主办单位:中国气象局沈阳大气环境研究所
国际刊号:ISSN 1673-503X
国内刊号:CN 21-1531/P

气象与环境学报 ›› 2019, Vol. 35 ›› Issue (3): 29-36.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-503X.2019.03.004

• 论文 • 上一篇    下一篇

偏离度法确定济南夏季对流边界层高度研究

王栋成, 邱粲, 董旭光, 曹洁   

  1. 山东省气候中心, 山东 济南 250031
  • 收稿日期:2018-01-22 修回日期:2018-04-03 出版日期:2019-06-30 发布日期:2019-06-28
  • 作者简介:王栋成,男,1969年生,高级工程师,主要研究领域为大气环境与气候应用,E-mail:hjpj2008@163.com。
  • 基金资助:
    山东省气象局气象科学技术重点研究项目(2014sdqxz05)资助。

Study on determining the height of the convective boundary layer in summer over Ji'nan using deviation degree method

WANG Dong-cheng, QIU Can, DONG Xu-guang, CAO Jie   

  1. Shandong Climate Center, Ji'nan 250031, China
  • Received:2018-01-22 Revised:2018-04-03 Online:2019-06-30 Published:2019-06-28

摘要: 利用济南站边界层风廓线雷达(简称WPR)观测资料,对大气折射率结构常数(简称Cn2)确定对流边界层高度(简称CBLH)的技术难点进行了研究,通过对实测Cn2数据廓线进行求导变换突出其变量特征,提出了一种确定CBLH的方法,即e指数拟合曲线的偏离度法。结果表明:经案例分析和与实测对比,证实其判断的结果与L探空实测虚位温梯度法、湿度梯度法等的判断结果总体一致,平均值分别与后两者结果相差+10.4 m、-21.8 m,最小值差-70 m、-120 m,最大值差+50 m、+80 m,与后两者的相关系数分别达0.988、0.980。不同方法对比表明,31组样本中有7组的极大值法判断结果与偏离度法、虚位温梯度法存在较大差异,在CBLH判别时偏离度法总体优于极大值法。偏离度法能够将夏季CBLH确定结果的绝对误差降至近似WPR垂直分辨率水平。

关键词: 偏离度法, 对流边界层高度, 大气折射率结构常数, 风廓线雷达, L探空, 质量控制

Abstract: Based on the data of boundary layer wind profile radar (WPR) at Ji'nan station,the technical difficulties in determining the height of the convective boundary layer (hereinafter referred to as CBLH) using the structure constant of atmospheric refractive index (hereinafter referred to as Cn2) were studied.Through transforming the profile of Cn2 data to highlight its variable characteristics,we proposed a method to determine CBLH,namely,the deviation method based on an e-index fitting curve.Confirmed by case analysis and compared with the measurements,the results derived using this method are generally consistent with those derived using the methods of the L-sounding virtual potential temperature gradient and the moisture gradient.The correlation coefficients between the results obtained in this study and those obtained from the other two methods reach 0.988 and 0.980,respectively,and the average differences are +10.4 m and -21.8 m,the minimum differences are -70 m and-120 m,and the maximum differences are +50 m and +80 m,respectively.The comparison results of different methods show that,among thirty-one groups of samples, the results from seven groups derived by the maximum value method are significant differences from those derived by the deviation and the virtual potential temperature gradient methods.The deviation method is generally superior to the maximum value method in determining CBLH.This method can reduce the absolute error of CBLH in summer to approximately the level of the WPR vertical resolution.

Key words: Deviation degree method, Convective boundary layer height, Structure constant of atmospheric refractive index, Wind profile radar, L-sounding, Quality control

中图分类号: