4.4 Article

Observed Rainfall Asymmetry in Tropical Cyclones Making Landfall over China

期刊

出版社

AMER METEOROLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1175/JAMC-D-13-0359.1

关键词

-

资金

  1. State 973 Program [2013CB430305]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41130964, 41305049, 41005033, 41275067]
  3. Div Atmospheric & Geospace Sciences
  4. Directorate For Geosciences [1326524] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, the rainfall asymmetries in tropical cyclones (TCs) that made landfall in the Hainan (HN), Guangdong (GD), Fujian (FJ), and Zhejiang (ZJ) provinces of mainland China and Taiwan (TW) from 2001 to 2009 were analyzed on the basis of TRMM satellite 3B42 rainfall estimates. The results reveal that in landfalling TCs, the wavenumber 1 rainfall asymmetry shows the downshear to downshear-left maximum in environmental vertical wind shear (VWS), which is consistent with previous studies for TCs over the open oceans. A cyclonic rotation from south China to east China in the location of the rainfall maximum has been identified. Before landfall, the location of the rainfall maximum rotated from southwest to southeast of the TC center for TCs making landfall in the regions from HN to GD, TW, FJ, and ZJ. After landfall, the rotation became from southwest to northeast of the TC center from south China to east China. It is shown that this cyclonic rotation in the location of the rainfall maximum is well correlated with a cyclonic rotation from south China to east China in the environmental VWS between 200 and 850 hPa, indicating that the rainfall asymmetry in TCs that made landfall over China is predominantly controlled by the large-scale VWS. The cyclonic rotation of VWS is found to be related to different interactions between the midlatitude westerlies and the landfalling TCs in different regions. The results also indicate that the axisymmetric (wavenumber 0) component of rainfall generally decreased rapidly after landfall in most studied regions.

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