面向四维变分资料同化的NSAS积云深对流参数化方案的简化及线性化研究

GRAPES全球四维变分资料同化系统需要积云深对流参数化方案的线性化与伴随方案,直接采用原始复杂参数化方案进行线性化并不可行,需要发展简化光滑方案来减缓非线性与非连续性特征。GRAPES全球模式采用NSAS积云对流参数化方案,积云深对流对环境的反馈主要通过补偿下沉来实现,研究突出补偿下沉作用,忽略降水蒸发、动量反馈等贡献,形成简化方案。采用输入温、湿度廓线加入不同幅度小扰动方法,评估参数化方案计算的温度、比湿时间倾向对输入扰动的敏感性,检验非线性与非连续特征。提出避免或减缓非连续“开关”的方法,在简化方案的基础上发展了简化光滑方案。简化光滑方案与原始积云深对流方案相比,在对流触发上一致,在对流的位温与比湿倾向、降水的时序模拟等方面相似,而在减缓非线性、避免非连续性方面显著优于原始方案。基于简化光滑方案发展的线性化方案表明,对小于2倍分析增量幅度的扰动,线性化方案可以较好地模拟非线性方案的扰动发展。发展的简化光滑方案具有合理性和实用性。      

不同积云对流参数化方案对“7·21”北京特大暴雨模拟的影响

针对2012年7月21—22日北京特大暴雨过程,比较WRF V3.5.1版本中KF、BMJ、GD、SAS四种积云对流参数化方案对降水的模拟效果,研究对流激发在时空分布上的特征以及预报降水量的影响因子。结果表明,KF方案整体效果较好,BMJ方案夸大了强降水区的范围和强度,GD和SAS方案模拟效果较差。各方案在初始对流激发的状态和时间上存在差异,使得演变过程显著不同。总体上,KF方案很好地模拟了对流的触发,在发生强降水时段,上升运动强,水汽条件充足。同时,KF和BMJ方案模拟的深对流区域降水效率高,SAS方案基本均为层云区域,无法模拟出强降水中心。     

台风暴雨积云参数化试验

本文使用半预报方法检验了五种积云参数化方案，并讨论了它们在台风暴雨中的适用性，结果表明:Arakawa-Schubert方案能最好地描述台风暴雨过程Q1和Q２的垂直结构，该方案所要求的云功函数准平衡假设在台风暴雨过程中能够成立；而Kuo-type方案由于假设了加热和增温分别线性正比于Ｔs-Ｔavg-和qs－q(avg)，不能很好地描绘实际Q1和Q２的垂直结构，但当改进云温的求取法后，参数化结果会得到较大改善。计算还表明多元回归方案显示出比Kuo(1974)方案更好些的结果，这种具有简便计算优点的参数化方案如果能作些相适性改进，可望能应用于台风暴雨过程。另外，我们还分析了台风暴雨过程不同阶段的积云演变特征。     

Influence of convective parameterization on the systematic errors of Climate Forecast System (CFS) model over the Indian monsoon region from an extended range forecast perspective

This study investigates the influence of Simplified Arakawa Schubert (SAS) and Relax Arakawa Schubert (RAS) cumulus parameterization schemes on coupled Climate Forecast System version.1 (CFS-1, T62L64) retrospective forecasts over Indian monsoon region from an extended range forecast perspective. The forecast data sets comprise 45 days of model integrations based on 31 different initial conditions at pentad intervals starting from 1 May to 28 September for the years 2001 to 2007. It is found that mean climatological features of Indian summer monsoon months (JJAS) are reasonably simulated by both the versions (i.e. SAS and RAS) of the model; however strong cross equatorial flow and excess stratiform rainfall are noted in RAS compared to SAS. Both the versions of the model overestimated apparent heat source and moisture sink compared to NCEP/NCAR reanalysis. The prognosis evaluation of daily forecast climatology reveals robust systematic warming (moistening) in RAS and cooling (drying) biases in SAS particularly at the middle and upper troposphere of the model respectively. Using error energy/variance and root mean square error methodology it is also established that major contribution to the model total error is coming from the systematic component of the model error. It is also found that the forecast error growth of temperature in RAS is less than that of SAS; however, the scenario is reversed for moisture errors, although the difference of moisture errors between these two forecasts is not very large compared to that of temperature errors. Broadly, it is found that both the versions of the model are underestimating (overestimating) the rainfall area and amount over the Indian land region (and neighborhood oceanic region). The rainfall forecast results at pentad interval exhibited that, SAS and RAS have good prediction skills over the Indian monsoon core zone and Arabian Sea. There is less excess rainfall particularly over oceanic region in RAS up to 30 days of forecast duration compared to SAS. It is also evident that systematic errors in the coverage area of excess rainfall over the eastern foothills of the Himalayas remains unchanged irrespective of cumulus parameterization and initial conditions. It is revealed that due to stronger moisture transport in RAS there is a robust amplification of moist static energy facilitating intense convective instability within the model and boosting the moisture supply from surface to the upper levels through convergence. Concurrently, moisture detrainment from cloud to environment at multiple levels from the spectrum of clouds in the RAS, leads to a large accumulation of moisture in the middle and upper troposphere of the model. This abundant moisture leads to large scale condensational heating through a simple cloud microphysics scheme. This intense upper level heating contributes to the warm bias and considerably increases in stratiform rainfall in RAS compared to SAS. In a nutshell, concerted and sustained support of moisture supply from the bottom as well as from the top in RAS is the crucial factor for having a warm temperature bias in RAS.     

