Guo Feiyan, Ding Feng, Chu Yingjia, et al. Comparison of two damaging wind events caused by strong downbursts. J Appl Meteor Sci, 2024, 35(5): 590-605. DOI:  10.11898/1001-7313.20240507.
Citation: Guo Feiyan, Ding Feng, Chu Yingjia, et al. Comparison of two damaging wind events caused by strong downbursts. J Appl Meteor Sci, 2024, 35(5): 590-605. DOI:  10.11898/1001-7313.20240507.

Comparison of Two Damaging Wind Events Caused by Strong Downbursts

DOI: 10.11898/1001-7313.20240507
  • Received Date: 2024-05-13
  • Rev Recd Date: 2024-07-26
  • Publish Date: 2024-09-30
  • Multi-source observations are used to comprehensively analyze the Doppler weather radar characteristics of strong storms and the formation mechanisms of surface damaging wind induced by two strong downbursts, occurred in Shandong on 2 June 2017 and 6 August 2017. It's found that two damaging wind events occurs under strong synoptic scale weather system forcing and favorable meso-scale environmental conditions, the relatively isolated supercell storm on 2 June (6·2 supercell) and strong single storm on 6 August (8·6 strong single storm) fiercely develop into series of downbursts, which leads to the occurrence of large-scale damaging winds. As two strong downbursts induced by 6·2 supercell storm and 8·6 strong single storm evolves, the vertically integrated liquid water content radar parameter first rises and then quickly plunges down. During 6·2 supercell storm, a powerful downburst descends sharply, causing the mesocyclone's top and bottom to shoal and its thickness to decrease. The occurrence of two strong downbursts are accompanied by obvious radar characteristics including reflective factor core rapid decline, high value area of radial velocity at low elevation, strong divergence at bottom, remarkable mid altitude radial convergence and severe divergence at upper-level. 6·2 supercell storm is characterized by intense rotation. Its mesocyclone lasts for a long time and extends deeply both upwards and downwards. Additionally, there are arc-shaped inflow notches and hook echoes at low levels of 6·2 supercell storm. 8·6 strong single storm is characterized by significant low-level convergence. Besides, there is a convergence zone at or near the surface formed by the outflow of the strong downburst and the inflow in front of 8·6 strong single storm. Among all the formation mechanisms of two damaging winds induced by two strong downbursts, the negative buoyancy effect of two storms is basically equivalent, but the cold pool outflow effect is more evident for 6·2 supercell storm, and the downward transport momentum effect is more significant for 8·6 strong single storm. The Nansun Station of Weifang locating right ahead of 8·6 strong single storm's approaching direction, therefore the front divergence flow from the strong downbursts is preferable superimposed on the fast moving homodromous storm, indicating the speed of the front divergence flow better superimposes on the speed of the storm itself, which is crucial for the occurrence of 37.0 m·s-1 extreme wind.
  • Fig. 1  Distributions for the wind speed no less than 8 degree (no less than 17.2 m·s-1) in Shandong from 1700 BT 2 Jun to 0200 BT 3 Jun(a) and from 1800 BT 6 Aug to 0200 BT 7 Aug(b) in 2017

    Fig. 1  Distributions for the wind speed no less than 8 degree (no less than 17.2 m·s-1) in Shandong from 1700 BT 2 Jun to 0200 BT 3 Jun(a) and from 1800 BT 6 Aug to 0200 BT 7 Aug(b) in 2017

    Fig. 2  Composite reflectivity of Jinan Radar at 1700 BT(a), 1753 BT(b), 1839 BT(c), 2001 BT(d) on 2 Jun 2017 and that of Weifang Radar at 1701 BT(e), 1800 BT(f), 1858 BT(g), 1940 BT(h) on 6 Aug 2017

    Fig. 2  Composite reflectivity of Jinan Radar at 1700 BT(a), 1753 BT(b), 1839 BT(c), 2001 BT(d) on 2 Jun 2017 and that of Weifang Radar at 1701 BT(e), 1800 BT(f), 1858 BT(g), 1940 BT(h) on 6 Aug 2017

    Fig. 3  Evolution of 6·2 supercell storm(a) and 8·6 strong single storm(b) structures

    Fig. 3  Evolution of 6·2 supercell storm(a) and 8·6 strong single storm(b) structures

    Fig. 4  Reflectivity at 2.4° elevation(a) and radial velocity at 0.5° elevation(b), 6.0° elevation(c), 9.0° elevation(d) of Jinan Radar at 1845 BT 2 Jun 2017 (the blue dashed line, the blue solid line and the blue dotted line denote 45, 55 dBZ and 60 dBZ isolines of reflectivity, respecitvely)

