基于再分析数据和集合预报产品的对流潜势评估

Convective Potential Assessment Based on Reanalysis Data and Ensemble Forecast Products

  • 摘要: 该文对比2023年7月1日—9月30日欧洲中期天气预报中心第5代再分析数据(ECWMF reanalysis version 5, ERA5)、中国气象局全球再分析数据(CMA global reanalysis, CRA)、中国气象局全球集合预报系统(CMA-Global Ensemble Prediction System, CMA-GEPS)控制预报产品与无线电探空仪观测数据计算的对流潜势指数, 并利用国家雷电探测系统闪电定位数据识别雷暴潜势阈值。结果表明:ERA5数据的对流有效位能误差最小, 与观测数据相关系数最高, CMA-GEPS控制预报产品次之, 而CRA数据的对流有效位能存在正误差, 且分布较为离散。复合参数表现与对流有效位能一致。ERA5数据、CRA数据、CMA-GEPS控制预报产品与观测数据的垂直风切变相关系数较高, 但均存在较小的负平均误差。与0~6 km垂直风切变相比, ERA5数据、CRA数据、CMA-GEPS控制预报产品的0~1 km垂直风切变与观测数据的相关系数更低, 平均误差更高, 不宜用于开展对流潜势指数研究。对流有效位能和复合参数可在一定程度上区分雷暴事件和非雷暴事件, 但潜势预报阈值会随着数据和区域的不同发生变化, 是一种概率指标。

     

    Abstract: Reanalysis data and model prediction products are frequently used in studying the convective potential index and its thresholds. CMA global reanalysis (CRA) developed by China Meteorological Administration and CMA-Global Ensemble Prediction System (CMA-GEPS) products are assessed to evaluate the capability in depicting convective potential index, and to establish a potential prediction threshold for thunderstorm weather across China. A comparison of the convective potential index derived from ERA5 reanalysis data, CRA reanalysis data, and control forecast products of CMA-GEPS with radiosonde observations is conducted during the warm season from July to September in 2023. The threshold for thunderstorm potential is determined using lightning location data from the National Lightning Detection Network. It's found that ERA5 reanalysis data induces the smallest forecasting errors and the highest correlation coefficients with radiosonde observations for convective available potential energy (CAPE), and the control prediction products of CMA-GEPS are next in line. However, CRA reanalysis data exhibits obvious positive errors for CAPE values, and the distribution of CAPE index appears to be relatively discrete. The composite CAPE-shear parameters are found to correlate with CAPE value. Consequently, it suggests that ERA5 reanalysis data and CMA-GEPS control prediction products can effectively substitute for actual radiosonde observations in the study of convective potential index. Correlation coefficients of vertical wind shear among ERA5 reanalysis data, CRA reanalysis data, CMA-GEPS control prediction products, and radiosonde observations are found to be high but with small negative mean errors. In addition, compared to 0-6 km vertical wind shear, correlation coefficients of 0-1 km vertical wind shear between reanalysis data, ensemble prediction products and radiosonde observations are found to be lower, and the mean errors are found to be larger. Consequently, using boundary layer wind from reanalysis data or prediction products is considered inappropriate for studying the convective potential index. The CAPE value, along with composite parameters that integrate CAPE with 0-6 km vertical wind shear, can be utilized to some extent for discriminating between thunderstorm and non-thunderstorm events. It is important to note that the potential thresholds vary with different datasets and should be regarded as probabilistic indicators. However, it shows that 0-6 km vertical wind shear index is ineffective in distinguishing thunderstorm events from non-thunderstorm events.

     

/

返回文章
返回