, Best M, et al. Statistical bias correction of global simulated daily precipitation and temperature for the application of hydrological models [J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2010, 395(3-4): 199-215.

服务与反馈：

【文章下载】【发表评论】【查看评论】【加入收藏】