CAPPS3模式在福州市预报效果检验

气象与环境学报 ›› 2011, Vol. 27 ›› Issue (4): 25-29.doi:

CAPPS3模式在福州市预报效果检验

王宏¹冯宏芳¹石钰² 隋平¹余永江¹

1.福建省气象科学研究所，福建福州 350001；2.福建省气象信息中心，福建福州350001

出版日期:2011-08-30 发布日期:2011-08-30

Forecasting verification of CAPPS3 mode in Fuzhou, Fujian province

WAND Hong¹FENG Hong-fang¹SHI Yu²SUI Ping¹YU Yong-jiang¹

1. Fujian Institute of Meteorological Science, Fuzhou 350001, China; 2. Fujian Meteorological Information Center, Fuzhou 350001, China

Online:2011-08-30 Published:2011-08-30

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 对2009年7月至2010年6月区域空气质量数值预报模式CAPPS3在福州市的应用进行效果检验，分析各季节CAPPS3预报福州市3种污染物SO₂、NO₂和PM₁₀的等级预报准确率、转折性天气预报准确率与监测值的相关系数以及综合评分。结果表明：夏秋季节CAPPS3模式3种污染物等级预报准确率较高，冬季NO₂和春季PM₁₀的等级预报准确率较低，错误等级预报多数偏高；转折性天气预报准确率夏秋季最高，春季最低，模式对天气形势的变化反应不灵敏，特别是污染物浓度突变时，预报能力较差，当天气形势稳定时，预报效果较好；浓度预报值较监测值有偏大和滞后的缺点；相关系数及综合评分结果夏秋季最高，春季最低。CAPPS3总体预报效果较好，可提供有价值的指导预报，适合业务运行。

关键词: CAPPS3模式, 效果检验, 污染物, 福州

Abstract: Forecasting results from a city air pollution numerical prediction system (CAPPS3) were validated in Fuzhou for a period of July 2009 to June 2010. The prediction accuracy of pollution level of SO₂, NO₂ and PM₁₀, the prediction accuracy of transitional weather, correlation coefficient between forecasting value and observational value and synthesis scoring were analyzed in different seasons. The results show that the prediction accuracy of pollution level based on the CAPPS3 mode is higher in summer and autumn for three pollutants, while it is lower in winter for NO₂ and in spring for PM₁₀and the pollution level of most error prediction is higher. The prediction accuracy of transitional weather is higher in summer and autumn and lower in spring. The CAPPS3 mode is insensitive to changes of weather conditions. The prediction ability of the CAPPS3 mode is lower when pollutants concentrations changes abruptly, while it is higher under stable weather conditions. The forecasting values of pollutants concentrations based on the CAPPS3 is higher than the observation value and lags behind the reality. The correlation coefficient between forecasting values and observation values and synthesis scoring are higher in summer and autumn and lower in spring. In general, forecasting results of the CAPPS3 model are reasonable. Thus, the mode could provide valuable prediction and is suitable for use in the operational system.

Key words: City air pollution numerical prediction system (CAPPS3) mode, Verification, Pollutant, Fuzhou

王宏, 冯宏芳, 石钰, 隋平, 余永江. CAPPS3模式在福州市预报效果检验[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2011, 27(4): 25-29.

WANG Hong, FENG Hong-Fang, SHI Yu, SUI Ping, YU Yong-Jiang. Forecasting verification of CAPPS3 mode in Fuzhou, Fujian province[J]. Journal of Meteorology and Environment, 2011, 27(4): 25-29.

0
/ / 推荐

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

链接本文: http://www.jme1984.net.cn/CN/

http://www.jme1984.net.cn/CN/Y2011/V27/I4/25

[1]	董贞花, 齐伊玲, 孔海江. 河南省三次重污染过程的对比分析[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2019, 35(1): 18-25.
[2]	安林昌, 张恒德, 李凯飞. 降雨天气对大气污染物浓度的影响分析[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2018, 34(3): 58-70.
[3]	占龙飞, 束炯, 陈亮. 行列式街区风场和污染物浓度场分布特征[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2017, 33(5): 61-67.
[4]	李倩, 杨旭, 马梁臣, 张俊茹, 孙克敏, 邢丽元. 长春市酸雨变化特征及其影响因素分析[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2017, 33(4): 48-55.
[5]	陈镭, 马井会, 甄新蓉, 曹钰. 上海地区空气污染变化特征及其气象影响因素[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2017, 33(3): 59-67.
[6]	杨关盈, 邓学良, 吴必文, 霍彦峰, 翟菁, 于彩霞, 田磊. 基于CUACE模式的合肥地区空气质量预报效果检验[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2017, 33(1): 51-57.
[7]	李晓岚, 马雁军, 王扬锋, 赵胡笳, 刘洪利. 基于CUACE系统沈阳地区春季空气质量预报的校验及修正[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2016, 32(6): 10-18.
[8]	杨峰, 李文青, 谢放尖, 陆晓波. 春节期间禁燃烟花爆竹对南京市空气质量影响[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2016, 32(4): 48-54.
[9]	雷正翠, 钱玮, 夏文梅, 沈琰, 吴晶璐, 吴建秋, 黄文彦, 刘银峰. 常州地区霾的变化特征及影响因子分析[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2016, 32(3): 53-60.
[10]	张子曰, 李艳, 戴高菊, 王玮琦, 程月星. 北京市朝阳区主要大气污染物浓度变化特征[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2016, 32(2): 44-51.
[11]	王成祥, 刘加珍. 聊城市空气质量现状及污染原因分析[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2016, 32(1): 108-112.
[12]	谢放尖李文青卢宁川喻义勇于忠华. 南京一次暴雪过程大气污染特征分析[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2015, 31(2): 9-14.
[13]	严晓瑜缑晓辉刘玉兰杜娟娟. 银川大气污染物浓度变化特征及其与气象条件的关系[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2015, 31(2): 21-30.
[14]	杨俊梅, 李培仁, 李义宇, 封秋娟, 李军霞, 韩永翔, 朱彬. 南京北郊 O₃、NO₂和 SO₂变化特征分析[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2014, 30(3): 66-70.
[15]	吴珂, 汪婷, 曾山佰,何娜. 2011年11月苏州一次灰霾天气过程分析[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2013, 29(6): 31-36.