全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

EC模式在青岛地区及其沿海地区风场预报中的适用性
Applicability of EC Model in Wind Field Forecasting in Qingdao and Its Coastal Areas

DOI: 10.12677/CCRL.2023.122039, PP. 368-375

Keywords: EC,风速,误差,准确率
EC
, Wind Speed, Deviation, Accuracy

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

为更好地开展青岛及其沿海地区的风场服务,本文对2017~2018年的ECMWF细网格产品模式的10米风场预报在青岛及其沿海地区的适用性进行检验评估。结果表明:EC预报整体偏小,预报效果陆地站优于岸基站优于海岛站。分不同风速等级分析得出,风速误差随着风速等级增加而增大,预报准确率随风速等级增加而降低。3级以下,预报偏小,4~5级,岸基站和海岛站预报偏小,6级以上,内陆站预报偏大,海岛站预报偏小。且3级以下的风速预报,EC预报风速等级和实测风速等级相差在?1~0级之间,占65%。4~5级风速预报,内陆站、岸基站风速等级差主要集中在0~1级之间,而海岛站风速差主要集中在?1~0之间,均达到65%,6级以上陆地站风速等级差主要分布在0~1级之间,占近30%,岸基站分布在1~2级之间,占44%,而海岛站分布在?2~?1之间,占53%。利用风速等级差对2019~2020年EC预报风速进行订正后,风速准确率均有一定程度的提升,尤其对于6级以上的风速准确率提升最高,整体提高38%以上。
In order to better develop the wind field service in Qingdao and its coastal areas, this paper tests and evaluates the applicability of the ECMWF fine grid products and the 10-meter wind field forecast of the GFS model in Qingdao and its coastal areas in 2017~2018. The results show that the overall EC forecast is relatively small, and the forecast effect of land stations is better than that of shore stations and island stations. According to the analysis of different wind speed levels, the wind speed error increases with the increase of the wind speed level, and the forecast accuracy decreases with the increase of the wind speed level. Below level 3, the forecast is too small, for levels 4~5, the forecast for shore base stations and island stations is small, and for levels above 6, the forecast for inland stations is too large, and the forecast for island stations is small. And for the wind speed forecast below level 3, the difference between the EC forecast wind speed level and the measured wind speed level is between ?1 and 0, accounting for 65%. 4~5 wind speed forecast, the difference in wind speed between inland stations and shore base stations is mainly between 0 and 1, while the difference in wind speed at island stations is mainly between ?1 and 0, both reaching 65%. The wind speed grade difference between the stations is mainly distributed between 0 and 1, account-ing for nearly 30%, the shore base stations are distributed between 1 and 2, accounting for 44%, and the island stations are distributed between ?2 and ?1, accounting for 53%. After correcting the 2019~2020 EC forecast wind speed by using the wind speed grade difference, the wind speed accuracy has been improved to a certain extent, especially for the wind speed above level 6, the accuracy has been improved the most, with an overall increase of more than 38%.

References

[1]  康志明. 2009年6-8月T639, ECMWF及日本数值模式中期预报性能检验[J]. 气象, 2009, 35(11): 143-149.
[2]  万夫敬, 赵传湖, 马艳, 等. ECMWF模式气温预报在青岛地区的检验与评估[J]. 气象科技, 2018, 46(1): 112-120.
[3]  王焕毅, 谭政华, 杨萌, 等. 三种数值模式气温预报产品的检验及误差订正方法研究[J]. 气象与环境学报, 2018, 34(1): 22-29.
[4]  张亚妮, 张金艳. 2010年12月至2011年2月T639与ECMWF及日本模式中期预报性能检验[J]. 气象, 2011, 37(5): 633-638.
[5]  方艳莹, 申华羽, 涂小萍, 等. ECMWF细网格对浙江沿海10 m风预报性能评估[J]. 中国农学通报, 2019(13): 22.
[6]  周昆, 郝元甲, 姚晨, 等. 6种数值模式在安徽区域天气预报中的检验[J]. 气象科学, 2010, 30(6): 801-805.
[7]  曾瑾瑜, 韩美, 吴幸毓, 等. WRF、EC和T639模式在福建沿海冬半年大风预报中的检验与应用[J]. 海洋科学, 2015, 39(7): 75-85.
[8]  高聪晖, 曾瑾瑜. 基于MOS方法的宁德海区风的预报检验分析[J]. 海洋预报, 2018, 35(4): 17-24.
[9]  荣艳敏, 闫丽凤, 盛春岩, 等. 山东精细化海区风的MOS预报方法研究[J]. 海洋预报, 2015, 32(3): 59-67.
[10]  阎丽凤, 盛春岩, 肖明静, 等. MM5、WRF-RUC及T639模式对山东沿海风力预报分级检验[J]. 气象科学, 2013, 33(3): 340-346.
[11]  侯淑梅, 张少林, 盛春岩, 等. T639数值预报产品对黄渤海沿海大风预报效果检验[J]. 海洋预报, 2014(6): 48-56.
[12]  马艳, 郭飞燕, 郭丽娜, 等. 基于1899-2015年观测资料的青岛风环境变化特征[J]. 山东气象, 2018(3): 67-74.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133