葫芦岛“8·20”特大暴雨过程中融合降水资料适用性对比评估

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1673-503X.2025.04.002

气象与环境学报 ›› 2025, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (4): 10-20.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-503X.2025.04.002

• 葫芦岛“8·20”特大暴雨专题 • 上一篇下一篇

葫芦岛“8·20”特大暴雨过程中融合降水资料适用性对比评估

肖光梁¹, 才奎志¹, 王瀛¹, 纪永明¹, 刘靖楠², 程攀¹, 朱宪龙¹, 纪曦萌¹

1. 辽宁省气象灾害监测预警中心, 辽宁沈阳 110166;
2. 葫芦岛市气象台, 辽宁葫芦岛 125001

收稿日期:2024-10-12 修回日期:2025-03-14 出版日期:2025-08-28 发布日期:2026-01-10
通讯作者: 才奎志,男,正高级工程师,E-mail:59595455@qq.com。 E-mail:59595455@qq.com
作者简介:肖光梁,男,1984年生,高级工程师,主要从事灾害性天气监测预报预警评估应用研究,E-mail:469739853@qq.com。
基金资助:
辽宁省科技厅自然科学基金面上项目(2025-MSLH-376)、中国气象局沈阳大气环境研究所联合开放基金(2022SYIAEKFMS02)、中国气象局预报员专项(CMAYBY2019-08)和辽宁省科学技术计划项目(2024-MSLH-237)共同资助。

Application assessment of merged precipitation data during the “8·20” torrential rainstorm in Huludao

XIAO Guangliang¹, CAI Kuizhi¹, WANG Ying¹, JI Yongming¹, LIU Jingnan², CHENG Pan¹, ZHU Xianlong¹, JI Ximeng¹

1. Liaoning Meteorological Disaster Monitoring and Warning Center, Shenyang 110166, China;
2. Huludao Meteorological Observatory, Huludao 125001, China

Received:2024-10-12 Revised:2025-03-14 Online:2025-08-28 Published:2026-01-10

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 针对辽宁省葫芦岛市2024年8月20—21日特大暴雨事件(简称“8·20”特大暴雨),选取相关系数、多种误差指标,采用分级和不分级两种评估方法,对比5种降水融合资料(C3SPA_1km、C3SPA_5km、C2SPA_5km、C3SPA_1km_10m、L2SPA_1km_10m)分别在站点数据不缺测和缺测情况下的反演能力。结果表明:5种降水融合资料对累计降水实况均表现出不同程度的低估;随着短时强降水级别增大,降水融合资料低估情况随之增加,C3SPA_1km和C3SPA_5km在不缺测情况下反演能力最好,但二者在缺测情况下反演效果下滑更明显,L2SPA_1km_10m相较而言影响较弱;C3SPA_1km和C3SPA_5km较C2SPA_5km改善明显,L2SPA_1km_10m反演效果差于三源资料,明显优于二源资料;站点最近格点不一定准确反演该站降水,可能距站点2～3个格距内有更接近实况的值;可以考虑研发降水融合小时产品,综合研判减少观测盲区低估问题。

关键词: 葫芦岛, 特大暴雨, 降水融合, 对比评估

Abstract: The torrential rainstorm that occurred in the city of Huludao,Liaoning Province,on 20-21 August,2024 (referred to as the "8·20" torrential rainstorm) was selected. The applicability of five merged precipitation datasets (C3SPA_1km,C3SPA_5km,C2SPA_5km,C3SPA_1km_10m,L2SPA_1km_10m) in the extreme rainstorm is compared and evaluated by using hierarchical and non-hierarchical assessment under the conditions of complete and missing observation. The results show that five merged precipitation datasets underestimate the actual cumulative precipitation to varying degrees,with the level of short-term heavy precipitation increases,the underestimation of merged precipitation data increases. Among the five datasets,the 3-source 1km data and 3-source 5 km data have the best reconstructing ability under the conditions of complete observation,but their reconstructing ability decreased more significantly under missing observation condition.The 3-source 1 km data and 3-source 5 km data are significantly better than the 2-source 5 km data,the reconstructing ability of Liaoning 1km data is worse than that of the 3-source datasets,it is significantly better than that of the 2-source 5 km data.The nearest grid point may not always accurately reconstruct precipitation at a station,and there may be a more accurate precipitation value within 2 to 3 grids distances from the station. It is suggested that hourly merged precipitation product should be developed to improve assessments and reduce underestimation in observation blind areas.

Key words: Huludao, Torrential rainstorm, Merged precipitation, Comparative assessment

中图分类号:

P426

肖光梁, 才奎志, 王瀛, 纪永明, 刘靖楠, 程攀, 朱宪龙, 纪曦萌. 葫芦岛“8·20”特大暴雨过程中融合降水资料适用性对比评估[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2025, 41(4): 10-20.

