4.1 Article

Explicit simulations of convective-scale transport of mineral dust in severe convective weather

期刊

出版社

METEOROLOGICAL SOC JAPAN
DOI: 10.2151/jmsj.83A.187

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Convective-scale transport of mineral dust in a severe weather setting is investigated with the approach of three-dimensional cloud-resolving simulations coupled with a dust emission-transport modeling. The simulations are intended to explicitly represent convective- and cloud-scale processes (such as updraft/downdraft, surface cold pool, precipitation) in a squall-line-type convective system, and are performed in an idealized setup in order to focus the primary mechanisms for convective-scale transport of dust within a squall-line system. Initialized based on an observation in a severe duststorm case over the Gobi Desert in China, the cloud model well simulates an observational feature of the squall line and the associated duststorm in spite of a simplified model setup. Dust is emitted by strong surface winds associated with a well-developed surface cold pool, and is contained and mixed within the cold pool: a high dust concentration of greater than 10 mg m(-3) is induced. Owing to a high subgrid-turbulence mixing at the leading edge of the cold pool, the contained dust is transferred out of the cold pool and is entrained into the updraft region at the cold pool edge. Dust is then transported upward by the convective updraft which is continuously regenerated at the cold-pool leading edge, and spreads laterally in the cross-line directions at upper levels by system-scale circulation. Rearward dust transport relative to the leading edge of the system is pronounced at upper levels, according to the prevalent front-to-rear flow typically found in the squall-line systems. This study suggests that the representations of convective-scale transport processes should be adequately updated in order to improve the accuracy of the regional-scale to global-scale numerical predictions.

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

4.1
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