The performance of two convective parameterization schemes in a mesoscale model over the Indian region

Summary A comparative study has been carried out using two cumulus parameterization schemes, namely the Kain-Fritsch and Betts-Miller-Janjic schemes within the Atmospheric Regional Prediction System model. The performances of these two schemes are examined for four weather disturbances over the Indian region. The results are evaluated using predicted parameters such as mean sea level pressure, wind, temperature/moisture fields and rainfall. Rainfall and other predicted parameters are discussed on the basis of known synoptic features associated with the disturbances. Rainfall prediction is subjectively assessed based on the amount and spatial distribution. Results indicate that out of the four cases examined, in three, the Betts-Miller-Janjic scheme produced better results whilst in the fourth, the Kain-Fritsch scheme performed better. The Betts-Miller-Janjic convection scheme produced smoother and more convective rainfall rates in all cases.     

物理过程参数化方案对中尺度暴雨数值模拟影响的研究

利用中尺度非静力MM 5模式和中国 2 0 0 1年 8月的 4个暴雨个例 ,研究了非绝热物理过程对中国暴雨动力和热力场预报的影响 ,深入分析了对流参数化方案在中尺度暴雨预报中的作用 ,讨论了利用模式扰动方法开展中国暴雨集合预报的可行性。结果表明 ,在短期数值预报中 ,非绝热物理过程对高度场预报影响较小 ,但边界层方案和对流参数化方案对产生暴雨的 3个基本条件即水汽通量散度、垂直速度、不稳定层结的影响很明显。不同对流参数化方案所预报的中尺度热力、动力场离差的结构特征与所预报降水的离差特征相似 ,且主要是在模式积分初期迅速增加 ,其后即趋于稳定。对中国热力场较均匀的暴雨过程 ,可以通过扰动模式的边界层和对流参数化方案 ,构造集合预报模式     

WRF模式中不同积云对流参数化方案对比试验

本文主要对基于WRF模式的快速同化系统（RUC）中使用的积云对流参数化方案进行简单介绍,并对不同积云对流参数化方案进行了典型个例降水预报的对比试验和检验。结果表明,总体预报效果以KF和GD方案较好,具体表现在雨区分布及大暴雨中心强度,对流降水对总降水贡献,在中低层流场高低值系统分布,以及冷空气活动引起的变温正负中心强度及位置,KF和GD方案模拟结果可以较好地反映观测实况,TS评分结果也表明KF和GD方案在小级别降水预报中占有优势。     

WRF模式中微物理和积云参数化方案的对比试验

为了研究微物理参数化方案对珠江三角洲(简称珠三角)降水模拟的影响,利用WRF中尺度数值预报模式,在3 km模式分辨率下,在微物理方案为WSM6方案条件下,选用KF、BMJ、GD以及G3等四种积云参数化方案对2010年5月14日广东珠三角地区的一次暴雨过程进行了模拟试验。结果显示,KF方案对于降水带和降水量的模拟与实况较为一致。在积云参数化方案为KF条件下,分别选用Kessler、Lin et al、WSM 3、WSM5、Ferrier(New eta)和WSM6等6种微物理方案再次对这次暴雨过程进行模拟试验,模拟结果的对比分析表明:选用Lin et al微物理方案时,模式较好地模拟出了强降水雨带的位置和降水强度;而其他5种参数方案的模拟效果均不好,降水量明显偏小,雨带位置偏差较大;同时对低空急流、K指数和上升速度等物理量分析可知,Lin et al方案能较好地模拟出降水实况。     

