激光雨滴谱仪探测降水与自动气象站观测降水的对比分析
|
摘要
东营市气象局激光雨滴谱仪于2012年投入应用,为评估分析其探测降水量的准确性,选取东营国家级气象观测站2012——2017年间46个月的自动气象站降水资料与激光雨滴谱仪观测资料,共计245个过程降水量、1 302个小时降水量数据,按不同降水量级对两种仪器观测资料进行对比分析,结果表明:1)过程降水小雨量级,激光雨滴谱仪较自动站平均偏多0. 38 mm,降水量越大,差值越大;中雨量级两者差值较小,雨滴谱仪较自动站仅偏多0. 24 mm;大雨量级,雨滴谱仪较自动站降水量明显偏少约2. 8 mm;暴雨时雨滴谱仪较自动站常偏多。2)小时降水Rh<2. 5 mm时,雨滴谱仪较自动站偏多约0. 1 mm; 2. 5 mm≤Rh≤4. 9 mm时,激光雨滴谱仪与自动站降水量平均差值为0. 0 mm; 5. 0 mm≤Rh≤16. 0 mm时,雨滴谱仪较自动站常明显偏少,偏少值约0. 9 mm;16. 0 mm 20. 0 mm时,雨滴谱仪较自动站可能出现极端偏多、偏少或两者相近情况。3)降雪时雨滴谱仪降雪量常明显偏多。4)雨滴谱仪和自动站过程累积降水量趋势较一致,且雨滴谱仪分钟降水量能较早反映出降水量峰值及降水强度的变化。通过分析可见,雨滴谱仪雨量数据有较好的可靠性,可在辅助降水现象观测与订正、人工影响天气效果评估和短临预报中发挥更大作用。
The optical disdrometer of Dongying Meteorological Bureau was put into use in 2012. In order to assess the accuracy of the detected precipitation,the precipitation data of 46 months by the automatic weather station( AWS) and by the optical disdrometer at Dongying National Meteorological Station from 2012 to 2017,a total of 245 precipitation processes and 1 302 hourly precipitation data,are collected.The observation data by these two instruments are compared and analyzed according to different precipitation grades. The results are as follows. 1) For light rain,the precipitation by the optical disdrometer is averagely 0. 38 mm more than that by the AWS,and the greater the precipitation,the greater the difference; for moderate rain,the difference is relatively small,and the precipitation by the former is only 0. 24 mm more; for heavy rain,the precipitation by the former is about 2. 8 mm less; for rainstorm,the precipitation by the former is usually more. 2) When the hourly precipitation is less than2. 5 mm,the precipitation by the optical disdrometer is about 0. 1 mm more than that by the AWS; when it is between 2. 5 mm and 4. 9 mm,inclusive,the average difference is 0. 0 mm; when it is between 5. 0 mm and 16. 0 mm,inclusive,the precipitation by the optical disdrometer is obviously less than that by the AWS,which is about 0. 9 mm; when it is between 16. 0 mm( exclusive) and 20. 0 mm( inclusive),the precipitation by these two is close; when it is more than 20. 0 mm,the precipitation by the optical disdrometer can probably be extremely more or extremely less or close to that by the AWS. 3) As for snowfall,the precipitation by the optical disdrometer is usually significantly more. 4) The trend of accumulated precipitation by these two instruments is in conformity,and the minute precipitation by the optical disdrometer can reflect the precipitation peaks and changes of precipitation intensity. It can be seen from the analysis that the precipitation data by the optical disdrometer is reliable and can play a more important role in the observation and correction of precipitation phenomenon,the evaluation of weather modification effect,short-range forecasting,and nowcasting.
The optical disdrometer of Dongying Meteorological Bureau was put into use in 2012. In order to assess the accuracy of the detected precipitation,the precipitation data of 46 months by the automatic weather station( AWS) and by the optical disdrometer at Dongying National Meteorological Station from 2012 to 2017,a total of 245 precipitation processes and 1 302 hourly precipitation data,are collected.The observation data by these two instruments are compared and analyzed according to different precipitation grades. The results are as follows. 1) For light rain,the precipitation by the optical disdrometer is averagely 0. 38 mm more than that by the AWS,and the greater the precipitation,the greater the difference; for moderate rain,the difference is relatively small,and the precipitation by the former is only 0. 24 mm more; for heavy rain,the precipitation by the former is about 2. 8 mm less; for rainstorm,the precipitation by the former is usually more. 2) When the hourly precipitation is less than2. 5 mm,the precipitation by the optical disdrometer is about 0. 1 mm more than that by the AWS; when it is between 2. 5 mm and 4. 9 mm,inclusive,the average difference is 0. 0 mm; when it is between 5. 0 mm and 16. 0 mm,inclusive,the precipitation by the optical disdrometer is obviously less than that by the AWS,which is about 0. 9 mm; when it is between 16. 0 mm( exclusive) and 20. 0 mm( inclusive),the precipitation by these two is close; when it is more than 20. 0 mm,the precipitation by the optical disdrometer can probably be extremely more or extremely less or close to that by the AWS. 3) As for snowfall,the precipitation by the optical disdrometer is usually significantly more. 4) The trend of accumulated precipitation by these two instruments is in conformity,and the minute precipitation by the optical disdrometer can reflect the precipitation peaks and changes of precipitation intensity. It can be seen from the analysis that the precipitation data by the optical disdrometer is reliable and can play a more important role in the observation and correction of precipitation phenomenon,the evaluation of weather modification effect,short-range forecasting,and nowcasting.