    Fig. 4  Reflectivity at 2.4° elevation(a) and radial velocity at 0.5° elevation(b), 6.0° elevation(c), 9.0° elevation(d) of Jinan Radar at 1845 BT 2 Jun 2017 (the blue dashed line, the blue solid line and the blue dotted line denote 45, 55 dBZ and 60 dBZ isolines of reflectivity, respecitvely)

    Fig. 5  Reflectivity factor at 1.5° elevation and radial velocity at 0.5°, 6.0°, 14.6°elevation of Weifang Radar at 1858 BT and 1904 BT on 6 Aug 2017 (the blue dashed line and the blue solid line denote 45 dBZ and 55 dBZ isolines of reflectivity factor, respecitvely) (a)1.5° elevation reflectivity factor at 1858 BT, (b)1.5° elevation reflectivity factor at 1904 BT, (c)0.5° elevation radial velocity at 1858 BT,(d)0.5° elevation radial velocity at 1904 BT,(e)6.0° elevation radial velocity at 1858 BT,(f)6.0° elevation radial velocity at 1904 BT, (g)14.6° elevation radial velocity at 1858 BT,(h)14.6° elevation radial velocity at 1904 BT

    Fig. 5  Reflectivity factor at 1.5° elevation and radial velocity at 0.5°, 6.0°, 14.6°elevation of Weifang Radar at 1858 BT and 1904 BT on 6 Aug 2017 (the blue dashed line and the blue solid line denote 45 dBZ and 55 dBZ isolines of reflectivity factor, respecitvely) (a)1.5° elevation reflectivity factor at 1858 BT, (b)1.5° elevation reflectivity factor at 1904 BT, (c)0.5° elevation radial velocity at 1858 BT,(d)0.5° elevation radial velocity at 1904 BT,(e)6.0° elevation radial velocity at 1858 BT,(f)6.0° elevation radial velocity at 1904 BT, (g)14.6° elevation radial velocity at 1858 BT,(h)14.6° elevation radial velocity at 1904 BT

    Fig. 6  Cross-sections of horizontal reflectivity factor and radial velocity along 236.6° radial direction of Jinan Radar on 2 Jun 2017 and along 24° radial direction of Weifang Radar on 6 Aug 2017 (black, red and blue horizontal solid lines denote heights of the 0 ℃ layer, -10 ℃ layer and -20 ℃ layer, respectively) (a)reflectivity factor cross-section of Jinan Radar at 1833 BT 2 Jun,(b)reflectivity factor cross-section of Jinan Radar at 1839 BT 2 Jun,(c)reflectivity factor cross-section of Jinan Radar at 1845 BT 2 Jun,(d)radial velocity cross-sections of Jinan Radar at 1833 BT 2 Jun, (e)radial velocity cross-section of Jinan Radar at 1839 BT 2 Jun,(f)radial velocity cross-section of Jinan Radar at 1845 BT 2 Jun, (g)reflectivity factor cross-section of Weifang Radar at 1853 BT 6 Aug,(h)reflectivity factor cross-section of Weifang Radar at 1858 BT 6 Aug, (i)reflectivity factor cross-section of Weifang Radar at 1904 BT 6 Aug,(j)radial velocity cross-section of Weifang Radar at 1853 BT 6 Aug, (k)radial velocity cross-section of Weifang Radar at 1958 BT 6 Aug,(l)radial velocity cross-section of Weifang Radar at 1904 BT 6 Aug

    Fig. 6  Cross-sections of horizontal reflectivity factor and radial velocity along 236.6° radial direction of Jinan Radar on 2 Jun 2017 and along 24° radial direction of Weifang Radar on 6 Aug 2017 (black, red and blue horizontal solid lines denote heights of the 0 ℃ layer, -10 ℃ layer and -20 ℃ layer, respectively) (a)reflectivity factor cross-section of Jinan Radar at 1833 BT 2 Jun,(b)reflectivity factor cross-section of Jinan Radar at 1839 BT 2 Jun,(c)reflectivity factor cross-section of Jinan Radar at 1845 BT 2 Jun,(d)radial velocity cross-sections of Jinan Radar at 1833 BT 2 Jun, (e)radial velocity cross-section of Jinan Radar at 1839 BT 2 Jun,(f)radial velocity cross-section of Jinan Radar at 1845 BT 2 Jun, (g)reflectivity factor cross-section of Weifang Radar at 1853 BT 6 Aug,(h)reflectivity factor cross-section of Weifang Radar at 1858 BT 6 Aug, (i)reflectivity factor cross-section of Weifang Radar at 1904 BT 6 Aug,(j)radial velocity cross-section of Weifang Radar at 1853 BT 6 Aug, (k)radial velocity cross-section of Weifang Radar at 1958 BT 6 Aug,(l)radial velocity cross-section of Weifang Radar at 1904 BT 6 Aug