东亚夏季风降水和环流数值模拟对不同对流参数化方案的敏感性

A 5-level spectral AGCM (ImPKU-5LAGCM) is used to examine the sensitivity of the simulated results of the summer monsoon rainfall and circulation in East Asia to different cumulus parameterization schemes in the climatological-mean case and in the cases of weak and strong Asian summer monsoons,respectively. The results simulated with the Arakawa-Schubert＇s(hereafter A-S＇s), Kuo＇s and Manabe＇s cumulus parameterization schemes show that these simulated distributions of the summer monsoon rainfall and circulation in East Asia depend strongly on the cumulus parameterization schemes either in the climatological-mean case or in the cases of weak and strong Asian summer monsoons. From the simulated results, it might be shown that the Kuo scheme appears to be more suitable for the simulation of the summer monsoon rainfall and circulation in East Asia than the A-S scheme or the Manabe scheme, although the A-S scheme is somewhat better in the simulations of the tropical rainfall. This might be due to that the Kuo＇s cumulus parameterization scheme is able to reflect well the characteristics of rainfall cloud system in the East Asian summer monsoon region, where the rainfall system used to be a mixing of cumulus and stratus.     

WRF模式中不同积云对流参数化方案对比试验

本文主要对基于WRF模式的快速同化系统 (RUC) 中使用的积云对流参数化方案进行简单介绍, 并对不同积云对流参数化方案进行了典型个例降水预报的对比试验和检验。结果表明, 总体预报效果以KF和GD方案较好, 具体表现在雨区分布及大暴雨中心强度, 对流降水对总降水贡献, 在中低层流场高低值系统分布, 以及冷空气活动引起的变温正负中心强度及位置, KF和GD方案模拟结果可以较好地反映观测实况, TS评分结果也表明KF和GD方案在小级别降水预报中占有优势。      

WRF模式对青藏高原南坡夏季降水的模拟分析

利用中尺度数值模式WRF研究积云对流参数化方案、网格嵌套技术和模式分辨率对陡峭的青藏高原南坡夏季降水模拟的影响。对2006年7月青藏高原南坡地区降水的模拟分析表明:降水对积云对流参数化方案的选择很敏感,不同方案模拟的结果差异显著,采用Grell-Devenyi质量通量方案时的模拟效果优于其他方案。在此基础上,通过5种试验方案比较发现,使用积云对流参数化方案、提高模式分辨率和应用网格嵌套技术能改善降水强度和空间分布的模拟,组合使用时模拟的降水与观测资料更接近。它们均能改进风场,使得水汽的输送和辐合过程的模拟更加准确;还能影响大气的垂直加热状态,导致不同的对流发生,使垂直速度的分布趋于合理。未使用积云对流参数化方案时,大气湿度偏小,而模式分辨率和网格嵌套技术对大气湿度的影响不大。      

中国夏季不同强度降水模拟对不同积云对流参数化方案的敏感性研究

利用PσRCM9区域气候模式, 分析了中国夏季不同强度降水模拟对不同积云对流参数化方案的敏感性。结果表明, 采用四种积云对流参数化方案, 模式能够模拟出小雨、 大雨和暴雨的雨量百分比和雨日百分比空间分布的一致性特征, 但不能模拟出中雨雨量百分比和雨日百分比空间分布的相似性, 这是由于模式不能模拟中雨雨量百分比的空间分布形式所致。还发现模拟的我国夏季降水以小雨和中雨为主, 四种积云对流参数化方案均低估了中国夏季大雨和暴雨对总降水的贡献, 尤其是在我国西部、 东北和华北地区更明显。不同积云对流参数化方案下模拟的极端强降水阈值的空间分布形式基本与观测一致, 但强度与观测存在较大差异。相比较而言, Grell方案较Kuo、 Anthes-Kuo和Betts-Mille积云对流参数化方案更适合中国东南部地区夏季极端强降水的模拟。     

