Title: A Multiscale Numerical Study of Hurricane Andrew 1992' Part I: Explicit Simulation and Verificantion
1A Multiscale Numerical Study of Hurricane Andrew
(1992). Part I Explicit Simulation and
Verificantion
- Liu, Y., D.-L. Zhang, and M. K. Yau, 1997, Mon.
Wea. Rev., 125, 3073-3093
??? 2004/03/08
2Introduction
- The hurricane is a violent atmospheric vortex
characterized by strong multiscale interactions. - Previous studies have shown that the tropical
synoptic conditions and the sea surface
temperature (SST) tend to control the general
development of a hurricane(Gray 1979.) . - Its track and intensity can be affected by its
internal dynamics and thermodynamics, the
formation and distribution of clouds and
precipitation, and the interaction between the
hurricane and its larger-scale environment
(Holland and Merrill 1984.) - Observations reveal many interesting phenomena
and structures of mature hurricanes.
3Overview of Hurricane Andrew
- Hurricane Andrew cost a total of 25 billion in
damages. - The storm originated from a tropical disturbance
near the west coast of Africa on 1992/08/14, and
deep convection began to organize into a narrow,
spiral cloud band an 08/17.
4http//www.nhc.noaa.gov/1992andrew.html
5(No Transcript)
6(No Transcript)
7(No Transcript)
8(No Transcript)
9- Model integration is initialized at 08/21/1200
UTC (began to intensify) 08/24/1200 UTC(about
move out Florida) - Its rapid deepening stage, the mature stage, the
maximum intensity stage near Bahamas, and its
landfall stage over Florida.
10Model description and initial conditions
- An improved version of the PSU-NCAR
nonhydrostatic, movable, triply nested grid, 3D
mesoscale model (MM5). - 23 s layers, a two-way interaction, movable,
triply nested grid. - The Betts-Miller parameterization for shallow
convection is applied over mesh C to treat
reasonably shallow convective clouds at the outer
edge of the hurricane. - The SST is held constant, and use the NCEP
data(2o). - The NCEP analysis is always too dry, particularly
in the lower troposphere, as compared with the
Omega dropwindsondes (ODWs) observation that were
taken during Andrews development stage.
11(No Transcript)
12Model verification
C5(gt68)
parameterized deep convection over the mesh B
domain
C4(gt57)
C3(gt48)
The storm translates at a speed of 6-8 ms-1, the
deviation in track less than 100 km at the time
of landfall.
C2(gt41)
C1(gt33)
922 hPa
919 hPa
1308/23/0000 UTC
CTL compared with 49 ODWs (released at 400 hPa
level).
14Miami WSR-57 radar at 08/24/0830 UTC
CTL at08/24/0800 UTC
15Andrew moves over land(1) the eye begins to
fill,(2) the eyewall expands in size, and(3)
the radar reflectivities or the rainfall rates
weaken rapidly.
16From Powell and Houston(1996)
The strong-wind zone near the coastline to the
north results from the intensified deep
convection, which is in turn attributable to the
rapid increase in surface friction and the
enhanced low-level convergence of mass and
moisture.
17(No Transcript)
18Vertical structures
08/23/2000 UTC
08/23/2000 UTC
08/24/0800 UTC
1908/23/2000 UTC
cloud water(0.8-2.0 g kg-1)/ice (0.8-1.2 g kg-1)
rain water (4-6 g kg-1) /snow (0.5-0.8 g kg-1)
graupel (2-4 g kg-1)
2008/23/2000 UTC
2108/23/2000 UTC
2208/23/2000 UTC at the center (eye)
08/23/2000 UTC at the eyewall
2308/23/2000 UTC
24Summary and conclusions
- The model captures successfully the track,
propagation, and rapid deepening of the storm
during the 3-day period, as verified against the
best track analysis. - The model simulates well the larger-scale
environment in which Andrew is embedded. - The model reproduces the visible cloud structures
in terms of their size, shape, and intensity, as
compared to the satellite and radar imagery. - It is found that Hurricane Andrew is
characterized by a shallow layer of intense
cyclonic inflows in the PBL and intense outflows
above 300 hPa, with much weaker and less
organized radial flows in between. - The streamlines in the central core tend to
rotate cyclonically outward and converge in the
eyewall with the cyclonic inflows from the far
distance.