###
气象:2015,41(8):932-941
本文二维码信息
码上扫一扫!
GRAPES中尺度模式中不同积云参数化方案预报性能对比研究
(1.成都信息工程大学大气科学学院高原大气与环境四川省重点实验室,成都 610225;2.国家气象中心,北京 100081;3.南京信息工程大学气象灾害预报预警与评估协同创新中心,南京 210044)
Comparative Analysis of Different Cumulus Parameterization Schemes in GRAPES_Meso Model
(1.Plateau Atmosphere and Environment Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, College of Atmospheric Sciences,Chengdu University of Information Technology, Chengdu 610225;2.National Meteorological Centre, Beijing 100081;3.Collaborative Innovation Centre on Forecast and Evaluation of Meteorological Disasters, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, Nanjing 210044)
摘要
图/表
参考文献
相似文献
本文已被:浏览 1474次   下载 1775
投稿时间:2014-03-12    修订日期:2014-07-09
中文摘要: 利用我国新一代中尺度数值模式GRAPES_Meso,采用KFeta和BMJ两种积云对流参数化方案,对我国2009年冬季(1月)和夏季(6—8月)天气进行批量回报试验。回报试验结果表明:在冬季,两种方案对GRAPES_Meso模式的预报性能影响差异较小。在夏季,两种方案对模式回报效果的影响表现明显。在低层BMJ方案对形势场的回报性能略优于KFeta方案,中层则是KFeta方案明显优于BMJ方案,而在高层KFeta方案略优于BMJ方案。TS评分检验表明KFeta方案对降水的预报总体上优于BMJ方案,特别是中雨到暴雨量级在华南地区KFeta方案有明显的优势。两个方案预报积云降水平均贡献率的空间分布差异主要表现在低纬度洋面上,BMJ方案的贡献率比KFeta方案大。两个方案积云降水贡献率的概率分布形态在小雨量级上都呈陡峭的“U”型分布。KFeta方案随着降水量级的增大逐渐向大贡献率偏移,特大暴雨量级时基本上是积云降水的贡献;而BMJ参数化方案则是随着降水量级的增大逐渐向小贡献率偏移,特大暴雨量级时基本上是格点降水的贡献。
Abstract:Based on the new generation numerical prediction model GRAPES_Meso, the numerical experiments were carried out to evaluate the two kinds of cumulus convective parameterization schemes, Kain Fritsch Eta scheme and Betts Miller Janjic scheme, for the winter (January) and summer (June-August) 2009. The results show that there is no obvious differences between the two schemes for winter, but some differences exist for the summer. The statistic characteristic of meteorological fields, such as wind, height and temperature, shows that BMJ performances slightly better than KFeta in the low atmospheric layer, but it does not do as well as KFeta in the middle and high layers. The results of T Score verification indicate that KFeta scheme has a higher score than BMJ scheme for precipitation forecast, especially in predicting moderate to heavy rains over southern China. The spatial distribution of the average contribution rate in total precipitation of the two schemes is different obviously in the low latitude ocean region, where the contribution rate of BMJ scheme is greater than KFeta scheme. In the drizzle level, the probability distribution of cumulus precipitation contribution rate in total precipitation looks like steep “U” shaped. With the increase of precipitation levels, the proportion of cumulus precipitation of KFeta becomes large. On the contrary, the higher of the precipitation level is, the lower proportion of the cumulus precipitation reaches by using the BMJ cumulus scheme.
文章编号:     中图分类号:    文献标志码:
基金项目:国家自然科学基金项目(41275103)资助
引用文本:
郭云云,邓莲堂,范广洲,李泽椿,2015.GRAPES中尺度模式中不同积云参数化方案预报性能对比研究[J].气象,41(8):932-941.
GUO Yunyun,DENG Liantang,FAN Guangzhou,LI Zechun,2015.Comparative Analysis of Different Cumulus Parameterization Schemes in GRAPES_Meso Model[J].Meteor Mon,41(8):932-941.