修正的质量通量积云对流方案及其模拟试验研究Ⅰ:方案介绍及对1991年洪涝过程的模拟

文中在综合比较各类积云对流参数化方案优缺点的基础上 ,主要参考陈伯民等修正的ECMWF质量通量积云参数化方案 ,对其进行简化和修改 ,发展了一个质量通量积云对流参数化方案 ,文中表示为 MFS(Mass Flux Scheme)。MFS是一种综合型的方案 ,既考虑了大尺度水汽辐合的重要性 ,又考虑了积云中的上升运动、下沉运动、环境中的补偿下沉运动 ,以及卷入、卷出和蒸发等 ,用总体云模式来描述积云与环境的相互作用 ,同时考虑了深对流和浅对流。将 MFS植入 NCAR区域气候模式 Reg CM2中 ,对 1 991年 5～ 7月江淮地区特大降水过程的夏季风气候特征和变化进行了模拟 ,并与 NCAR Reg CM2选用 Kuo方案 ,在同样初、边值条件和其它物理过程选择下的模拟结果进行了对比分析。分析结果表明 ,植入 MFS后的模式能够模拟这次极端的降水气候事件。在某些方面 ,如地表气温 ,降水的模拟上 ,植入 MFS后的模式的模拟结果要比原模式的结果更合理     

MM5模式中不同对流参数化方案的比较试验

应用MM5中尺度模式, 在60、20和10 km模式分辨率下, 分别选用4种不同对流参数化方案 (KUO方案、GRELL方案、KAIN-FRITSCH方案和BETTS-MILLER方案, 以下简称KU、GR、KF和BM方案) 对1996年8月3~4日石家庄暴雨过程进行数值模拟试验.模拟结果的对比分析及其与观测的比较表明:主要雨带位置对参数化方案并不是十分敏感, 但随分辨率提高, 雨带分布特征的模拟更接近实况; 当分辨率提高到10 km时, 虚假的降水中心也明显增加; 模拟的暴雨中心强度随分辨率的提高而增强并随参数化方案的不同有所变化, 但均比实况偏弱.分析还发现, MM5模式的GR、KF及BM方案的次网格降水对总降水的贡献率随分辨率的提高而减小, 而KU方案的情况则呈现出不合理的缓慢增加态势.虽然4种方案下模拟的水平环流特征有较好的一致性, 但模拟的云物理特征和垂直运动特征还是存在一定差别的, 这种差别对定点、定量降水和天空状况、地面气温、湿度等要素的准确预报都会产生影响.因此, 在预报和模拟中应考虑预报和研究对象的特点来选择对流参数化方案.     

Test of a convectively forced gravity wave drag parameterization in a general circulation model

The influence of gravity wave drag induced by cumulus convection (GWDC) on a simulated boreal summer climate was evaluated in a general circulation model. For this, the GWDC scheme developed by Chun and Baik was implemented into a version of the National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) global spectral model (GSM). Ensemble simulations with the two different convection schemes, the simplified Arakawa-Schubert (SAS) scheme and Community Climate Model (CCM) convection scheme, were conducted for the boreal summer of 1996. A cloud factor to modulate the stress intensity with respect to the cloud type was introduced in this study, in order to prevent unrealistic behaviors of the GWDC scheme in GSM. The effect of gravity wave drag on the zonal mean of wind and temperature fields was focused. On the whole, the effect of GWDC in this study is positive on the simulated seasonal climate. It is evident that biases in temperature in the polar region as well as in the zonal and meridional winds in the upper atmosphere are reduced. The percentage of reduction of the bias in zonal winds is about 10–20%. Such a response of the GWDC forcing widely appears not only in tropical regions but also in mid-latitude regions. These characteristics are prominent in the case of the SAS scheme, which is due to the various convective cloud types. The magnitude of GWDC forcing is generally small, but still positive, in the case of the CCM scheme, which is due to rather homogeneous cloud types. It is also found that the role of a particular GWDC forcing depends upon the inherent systematic biases of a particular model. It is concluded that incorporation of the GWDC parameterization in GCMs should be taken into account to improve the seasonal prediction.     

