4.4 Article

Evolution of Lightning Activity and Storm Charge Relative to Dual-Doppler Analysis of a High-Precipitation Supercell Storm

期刊

MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW
卷 141, 期 7, 页码 2199-2223

出版社

AMER METEOROLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1175/MWR-D-12-00258.1

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [ATM-0233268, ATM-1063537, ATM-0802717]
  2. Directorate For Geosciences
  3. Div Atmospheric & Geospace Sciences [1063537, 0924621] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A high-precipitation tornadic supercell storm was observed on 29-30 May 2004 during the Thunderstorm Electrification and Lightning Experiment. Observational systems included the Oklahoma Lightning Mapping Array, mobile balloon-borne soundings, and two mobile C-band radars. The spatial distribution and evolution of lightning are related to storm kinematics and microphysics, specifically through regions of microphysical charging and the location and geometry of those charge regions. Lightning flashes near the core of this storm were extraordinarily frequent, but tended to be of shorter duration and smaller horizontal extent than typical flashes elsewhere. This is hypothesized to be due to the charge being in many small pockets, with opposite polarities of charge close together in adjoining pockets. Thus, each polarity of lightning leader could propagate only a relatively short distance before reaching regions of unfavorable electric potential. In the anvil, however, lightning extended tens of kilometers from the reflectivity cores in roughly horizontal layers, consistent with the charge spreading through the anvil in broad sheets. The strong, consistent updraft of this high-precipitation supercell storm combined with the large hydrometeor concentrations to produce the extremely high flash rates observed during the analysis period. The strength and size of the updraft also contributed to unique lightning characteristics such as the transient hole of reduced lightning density and discharges in the overshooting top.

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

4.4
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