两种模式对粤西台风云系微物理结构模拟结果的检验评估  

Assessment of the Simulation Results of the Microphysical Structure of Typhoon Cloud Systems in Western Guangdong by Two Models

作　　者：罗瑞婷 刘炫州 殷美祥 温精敏[4] LUO Ruiting;LIU Xuanzhou;YIN Meixiang;WEN Jingmin(Guangdong Weather Modification Centre,Guangzhou 510641,China;Zhaoqing Meteorological Bureau,Zhaoqing 526000,China;Guangdong Meteorological Service Centre,Guangzhou 510641,China;Shenzhen National Climate Observatory,Shenzhen 518040,China)

机构地区：[1]广东省人工影响天气中心,广东广州510641 [2]广东省肇庆市气象局,广东肇庆526000 [3]广东省气象服务中心,广东广州510641 [4]深圳市国家气候观象台,广东深圳518040

出　　处：《成都信息工程大学学报》2025年第2期226-231,共6页Journal of Chengdu University of Information Technology

基　　金：广东省气象局科技资助项目(GRMC2022LM02、GRMC2023M03)。

摘　　要：为提高人工影响天气模式产品释用技巧,基于探空、S波段双偏振雷达、卫星和地面观测等多源数据资料,以粤西一次典型台风云系为例,对CMA-GD和CPEFS模式模拟降水云系的水平、垂直结构和云微物理结构的效果进行对比检验。结果表明:(1)对台风云系发展演变的模拟,CMA-GD模式相较于CPEFS模式模拟回波强度和回波移入时间与实况偏差较小;(2)对云系宏观参量的模拟,CMA-GD模式模拟广东地区云顶高度和垂直累积液态水含量较实况偏低,CPEFS模式则偏高;(3)对云系垂直结构的模拟,两种模式对零度层的预报比实况偏高200~300 m,液态水分布接近实况,过冷水分布高度偏高,CMA-GD模式模拟垂直风向和风速更接近实况;(4)对云系微观结构的模拟,CMA-GD和CPEFS模式对雨水、霰混合比模拟明显偏小,CMA-GD模式对雪混合比模拟较接近实况,而CPEFS模式模拟云层较深厚,雨水主要来自高层冰晶、雪、霰等冰相粒子的融化和部分云水的相互转化。To enhance the application techniques of cloud model products for weather modification,this study utilizes a variety of data sources including radiosonde,S-band dual-polarization weather radar,satellite and ground-based observations.Focusing on a typhoon cloud system in western Guangdong,it conducts a comparative analysis of the simulation capabilities of the CMA-GD and CPEFS cloud models in terms of the horizontal and vertical physical structures,as well as the microphysical properties of the precipitation clouds.The results indicate that:(1)In simulating the development and evolution of the typhoon's cloud system,the CMA-GD model demonstrates smaller deviations in radar echo intensity and arrival time compared to the CPEFS model;(2)For simulating macro parameters of cloud systems,the CMA-GD model shows that the cloud top height in Guangdong is lower,the vertically accumulated liquid water content is lower,whereas the CPEFS model overestimates these values;(3)In simulating the vertical structure of cloud systems,both models'predictions for the zero temperature layer was 200-300 m higher than observed,the distribution of liquid water is close to the actual values,and the distribution of supercooled water is higher than the actual values.The CMA-GD model's predictions for vertical wind direction and speed were more accurate;(4)For simulating the microstructure of cloud systems,both the CMA-GD and CPEFS cloud models significantly underestimated the mixing ratio between rainwater and graupel.The CMA-CD cloud model was closer to the observed snow mixing ratios,whereas the CPEFS cloud model overestimated them.The CMA-GD model simulated deeper snow layers with less graupel,resulting in less transformation into rainwater.Conversely,the CPEFS model simulated deeper cloud layers,with rainwater primarily derived from the melting of high-level ice crystals,snow,and graupel,and from the transformation of some cloud water.

关 键 词：数值模拟 预报检验 台风云系 微物理结构 模式 

分 类 号：P426[天文地球—大气科学及气象学]