4.6 Article

Relationships between tropical cyclones and heavy rainfall in the Carolina region of the USA

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLIMATOLOGY
卷 30, 期 4, 页码 522-534

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/joc.1894

关键词

tropical cyclone; heavy rainfall; Carolina; tree regression; synoptic climatology

资金

  1. NSF [BCS-9911315]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A strong association exists between exceptionally heavy rainfall and the movement of tropical cyclones (i.e. tropical depressions, tropical storms, and hurricanes) across the Carolina region of the USA. There is much variability, however, in the precipitation totals associated with each tropical cyclone. This variability is at least partially tied to various interactions between mid-latitude features and the moisture plume that is advected around the tropical cyclone. In the first part of this study, a 55-year precipitation events climatology is constructed that quantifies the influence of tropical cyclones on precipitation events with varying return intervals. In particular, it shows that the majority of the heaviest precipitation events in the eastern three-quarters of the region are associated with tropical cyclones. In the second part of this study, a synoptic climatology is developed that reveals the relationships between precipitation totals and various atmospheric variables. The variables include the speed of movement, size, and strength of the tropical system as well as the relative position and strength of various synoptic features surrounding the tropical system. These synoptic features include the location of fronts, regions of upper level divergence and areas of high water vapor contents in the atmosphere. A tree regression model is used to develop a classification that summarizes these multivariate relationships. Four classes of tropical cyclones are identified that effectively differentiate tropical cyclones that produce relatively light versus extraordinarily heavy rainfall. Copyright (C) 2009 Royal Meteorological Society

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据