Background
Model, data, and statistical methods
Buoys
Satellite data
Results
Model vs. buoys - on-line validation
A simple, non-quality checked, data display
Most recent data
Ensemble forecast (half resolution)
Previous month
Two months back
Wave spectra
A simple, non-quality checked, forecast data display
1-d spectra
2-d spectra
Model vs. buoys - 6-monthly validation
Detailed comparison of 6 months of buoy data and operational forecasts
of significant wave height. The general wave height forecast quality is
evaluated for each buoy. The wave height during the 5 most severe storm events is studied separately.
Stations are intercompared, and the dependency of the wave height forecast
quality on both forecast range and observed
wave height is calculated.
The quality Q is based on the 5 highest events at a fixed, small subset of wave buoys.
Previous half-year
Previous 4 years, compared
Highest waves
Jcomm: Model vs. buoys - monthly
Jcomm (Joint WMO-IOC Technical Commission for Oceanography and Marine Meteorology)
carries out an automatised, global comparative wave model verification.
DMI takes part in this project, and submits wave forecasts for a number
of buoys to ECMWF once every month. Please refer to
Jcomm verification
NOTE: Latest report dates Oct 2017. There seems to be an approval problem, and the link is dead.
LC-WFV: Model vs. buoys - monthly
WMO / ECMWF project: Leading Center for Wave Forecast Verification. Takes Jcomm one step further.
DMI takes part, by transmitting full DMI-WAM forecast to ECMWF on seim-operational basis.
LC-WFV project description
Results
Jcomm (Joint WMO-IOC Technical Commission for Oceanography and Marine Meteorology)
carries out an automatised, global comparative wave model verification.
DMI takes part in this project, and submits wave forecasts for a number
of buoys to ECMWF once every month. Please refer to
Jcomm verification
NOTE: Latest report dates Oct 2017. There seems to be an approval problem.
Model vs. satellite altimetry
Comparison of 6 months of satellite altimetry based and operational forecasts
of significant wave height. The forecast error is
mapped for the Northwest European Shelf Seas, and mean errors are calculated as a function
of wave height, forecast range, and time of year.
Last year
Previous 3 years, compared
Previous studies
Validation reports since 2001
Tests
Revised depth maps
The impact of updated depth maps, with ETOPO1 / ETOPOP2 replacing ETOPO5 as data source,
is studied in a hindcast simulation of 2010, jan-jun.
Previous half-year
Highest waves
Current refraction
The refractive effect of time-dependent current,
as calculated by the DMI operational ocean hydrodynamical ocean models, is included.
Previous half-year
Highest waves
Test/opr model intercomparison
Extended spectral frequency range
Attempt to entend the high-frequency range of the modelled spectrum.
Test/opr intercomparison
Case Studies
Comparison with buoy data
Wave forecasts at wind mill parks, primo 2009
Comparison of 3 different WAM version in the shallows of wind mill park sites for a 1½ month period.
Wave forecasts off Ireland, ult. 2003
Preliminary study of forecasts for 3 Irish buoys during a 3-week period.
North Baltic Proper, jan. 2005
Hurricane over the Baltic, with exceptionally high waves.
Comparison with satellite altimetry data
North Sea - Baltic, med. 2004 - mar. 2005
Sea state as measured from satellite is described and compared with
wave model forecast. The model error (bias, stdev, scatter index) is mapped
for all European waters excluding the Mediterranean. The area-averaged model error
is given as a function of time, forecast range, and wave height.
Yellow Sea , medio-ultimo 2008
Same, for Chinese and Korean waters.
Yellow Sea , medio-ultimo 2008
Same, for Chinese and Korean waters. Extended model area.
Yellow Sea , primo-medio 2009
Same, for the Red Sea.
South China Sea , primo-medio 2009
Same, for the South China Sea.
