2018年夏季高空数值预报产品在中国的适用性评价
Applicability Evaluation of Upper-Altitude Numerical Forecast Products in China in the Summer of 2018

作者: 庄凌峰 , 赵泽栖 , 张少波 :成都信息工程大学大气科学学院,四川 成都;

关键词: 数值预报产品高空检验温度位势高度风速Numerical Prediction Products Altitude Inspection Temperature Geopotential Height Wind Speed

摘要: 为研究高空数值预报产品在中国的适用性,本文收集了目前在我国气象服务中采用的主要数值预报产品(GRAPES、ECMWF)、气象台站大气探空数据,利用数理统计方法,分析了高空数值预报产品与实况场在2018年夏季的差异,进行不同数值预报产品在不同时效的预测能力综合评估,得出了以下结论:在温度预报上,模式对于北部的预报效果优于南部地区,其中ECMWF的平均偏差、均方根误差和相关系数在不同层次的12 h和24 h预报时效的对比中均小于GRAPES的结果,且在对流层低层的700 hPa和850 hPa,ECMWF结果的优势明显。在位势高度预报上,模式对于北部的预报效果优于南部地区,12 h预报时效的结果优于24 h预报时效的结果,在对流层低层的700 hPa和850 hPa,ECMWF结果的优势明显,且这种优势主要表现在我国西部地区。在风速预报上,GRAPES在平均误差、相关系数和均方根误差上明显优于ECMWF的结果,反映了GRAPES在风速预报中的优势。

Abstract: In order to study the applicability of high-altitude numerical forecast products in China, this paper collects the main numerical forecast products (GRAPES, ECMWF) and atmospheric sounding data of meteorological stations currently used in China’s meteorological services, and analyzes the numerical forecast products using mathematical statistics. Compared with the actual field in the summer of 2018, a comprehensive evaluation of the predictive capabilities of different numerical forecast products at different timelines was carried out, and the following conclusions were drawn: In terms of temperature forecasting, the model’s forecasting effect for the northern region was better than that of the southern region. The deviation, root mean square error, and correlation coefficient were all smaller than the results of GRAPES in the comparison of 12 h and 24 h forecast timeliness at different levels, and the ECMWF results had obvious advantages at 700 hPa and 850 hPa in the lower troposphere. In terms of geopotential height forecasting, the model’s forecasting effect for the north was better than that of the southern region. The results of 12 h forecast time were better than that of 24 h forecast time. At 700 hPa and 850 hPa in the lower troposphere, ECMWF results had obvious advantages, and this advantage was mainly shown in the western region. In wind speed forecasting, GRAPES was significantly better than ECMWF's results in average error, correlation coefficient and root mean square error, reflecting the advantages of GRAPES in wind speed forecasting.

文章引用: 庄凌峰 , 赵泽栖 , 张少波 (2020) 2018年夏季高空数值预报产品在中国的适用性评价。 自然科学, 8, 623-632. doi: 10.12677/OJNS.2020.86072

参考文献

[1] 丁凡, 安婷婷, 陈小苏, 程月, 潘玲. ECMWF细网格数值预报产品在山东汛期强对流天气预报中的检验[J]. 陕西气象, 2020(4): 21-25.

[2] 吴晶, 李照荣, 颜鹏程, 杨艳芬, 白磊, 杨建才, 彭筱. 西北四省(区) GRAPES模式降水预报的定量评估[J]. 气象, 2020, 46(3): 346-356.

[3] 彭筱, 陈晓燕, 黄武斌. 2016年夏季不同分辨率GRAPES_MESO模式的西北地区预报效果检验[J]. 气象研究与应用, 2019, 40(4): 6-11.

[4] 吕林宜, 王新敏, 栗晗. 华东区域模式对河南“7•19”特大暴雨的数值检验与分析[J]. 气象与环境科学, 2019, 42(1): 101-109.

[5] 宫宇, 代刊, 徐珺, 杨舒楠, 唐健, 张芳, 胡宁, 张夕迪, 沈晓琳. GRAPES-GFS模式暴雨预报天气学检验特征[J]. 气象, 2018, 44(9): 1148-1159.

[6] 邹阳, 王将. 2个数值模式在昆明地区气温预报中的准确率比较[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2018, 46(10): 140-144.

[7] 次仁德吉, 杨丽敏, 李慧敏. 数值预报产品在西藏中期天气预报应用检验的初步分析[J]. 西藏科技, 2018(2): 60-62.

[8] 王焕毅, 谭政华, 杨萌, 张翘, 蒋林杉. 三种数值模式气温预报产品的检验及误差订正方法研究[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2018, 34(1): 22-29.

[9] 翟振芳, 魏春璇, 邓斌, 纪元. 安徽省ECMWF数值模式降水预报性能的检验[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2017, 33(5): 1-9.

[10] 潘留杰, 张宏芳, 朱伟军, 王楠, 王建鹏. ECMWF模式对东北半球气象要素场预报能力的检验[J]. 气候与环境研究, 2013, 18(1): 111-123.

[11] 陈德辉, 薛纪善, 杨学胜, 张红亮, 沈学顺, 胡江林, 王雨, 纪立人, 陈嘉滨. GRAPES新一代全球/区域多尺度统一数值预报模式总体设计研究[J]. 科学通报, 2008(20): 2396-2407.

分享
Top