引文
[1]中国气象局.地面气象观测规范[M].北京:气象出版社,2003.
[2]杜波,马舒庆,梁明珠,等.雨滴谱降水现象仪对比观测试验技术应用分析[J].气象科技,2017,45(6):995-1001.
[3]周黎明,王俊,龚佃利,等.激光雨滴谱仪在山东的布设和初步应用[J].山东气象,2015,35(1):18-22.
[4]余东升,徐青山,徐赤东,等.雨滴谱测量技术研究进展[J].大气与环境光学学报,2011,6(6):403-408.
[5]朱亚乔,刘元波.地面雨滴谱观测技术及特征研究进展[J].地球科学进展,2013,28(6):685-694.
[6]周黎明,王俊,张洪生,等.激光雨滴谱仪与自动气象站观测雨量的对比分析[J].气象科技,2010,38(增刊):113-117.
[7]晋立军,封秋娟,李军霞,等.自动激光雨滴谱仪在雷达降水估测中的应用[J].气候与环境研究,2012,17(6):740-746.
[8]祝伟,刘园园,李克,等.激光雨滴谱降水量与人工降水量的对比分析[J].青海气象,2014(3):50-53.
[9]杜波,张雪芬,胡树贞,等.天气现象仪自动化观测资料对比分析[J].气象科技,2014,42(4):617-623.
[10]王俊,姚展予,侯淑梅,等.一次飑线过程的雨滴谱特征研究[J].气象学报,2016,74(3):450-464.
[11]刘冬冬,王海龙,马晓璐.DSC1型称重式降水传感器工作原理及维护维修[J].山东气象,2014,34(3):83-86.
[12]陈征,龙亚星,张和.称重式降水传感器观测数据对比分析[J].陕西气象,2013(2):27-29.
[13]高彬.降水量人工站与自动站数据误差分析[J].陕西水利,2017(增刊):158-160.
[14]李力,姜有山,蔡凝昊,等.Parsivel降水粒子谱仪与观测站雨量计的对比分析[J].气象,2018,44(3):434-441.
[15]卢超,罗红艳,李磊,等.深圳地区Parsivel雨滴谱仪与SL3-1雨量筒对比分析[J].广东气象,2017,39(6):69-71.
[2]杜波,马舒庆,梁明珠,等.雨滴谱降水现象仪对比观测试验技术应用分析[J].气象科技,2017,45(6):995-1001.
[3]周黎明,王俊,龚佃利,等.激光雨滴谱仪在山东的布设和初步应用[J].山东气象,2015,35(1):18-22.
[4]余东升,徐青山,徐赤东,等.雨滴谱测量技术研究进展[J].大气与环境光学学报,2011,6(6):403-408.
[5]朱亚乔,刘元波.地面雨滴谱观测技术及特征研究进展[J].地球科学进展,2013,28(6):685-694.
[6]周黎明,王俊,张洪生,等.激光雨滴谱仪与自动气象站观测雨量的对比分析[J].气象科技,2010,38(增刊):113-117.
[7]晋立军,封秋娟,李军霞,等.自动激光雨滴谱仪在雷达降水估测中的应用[J].气候与环境研究,2012,17(6):740-746.
[8]祝伟,刘园园,李克,等.激光雨滴谱降水量与人工降水量的对比分析[J].青海气象,2014(3):50-53.
[9]杜波,张雪芬,胡树贞,等.天气现象仪自动化观测资料对比分析[J].气象科技,2014,42(4):617-623.
[10]王俊,姚展予,侯淑梅,等.一次飑线过程的雨滴谱特征研究[J].气象学报,2016,74(3):450-464.
[11]刘冬冬,王海龙,马晓璐.DSC1型称重式降水传感器工作原理及维护维修[J].山东气象,2014,34(3):83-86.
[12]陈征,龙亚星,张和.称重式降水传感器观测数据对比分析[J].陕西气象,2013(2):27-29.
[13]高彬.降水量人工站与自动站数据误差分析[J].陕西水利,2017(增刊):158-160.
[14]李力,姜有山,蔡凝昊,等.Parsivel降水粒子谱仪与观测站雨量计的对比分析[J].气象,2018,44(3):434-441.
[15]卢超,罗红艳,李磊,等.深圳地区Parsivel雨滴谱仪与SL3-1雨量筒对比分析[J].广东气象,2017,39(6):69-71.