三种方法确定济南夏季日最大边界层高度的对比研究  

Comparison of three methods in determining the daily maximum boundary layer height in Jinan in summer

作　　者：王栋成[1] 汤子东[1] 邱粲[1,2] 曹洁 董旭光[1] WANG Dongcheng;TANG Zidong;QIU Can;CAO Jie;DONG Xuguang(Shandong Climate Center, Jinan 250031, China;Department of Geography, Shanghai Normal University, Shanghai 200234, China)

机构地区：[1]山东省气候中心,山东济南250031 [2]上海师范大学地理系,上海200234

出　　处：《海洋气象学报》2020年第2期113-124,共12页Journal of Marine Meteorology

基　　金：山东省气象局重点科研项目(2014sdqxz05);山东省气象科学研究所数值天气预报应用技术开放基金(SDQXKF2015Z02)。

摘　　要：基于济南站边界层风廓线雷达(wind profile radar,WPR)观测的大气折射率结构常数(Cn2),采用偏离度法确定夏季白天边界层高度(HBL),分别与基于L波段雷达探空资料的干绝热曲线法、基于地面气象观测资料的国标法确定的HBL进行对比。结果表明:1)三种方法确定的25 d日最大HBL的平均值分别为2500.0 m、2529.1 m、2469.9 m,总体一致;25 d同日期比较,偏离度法与后两者的标准偏差(σ)分别为337.1 m、636.7 m;前两方法结果的相关系数(R)较高为0.668,但两者与国标法的R分别为-0.130、-0.064,证实国标法HBL的均值准确度尚可但实时值准确度低。2)偏离度法确定的日最大HBL出现时间,25 d平均和最多均在15时,逐小时HBL 07—15时呈缓慢增高态势、15—19时则快速降低;但国标法日最大HBL 25 d平均和最多均出现在16时,且HBL在午后13—15时出现坍塌现象,与对流边界层午后峰值规律显著不同。3)前两种方法的HBL与地表温度、气温的相关性均较好,与风速的相关性则较差;而国标法HBL与风速的相关性较好,与地表温度、气温的相关性则较差;偏离度法日最大HBL对最高气温、最高地表温度的平均响应时间分别为1、2 h左右,符合太阳辐射—地表温度—气温—HBL的响应关系和次序,但国标法的日最大HBL未能反映这一响应。4)偏离度法HBL与各污染物的逐小时质量浓度均呈显著负相关,但国标法HBL的相关性较差。5)三种方法综合对比,偏离度法HBL准确度较高,且能给出时空演变;干绝热曲线法HBL准确度较高,但不能给出时空演变;国标法实时HBL准确度低,虽能给出时空演变但午后峰值偏差大。Based on the atmospheric refractive index structure constant(Cn2)observed by the boundary layer wind profile radar(WPR)of Jinan Station,the boundary layer height(HBL)during the daytime in summer is determined by the deviation degree method,whose results are compared with those by the dry adiabatic curve method based on L-band sounding data and the national standard method based on surface meteorological observations.The results are shown below.1)The mean values of the daily maximum HBL in the 25 d determined by the three methods are 2500.0 m,2529.1 m,and 2469.9 m,respectively,which are generally consistent;the standard deviations(σ)between the results of deviation degree method and those of the latter two are 337.1 m and 636.7 m,respectively;the correlation coefficient(R)between the results by the first two methods is 0.668,while the R between the results by the two methods and those by the national standard method are-0.130 and-0.064,respectively,which confirms that the accuracy of mean HBL by the national standard method is acceptable but the accuracy of real-time HBL is low.2)The average and most occurrence time of the daily maximum HBL determined by the deviation degree method are 15:00 during the 25 d and the HBL increases slowly from 07:00 to 15:00 and decreases rapidly from 15:00 to 19:00;however,the average and most occurrence time of the daily maximum HBL determined by the national standard method are 16:00 during the 25 d and the HBL collapses from 13:00 to 15:00,which is significantly different from the afternoon-peak pattern of the convective boundary layer.3)The HBL determined by the first two methods has a good correlation with surface temperature and air temperature,but a poor correlation with wind speed;while the HBL determined by the national standard method has an opposite result.For the deviation degree method,the average response time of the daily maximum HBL to the highest air temperature and the highest surface temperature are about one h and two h,respectively,which accords with the respon

关 键 词：最大边界层高度 偏离度法 干绝热曲线法 国标法 风廓线雷达 大气折射率结构常数 

分 类 号：P412.3[天文地球—大气科学及气象学]