    Fig. 7  Spatial distribution of surface temperature (the isoline, unit:℃) at 1830 BT(a), 1840BT(b), 1845 BT(c) on 2 Jun 2017 and 1850 BT(d), 1900 BT(e),1905 BT(f) on 6 Aug 2017 and composite reflectivity factor and storm locations of Jinan Radar (1828 BT, 1839 BT, 1845 BT) and Weifang Radar (1847 BT, 1858 BT, 1904 BT) (green solid circles denote locations of 6·2 supercell storm and 8·6 strong storm paths, respectively)

    Fig. 7  Spatial distribution of surface temperature (the isoline, unit:℃) at 1830 BT(a), 1840BT(b), 1845 BT(c) on 2 Jun 2017 and 1850 BT(d), 1900 BT(e),1905 BT(f) on 6 Aug 2017 and composite reflectivity factor and storm locations of Jinan Radar (1828 BT, 1839 BT, 1845 BT) and Weifang Radar (1847 BT, 1858 BT, 1904 BT) (green solid circles denote locations of 6·2 supercell storm and 8·6 strong storm paths, respectively)

    Fig. 8  Time Series of temperature, precipitation per minute, maximum instantaneous wind at Lepingpu County of Chiping, Shandong on 2 Jun 2017(a) and at Nansun County of Weifang, Shandong on 6 Aug 2017(b)

    Fig. 8  Time Series of temperature, precipitation per minute, maximum instantaneous wind at Lepingpu County of Chiping, Shandong on 2 Jun 2017(a) and at Nansun County of Weifang, Shandong on 6 Aug 2017(b)