XIAO Guangliang, CAI Kuizhi, WANG Ying, JI Yongming, LIU Jingnan, CHENG Pan, ZHU Xianlong, JI Ximeng. Application assessment of merged precipitation data during the “8·20” torrential rainstorm in Huludao[J]. Journal of Meteorology and Environment, 2025, 41(4): 10-20.

参考文献

[1] 杨雪,韦昊岩.辽宁葫芦岛强降雨已造成10人遇难1人因公牺牲14人失联[Z/OL].央视新闻,(2024-08-23).https://news.cctv.com/2024/08/23/ARTITVdQaPCK7vmh5zF3GWBD240823.shtml.
[2] Morrissey M L,Maliekal J A,Greene J S,et al.The uncertainty of simple spatial averages using rain gauge networks[J].Water Resources Research,1995,31(8):2011-2017.
[3] Villarini G,Krajewski W F.Empirically based modeling of Spatial sampling uncertainties associated with rainfall measurements by rain gauges[J].Advances in Water Resources,2008,31(7):1015-1023.
[4] 东高红,吕江津.不同校准方法检验雷达定量估测降水的效果对比[J].气象与环境学报,2012,28(4):38-42.
[5] 尉英华,东高红,徐姝.海河流域不同地形站网密度对面雨量分析精度的影响[J].气象与环境学报,2014,30(6):75-79.
[6] Krajewski W F.Cokriging radar-rainfall and rain gage data[J].Journal of Geophysical Research:Atmospheres,1987,92(8):9571-9580.
[7] Rosenfeld D,Wolff D B,Amitai E.The window probability matching method for rainfall measurements with radar[J].Journal of Applied Meteorology,1994,33(6):682-693.
[8] Pereira F A J,Crawford K C,Hartzell C L.Improving WSR-88D hourly rainfall estimates[J].Weather and Forecasting,1998,13(4):1016-1028.
[9] Todini E.A Bayesian technique for conditioning radar precipitation estimates to rain-gauge measurements[J].Hydrology and Earth System Sciences,2001,5(2):187-199.
[10] Seo D J,Breidenbach J P.Real-time correction of spatially nonuniform bias in radar rainfall data using rain gauge measurements[J].Journal of Hydrometeorology,2002,3(2):93-111.
[11] Shen Y,Zhao P,Pan Y,et al.A high spatiotemporal gauge-satellite merged precipitation analysis over China[J].Journal of Geophysical Research:Atmospheres,2014,119(6):3063-3075.
[12] Bianchi B,Van Leeuwen P J,Hogan R J,et al.A variational approach to retrieve rain rate by combining information from rain gauges,radars,andmicrowave links[J].Journal of Hydrometeorology,2013,14(6):1897-1909.
[13] 潘旸,沈艳,宇婧婧,等.基于最优插值方法分析的中国区域地面观测与卫星反演逐时降水融合试验[J].气象学报,2012,70(6):1381-1389.
[14] 宇婧婧,沈艳,潘旸,等.概率密度匹配法对中国区域卫星降水资料的改进[J].应用气象学报,2013,24(5):544-553.
[15] 沈艳,潘旸,宇婧婧,等.中国区域小时降水量融合产品的质量评估[J].大气科学学报,2013,36(1):37-46.
[16] 刘卫华,金巍,王会品,等.2020年CLDAS风场数据在辽宁省的适用性分析[J].气象与环境学报,2023,39(6):61-68.
[17] 吴薇,黄晓龙,郭旭,等.总云量实况分析产品在四川省的检验分析[J].气象与环境学报,2022,38(6):65-72.
[18] 贾晓红,李琦.京藏高速呼集段道路结冰期CLDAS气温适用性及其在交通风险预警中的应用[J].气象与环境学报,2023,39(6):96-104.
[19] 孙帅,师春香,潘旸,等.中国区域三源降水融合产品的改进效果评估[J].水文,2020,40(6):10-15.

葫芦岛“8·20”特大暴雨过程中融合降水资料适用性对比评估

Application assessment of merged precipitation data during the “8·20” torrential rainstorm in Huludao

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 4

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 10

[1]	崔曜鹏, 杨磊, 孙丽, 高艳波, 魏海宁, 华婧婧, 崔景轩, 刘春溪. 辽宁东南半岛两次北上台风暴雨特征及成因对比分析[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2022, 38(2): 1-11.
[2]	林璇,赵磊,李得勤,古珊,牛骋,陈薇,文小航,王思慧. 华北“7.20”特大暴雨多尺度特征分析[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2020, 36(3): 1-9.
[3]	李安泰,何宏让,张云. WRF模式对舟曲“0808”特大泥石流暴雨的数值模拟分析[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2012, 28(2): 54-59.
[4]	周慧晶,郭振江. 近年葫芦岛市区空气微生物浓度变化特征分析[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2008, 24(2): 68-72.