Tropical Cyclone Parameter Estimation in the Australian Region
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Tropical Cyclone Parameter Estimation in the Australian Region: Wind-Pressure Relationships and Related Issues for Engineering Planning and Design A Discussion Paper November 2002 by On behalf of Bruce Harper BE PhD Cover Illustration: Bureau of Meteorology image of Severe Tropical Cyclone Olivia, Western Australia, April 1996. Report No. J0106-PR003E November 2002 Prepared by: Systems Engineering Australia Pty Ltd 7 Mercury Court Bridgeman Downs QLD 4035 Australia ABN 65 073 544 439 Tel/Fax: +61 7 3353-0288 Email: [email protected] WWW: http://www.uq.net.au/seng Copyright © 2002 Woodside Energy Ltd Systems Engineering Australia Pty Ltd i Prepared for Woodside Energy Ltd Contents Executive Summary………………………………………………………...………………….……iii Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………………….………iv 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................1 2 The Need for Reliable Tropical Cyclone Data for Engineering Planning and Design Purposes.2 3 A Brief Overview of Relevant Published Works.........................................................................4 3.1 Definitions............................................................................................................................4 3.2 Dvorak (1972,1973,1975) and Erickson (1972)...................................................................7 3.3 Sheets and Grieman (1975)................................................................................................10 3.4 Atkinson and Holliday (1975, 1977)..................................................................................10 3.5 BoM (1978)........................................................................................................................12 3.6 Gaby et al (1980)................................................................................................................13 3.7 Lubeck and Shewchuk (1980); Shewchuk and Weir (1980)..............................................13 3.8 Holland (1980)...................................................................................................................14 3.9 Dvorak (1982,1984)...........................................................................................................16 3.10 Love and Murphy (1985) ...................................................................................................18 3.11 Crane (circa 1985)..............................................................................................................21 3.12 Weatherford and Gray (1988ab) ........................................................................................22 3.13 Gray, Neumann and Tsui (1991)........................................................................................23 3.14 Martin and Gray (1993)......................................................................................................24 3.15 Black (1993).......................................................................................................................25 3.16 Guard and Lander (1996) ...................................................................................................25 3.17 Callaghan and Smith (1998)...............................................................................................26 3.18 Velden et al (1998).............................................................................................................28 3.19 Harper and Holland (1999) ................................................................................................29 3.20 Landsea et al (2000) ...........................................................................................................30 3.21 Neumann (2001).................................................................................................................31 3.22 Brown and Franklin (2002)................................................................................................32 4 Discussion ..................................................................................................................................34 4.1 The Dvorak Technique.......................................................................................................34 4.2 Some Provocative Questions..............................................................................................34 4.3 Evidence of Best Track Bias in the Atlantic Dataset .........................................................35 4.4 Storm Structure, Dynamics and the Apparent Influence of Size .......................................38 4.5 Use of the Holland B Parameter for the Inner-Vortex Balance .........................................39 4.6 The Outer-Vortex Problem.................................................................................................42 4.7 Towards a Universal Method that also Considers Size......................................................42 4.8 An Example Storm.............................................................................................................44 4.9 Concluding Discussion.......................................................................................................47 5 Recommendations ......................................................................................................................48 6 References ..................................................................................................................................50 Appendix A Example Figures from Erickson (1972) Appendix B A Critique of the Atkinson and Holliday (1977) Near-Surface Boundary Layer Assumptions Appendix C Selected Storm Data and Commentaries Appendix D Selected Atlantic Data Comparisons Appendix E Notes on Vertical Wind Profile Assumptions SEA Document J0106-PR003E For selected release. November 2002 Systems Engineering Australia Pty Ltd ii Prepared for Woodside Energy Ltd Tables Table 3.1 Summary of some previously developed wind-pressure relationships (10 min wind predictors). .......................................................................................................................... 5 Table 3.2 The Dvorak (1984) tabulated relationships. ..................................................................... 17 Table 3.3 Northern Region wind-pressure relationship proposed by L&M..................................... 19 Table 3.4 Verification results from Velden et al (1998)................................................................... 28 Table 4.1 A comparison of some recent NHC Atlantic best track and HRD data sets. ................... 36 Figures Figure 3.1 Wind-pressure relationships from Table 3.1..................................................................... 6 Figure 3.2 The Dvorak Vmax – CI relationship..................................................................................... 7 Figure 3.3 The evolution of the early Dvorak wind-pressure relationships. ...................................... 9 Figure 3.4 A comparison of the Dvorak (1975) and A&H (1977) relationships............................... 12 Figure 3.5 The Holland B within a wind-pressure relationship context........................................... 15 Figure 3.6 Schematic of the Dvorak (1984) technique for the Atlantic basin from Dvorak and Smigielski (1990); 1min winds shown. .......................................................................... 17 Figure 3.7 Comparison of the Dvorak (1984) Atlantic and NWP wind-pressure relationships....... 18 Figure 3.8 L&M relationship compared with data. .......................................................................... 21 Figure 3.9 Relationship proposed by Crane (1985).......................................................................... 22 Figure 3.10 NWP data from Weatherford and Gray (1988)............................................................. 23 Figure 3.11 Impact of analyses by Martin and Gray (1993)............................................................. 24 Figure 3.12 “Midget” NWP relationship proposed by Guard and Lander (1996)............................ 26 Figure 3.13 Data considered by Callaghan and Smith (1998).......................................................... 27 Figure 3.14 Holland B ranges found from calibration studies by Harper. ....................................... 30 Figure 3.15 Atlantic best track data stratified by latitude after Landsea et al (2000). ..................... 31 Figure 3.16 The mean Southern Hemisphere practice after Neumann (2001) .................................. 31 Figure 3.17 Dvorak intensity estimates versus best track data in the Atlantic from Brown and Franklin (2002); 1 min winds shown.............................................................................. 32 Figure 3.18 Pressure – wind relationships based on best track data in the Atlantic from Brown and Franklin (2002); 1 min winds shown.............................................................................. 33 Figure 4.1 Potential for bias in Atlantic best track wind-pressure relationships.............................. 37 Figure 4.2 A simplified model of changes in tangential wind structure after Merrill (1984). ......... 38 Figure 4.3 Example wind-pressure profiles using the Holland model. ............................................ 40 Figure 4.4 The Holland B parameter performance in wind-pressure space. .................................... 41 Figure 4.5 Time development of Hurricane Michelle, October 2001..............................................