relationship between level of neutral buoyancy and dual-doppler observed mass detrainment levels in deep convection
Clicks: 124
ID: 161983
2013
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
30.0
/100
124 views
19 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #555 of 850 articles by views in Journal of agricultural and food chemistry
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 850 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Although it is generally accepted that the level of neutral buoyancy (LNB) is only a coarse estimate of updraft depth, the LNB is still used to understand and predict storm structure in both observations and modeling. This study uses case studies to quantify the variability associated with using environmental soundings to predict detrainment levels. Nine dual-Doppler convective cases were used to determine the observed level of maximum detrainment (LMD) to compare with the LNB. The LNB for each case was calculated with a variety of methods and with a variety of sources (including both observed and simulated soundings). The most representative LNB was chosen as the proximity sounding from NARR using the most unstable parcel and including ice processes. <br><br> The observed cases were a mix of storm morphologies, including both supercell and multicell storms. As expected, the LMD was generally below the LNB, the mean offset for all cases being 2.2 km. However, there was a marked difference between the supercell and non-supercell cases. The two supercell cases had LMDs of 0.3 km and 0.0 km below the LNB. The remaining cases had LMDs that ranged from 4.0 km below to 1.6 km below the LNB, with a mean offset of 2.8 km below. Observations also showed that evolution of the LMD over the lifetime of the storm can be significant (e.g., >2 km altitude change in 30 min), and this time evolution is lacking from models with coarse time steps, missing significant changes in detrainment levels that may strongly impact the amount of boundary layer mass transported to the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere.
| Reference Key |
mullendore2013atmosphericrelationship
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;G. L. Mullendore;A. J. Homann;S. T. Jorgenson;T. J. Lang;S. A. Tessendorf |
| Journal | Journal of agricultural and food chemistry |
| Year | 2013 |
| DOI |
10.5194/acp-13-181-2013
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.