4.4 Article

An Electrical and Polarimetric Analysis of the Overland Reintensification of Tropical Storm Erin (2007)

期刊

MONTHLY WEATHER REVIEW
卷 142, 期 6, 页码 2321-2344

出版社

AMER METEOROLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1175/MWR-D-13-00360.1

关键词

-

资金

  1. NOAA/Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research under NOAA University of Oklahoma [NA17RJ1227, NA11OAR4320072]
  2. U.S. National Weather Service
  3. Federal Aviation Administration
  4. Department of Defense
  5. National Science Foundation [ATM-0233268, ATM-0924621]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

While passing over central Oklahoma on 18-19 August 2007, the remnants of Tropical Storm Erin unexpectedly reintensified and developed an eyelike feature that was clearly discernable in Weather Surveillance Radar-1988 Doppler (WSR-88D) imagery During this brief reintensification period, Erin traversed a region of dense surface and remote sensing observation networks that provided abundant data of high spatial and temporal resolution. This study analyzes data from the polarimetric KOUN S-band radar, total lightning data from the Oklahoma Lightning Mapping Array, and ground-flash lightning data from the National Lightning Detection Network. Erin's reintensification was atypical since it occurred well inland and was accompanied by stronger maximum sustained winds and gusts (25 and 37 m s(-1), respectively) and lower minimum sea level pressure (1001.3 hPa) than while over water. Radar observations reveal several similarities to those documented in mature tropical cyclones over open water, including outward-sloping eyewall convection, near 0-dBZ reflectivities within the eye, and relatively large updraft velocities in the eyewall as inferred from single-Doppler winds and Z(DR) columns. Deep, electrified convection near the center of circulation preceded the formation of Erin's eye, with maximum lightning activity occurring prior to and during reintensification. The results show that inner-core convection may have played a role in the reinvigoration of the storm.

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