WRF模式不同云参数化方案的暴雨预报能力检验及集成试验

利用WRFV3. 6的8种微物理方案和6种积云参数化方案对湖北及其周边地区夏季12次暴雨过程进行回报,分析各种方案对暴雨预报的影响。结果显示,各种方案均能较好地预报出降水过程,但其降水强度和范围存在一定差异。当积云参数化方案为KF方案时,对Lin、WSM6、Thompson、Morrison 2-mom、CAM5. 1、WDM5、WDM6、NSSL 2-mom微物理方案做敏感性试验,发现CAM 5. 1方案优于其他7种微物理方案,M orrison 2-mom次之。当微物理方案为CAM 5. 1时,对KF、BM J、GD、SAS、G3D、Tiedtke积云参数化方案做敏感性试验,发现在不同量级降水预报中,6种积云参数化方案各有优劣。综合考虑,GD、SAS、Tiedtke积云参数化方案优于其他3种方案。在此基础上开展多方案集成试验,结果表明集合平均(ensemble mean,EMN)在一定程度上可以减少预报误差,降低单个成员预报的不确定性。     

GRAPES中尺度模式中不同对流参数化方案模拟对流激发的研究

针对GRAPES中尺度数值模式的三种积云对流参数化方案,对华南2005年6月17～25日的降水过程进行模拟,研究了不同参数化方案中对流激发的时间和空间特征,讨论对流的激发状态和预报降水量的关系以及模式预报降水偏少的可能原因.21日的24小时降水量模拟结果显示,总体上雨带与实况接近,但中尺度暴雨中心位置不同.各方案的初始对流激发的状态及演变存在显著不同,并与各自24小时模拟降水量的分布和雨量紧密相关;同时预报对流激发的时间也不同.综合来看,SAS方案能较好地模拟对流的触发,但激发的降水在实况出现小雨和大雨的时段没有太大的区别.用KFETA方案探讨模拟降水偏少的可能原因之一是,对流层中层垂直速度偏小.     

区域气候模拟中多种对流参数化方案的比较研究

利用区域气候模式RegCM2,选择Betts-Miller、Kuo-Anthes和Grell3种积云对流参数化方案,进行了1991年和1994年5～7月2个个例的东亚季风区区域气候模拟试验,重点分析比较了3种参数化方案对降水总量分布、主要降水时段、雨带南北变动和基本气象要素场的模拟能力,并相对实测降水和基本要素的观测分析进行了统计检验.通过对比,发现Betts方案的模拟能力明显优于其他两种方案.     

高分辨率模式中积云参数化方案对模拟台风“凡亚比”的影响

在高水平分辨率模式(3～6 km)中,对于是否应该再使用积云参数化方案,仍存在着争论.为此,利用WRF模式,在5 km水平分辨率下,研究了不同云降水方案对一次台风过程模拟的影响,并对影响原因进行了初步探索.结果表明,即使在5 km高水平分辨率下,使用积云参数化方案仍能有效改善对台风路径的模拟,同时,成熟的混合冰相微物理方案对模拟台风路径也非常重要;对台风强度模拟,对积云参数化方案的选择较为敏感和复杂;在48 h预报时效内,只使用微物理方案模拟的降水较好,使用积云参数化方案容易产生较多的虚假降水,但能改善第3天24 h累积降水模拟.这些研究结果为利用高水平分辨率模式模拟台风和改进积云参数化方案提供一定借鉴.     

Customization of regional climate model (RegCM4) over Indian region

The regional climate model (RegCM4) is customized for 10-year climate simulation over Indian region through sensitivity studies on cumulus convection and land surface parameterization schemes. The model is configured over 30° E–120° E and 15° S–45° N at 30-km horizontal resolution with 23 vertical levels. Six 10-year (1991–2000) simulations are conducted with the combinations of two land surface schemes (BATS, CLM3.5) and three cumulus convection schemes (Kuo, Grell, MIT). The simulated annual and seasonal climatology of surface temperature and precipitation are compared with CRU observations. The interannual variability of these two parameters is also analyzed. The results indicate that the model simulated climatology is sensitive to the convection as well as land surface parameterization. The analysis of surface temperature (precipitation) climatology indicates that the model with CLM produces warmer (dryer) climatology, particularly over India. The warmer (dryer) climatology is due to the higher sensible heat flux (lower evapotranspiration) in CLM. The model with MIT convection scheme simulated wetter and warmer climatology (higher precipitation and temperature) with smaller Bowen ratio over southern India compared to that with the Grell and Kuo schemes. This indicates that a land surface scheme produces warmer but drier climatology with sensible heating contributing to warming where as a convection scheme warmer but wetter climatology with latent heat contributing to warming. The climatology of surface temperature over India is better simulated by the model with BATS land surface model in combination with MIT convection scheme while the precipitation climatology is better simulated with BATS land surface model in combination with Grell convection scheme. Overall, the modeling system with the combination of Grell convection and BATS land surface scheme provides better climate simulation over the Indian region.