  • [1]
    Wakimoto R M.Convectively Driven High Wind Events.Severe Convective Storms.Boston,MA:American Meteorological Society,2001:255-298.
    [2]
    Fujita T T. Manual of Downburst Identification for Project NIMROD. SMRP Research Paper156, Chicago: University of Chicago, 1978.
    [3]
    Fujita T T, Wakimoto R M. Five scales of airflow associated with a series of downbursts on 16 July 1980. Mon Wea Rev, 1981, 109(7): 1438-1456. doi:  10.1175/1520-0493(1981)109<1438:FSOAAW>2.0.CO;2
    [4]
    Zheng Y G, Tian F Y, Meng Z Y, et al. Survey and multi-scale characteristics of wind damage caused by convective storms in the surrounding area of the capsizing accident of cruise ship "Dongfangzhixing". Meteor Mon, 2016, 42(1): 1-13.
    [5]
    Weisman M L. The genesis of severe, long-lived bow echoes. J Atmos Sci, 1993, 50(4): 645-670. doi:  10.1175/1520-0469(1993)050<0645:TGOSLL>2.0.CO;2
    [6]
    Przybylinski R W. The bow echo: Observations, numerical simulations, and severe weather detection methods. Wea Forecasting, 1995, 10(2): 203-218. doi:  10.1175/1520-0434(1995)010<0203:TBEONS>2.0.CO;2
    [7]
    Ma S P, Wang X M, Yu X D. Environmental parameter characteristics of severe wind with extreme thunderstorm. J Appl Meteor Sci, 2019, 30(3): 292-301.
    [8]
    Wang H, Li Y, Song L L, et al. Comparison of characteristics and environmental factors of thunderstorm gales over the Sichuan-Tibet Region. J Appl Meteor Sci, 2020, 31(4): 435-446.
    [9]
    Yu X D. Thunderstorm and Strong Convection Prediction. Beijing: China Meteorological Press, 2020.
    [10]
    Guo F Y, Diao X G, Ma Y, et al. Characteristics of the dual-polarization structure and raindrop size distribution of a squall line in Shandong. Acta Meteor Sinica, 2023, 81(2): 328-339.
    [11]
    Mauri E L, Gallus Jr W A. Differences between severe and nonsevere warm-season, nocturnal bow echo environments. Wea Forecasting, 2021, 36(1): 53-74. doi:  10.1175/WAF-D-20-0137.1
    [12]
    Guo F Y, Diao X G, Chu Y J, et al. Dual polarization radar characteristics of severe downburst occurred in weak vertical wind shear. J Appl Meteor Sci, 2023, 34(6): 681-693.
    [13]
    Wakimoto R M, Bringi V N. Dual-polarization observations of microbursts associated with intense convection: The 20 July storm during the MIST project. Mon Wea Rev, 1988, 116(8): 1521-1539. doi:  10.1175/1520-0493(1988)116<1521:DPOOMA>2.0.CO;2
    [14]
    Kuster C M, Heinselman P L, Schuur T J. Rapid-update radar observations of downbursts occurring within an intense multicell thunderstorm on 14 June 2011. Wea Forecasting, 2016, 31(3): 827-851. doi:  10.1175/WAF-D-15-0081.1
    [15]
    Kuster C M, Bowers B R, Carlin J T, et al. Using KDP cores as a downburst precursor signature. Wea Forecasting, 2021, 36(4): 1183-1198. doi:  10.1175/WAF-D-21-0005.1
    [16]
    Wang Y T, Wang X M, Yu X D. Radar characteristics of straight-line damaging wind producing supercell storms. J Appl Meteor Sci, 2022, 33(2): 180-191.
    [17]
    Yu X D, Zhang A M, Zheng Y Y, et al. Doppler radar analysis on a series of downburst events. J Appl Meteor Sci, 2006, 17(4): 385-393.
    [18]
    Duan Y P, Wang D H, Liu Y. Radar analysis and numerical simulation of strong convective weather for "Oriental Star" depression. J Appl Meteor Sci, 2017, 28(6): 666-677.
    [19]
    Sheng J, Zheng Y G, Shen X Y, et al. Evolution and mechanism of a rare squall line in early spring of 2018. Meteor Mon, 2019, 45(2): 141-154.
    [20]
    Ribeiro B Z, Weiss S J, Bosart L F. An analysis of the 3 May 2020 low-predictability derecho using a convection-allowing MPAS ensemble. Wea Forecasting, 2022, 37(2): 219-239. doi:  10.1175/WAF-D-21-0092.1
    [21]
    Sun J S. The pattern structure and thermodynamic and dynamic processes of severe storms associated with linear convective gales. Meteor Mon, 2023, 49(1): 1-11.
    [22]
    Wang X M, Yu X D, Fei H Y, et al. A review of downburst genesis mechanism and warning. Meteor Mon, 2023, 49(2): 129-145.
    [23]
    French A J, Parker M D. The initiation and evolution of multiple modes of convection within a meso-alpha-scale region. Wea Forecasting, 2008, 23(6): 1221-1252. doi:  10.1175/2008WAF2222136.1
    [24]
    Parker M D, Borchardt B S, Miller R L, et al. Simulated evolution and severe wind production by the 25-26 June 2015 nocturnal MCS from PECAN. Mon Weather Rev, 2020, 148(1): 183-209. doi:  10.1175/MWR-D-19-0072.1
    [25]
    Wang X M, Yu X D, Zhou X G, et al. Study on the formation and evolution of "6.3" damage wind. Plateau Meteor, 2012, 31(2): 504-514.
    [26]
    Xu C Y, Zhang L N, Xiao X, et al. Case analysis of damaging high winds generated by bow echoes in the presence of a cold vortex over the North China Plain. Acta Meteor Sinica, 2023, 81(1): 40-57.
    [27]
    Diao X G, Li F, Wan F J. Comparative analysis on dual polarization features of two severe hail supercells. J Appl Meteor Sci, 2022, 33(4): 414-428.
    [28]
    Xu Y, Shao M R, Tang K, et al. Multiscale characteristics of two supercell tornados of Heilongjiang in 2021. J Appl Meteor Sci, 2022, 33(3): 305-318.
    [29]
    Li S S, Zhang D J, Hu L, et al. An analysis of a typical bow echo. J Meteor Environ, 2012, 28(4): 84-89.
    [30]
    Chen S J, Zheng J F, Yang J, et al. Retrieval of air vertical velocity and droplet size distribution in squall line precipitation using C-FMCW radar. J Appl Meteor Sci, 2022, 33(4): 429-441.
    [31]
    Emanuel K A. Atmospheric Convection. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994: 158-165.
    [32]
    Markowski P, Richardson Y. Mesoscale Meteorology in Midlatitudes. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010: 245-265.
  • 加载中
  • -->

Catalog

    Figures(16)

    Article views (130) PDF downloads(47) Cited by()
    • Received : 2024-05-13
    • Accepted : 2024-07-26
    • Published : 2024-09-30

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint