基于目标对象检验法的四川省两种数值模式暴雨预报对比分析

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1673-503X.2023.06.006

Abstract

Abstract:

According to the deviation test of 31 heavy rain process forecasts in Sichuan province in 2021, 3 forecasting cases predicted by the ECMWF (European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts) model and the CMA-MESO (China Meteorological Administration Mesoscale Model) model were selected for comparisons.For these three cases, the rain bands predicted by the ECMWF model were westerly biased, and those produced by the CMA-MESO were better.Based on the object-oriented verification method, the characteristics and main reasons for the bias of the two models in the heavy precipitation falling area (≥25 mm) were compared from four aspects: location deviation, area deviation, rain band trend, and precipitation intensity.The results show that the falling region of the precipitation forecasted by the ECMWF model biases westward and northward, and the westward deviation distance (59.06~123.67 km) is significantly larger than the northerly deviation distance (8.23~53.59 km), while that forecasted by the CMA-MESO model is closer to the forecast.The precipitation areas forecasted by the ECMWF and CMA-MESO models both exceed the actual areas with the ECMWF model being over 7.0%~34.3% and CMA-MESO model being over 25.2%~45.9%, respectively.The deviation between the average precipitation forecast and the actual precipitation is -3.5%~20.0%, but the extreme precipitation forecast is larger than the actual precipitation deviation, with a deviation range of 50.1%~196.9%.The test analysis shows that the CMA-MESO model can provide a correction reference for the heavy rainfall process in Sichuan province, which occurs at the edge of subtropical high and is affected by the plateau vortex or the southwest vortex when the ECMWF model forecasts the heavy rainfall area (≥25 mm) to the west.

Key words: Target object verification method, ECMWF model, CMA-MESO model

CLC Number:

P457.6

Jiajin WANG,Binyan WANG,Dixiang XIAO,Ke-ji LONG. Comparative analysis of heavy rain forecast in Sichuan province from two numerical models based on the object recognition method[J]. Journal of Meteorology and Environment, 2023, 39(6): 44-50.

Figures/Tables 8

Fig.1

Fig.2

Table 1

Fig.3

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Fig.4

References 22

1	张寅, 罗亚丽, 管兆勇. NCEP全球预报系统在ARM SGP站点预报大气温度、湿度和云量的检验[J]. 大气科学, 2012, 36 (1): 170- 184.
2	唐娴, 周荣卫, 何晓凤, 等. 多源降水预报集成技术应用研究[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2021, 37 (4): 26- 32. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-503X.2021.04.004
3	熊秋芬. GRAPES_Meso模式的降水格点检验和站点检验分析[J]. 气象, 2011, 37 (2): 185- 193. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6362.2011.02.006
4	潘留杰, 张宏芳, 王建鹏, 等. 日本高分辨率模式对中国降水预报能力的客观检验[J]. 高原气象, 2014, 33 (2): 483- 494.
5	彭新东, 常燕, 王式功. GRAPES模式对2008年两次强降水过程的数值预报检验[J]. 高原气象, 2010, 29 (2): 321- 330.
6	聂安祺, 李得勤, 滕方达, 等. 辽宁省夏季多模式降水预报检验及晴雨预报技术研究[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2020, 36 (5): 10- 17.
7	翟振芳, 魏春璇, 邓斌, 等. 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.
8	张人禾, 沈学顺. 中国国家级新一代业务数值预报系统GRAPES的发展[J]. 科学通报, 2008, 53 (20): 2393- 2395.
9	Baldwin M E , Kain J S . Sensitivity of several performance measures to displacement error, bias, and event frequency[J]. Weather and Forecasting, 2006, 21 (4): 636- 648. doi: 10.1175/WAF933.1
10	Mass C F , Ovens D , Westrick K , et al. Does increasing horizontal resolution produce more skillful forecasts?[J]. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 2002, 83 (3): 407- 430. doi: 10.1175/1520-0477(2002)083<0407:DIHRPM>2.3.CO;2
11	Gilleland E , Ahijevych D , Brown B G , et al. Intercomparison of spatial forecast verification methods[J]. Weather and Forecasting, 2009, 24 (5): 1416- 1430. doi: 10.1175/2009WAF2222269.1
12	王彬雁, 陈朝平, 丛芳, 等. MODE方法在西南区域模式降水预报检验中的应用[J]. 高原山地气象研究, 2020, 40 (2): 26- 30.
13	丛芳, 龙柯吉, 王佳津, 等. 结合SAL方法的四川盆地暴雨过程检验及订正方法[J]. 中低纬山地气象, 2021, 45 (5): 28- 33.
14	曹萍萍, 肖递祥, 王佳津, 等. SWCWARMS及ECMWF模式对四川盆地暖区型和斜压锋生型暴雨预报检验分析[J]. 高原山地气象研究, 2018, 38 (1): 22-29, 47.
15	肖红茹, 王灿伟, 周秋雪, 等. T639、ECMWF细网格模式对2012年5~8月四川盆地降水预报的天气学检验[J]. 高原山地气象研究, 2013, 33 (1): 80- 85.
16	葛晶晶, 钟玮, 杜楠, 等. 地形影响下四川暴雨的数值模拟分析[J]. 气象科学, 2008, 28 (2): 176- 183.
17	屠妮妮, 何光碧, 衡志炜, 等. 三种数值模式对四川省汛期降水预报性能的检验[J]. 高原山地气象研究, 2020, 40 (4): 1- 9.
18	张武龙, 康岚, 周威, 等. 基于GRAPES-MESO模式的极端短时强降水预报[J]. 干旱气象, 2021, 39 (3): 507- 513.
19	王国荣, 陈敏, 由凤春, 等. 基于对象诊断的空间检验方法(MODE)[J]. 气象科技, 2014, 42 (4): 652- 656.
20	尤凤春, 王国荣, 郭锐, 等. MODE方法在降水预报检验中的应用分析[J]. 气象, 2011, 37 (12): 1498- 1503.
21	薛春芳, 潘留杰. 基于MODE方法的日本细网格模式降水预报的诊断分析[J]. 高原气象, 2016, 35 (2): 406- 418.
22	曲巧娜, 盛春岩, 范苏丹, 等. 基于目标对象检验法的多种模式强降水能力的比较[J]. 气象, 2019, 45 (7): 908- 919.

模式	方向	偏差距离/km
模式	方向	20210716	20210904	20210905
EC-实况	东	—	—	—
	南	—	—	—
	西	123.67	59.06	84.74
	北	8.23	53.59	31.91
CMA-MESO-实况	东	—	49.70	—
	南	78.17	—	—
	西	90.15	—	57.88
	北	—	27.00	26.35

模式	轴角/°
模式	20210716	20210904	20210905
实况	-39.933	-37.709	-51.443
EC	-45.646	-40.122	-20.038
CMA-MESO	-36.437	-30.111	72.037
A	-41.042	-35.117	-25.999

模式	轴角偏差/°
模式	20210716	20210904	20210905
EC	5.71	2.41	31.40
CMA-MESO	3.49	7.59	123.48
A	1.11	2.59	25.44

模式	离心率
模式	20210716	20210904	20210905
实况	0.930	0.969	0.783
EC	0.886	0.928	0.806
CMA-MESO	0.932	0.944	0.452

[1]	Wei JIN, Wei-hua LIU, Ling-feng GAO, Qian WANG, Guo-jing HAN. Research on the test and error correction in temperature forecasted by the ECWMF model in Liaoning province [J]. Journal of Meteorology and Environment, 2020, 36(6): 50-57.
[2]	LI Dian, CHAI Xiao-ling, LI Chong, LU Yang, WU Yu-tong, CUI Jing-lin. Characteristics analysis of “20160630” local heavy rain and its predictability in Shenyang [J]. Journal of Meteorology and Environment, 2018, 34(1): 11-21.
[3]	ZHAI Zhen-fang, WEI Chun-xuan, DENG Bin, JI Yuan. Verification and analysis of rainfall forecasted by the ECMWF model in Anhui province [J]. Journal of Meteorology and Environment, 2017, 33(5): 1-9.
[4]	ZHU Jia-rong, QI Liang-bo. Evolution and forecast of a radiation fog event in Shanghai [J]. Journal of Meteorology and Environment, 2017, 33(1): 1-11.
[5]	WANG Ying WANG Qian CHEN Yu WU Manli. Application of subtropical high index from ECMWF model [J]. Journal of Meteorology and Environment, 2007, 23(5): 26-31.

Comparative analysis of heavy rain forecast in Sichuan province from two numerical models based on the object recognition method

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 8

References 22

Related Articles 5

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 10