1 / 10

Convective Variability Across the East Pacific Rob Cifelli Steve Nesbitt, and Steve Rutledge

Convective Variability Across the East Pacific Rob Cifelli Steve Nesbitt, and Steve Rutledge Colorado State University Walt Petersen University of Alabama Sandra Yuter University of Washington Support from NSF and NOAA OGP. TRMM 1998-2000 JAS Climatology. PR Rainrate (mm/dy).

hisoki
Télécharger la présentation

Convective Variability Across the East Pacific Rob Cifelli Steve Nesbitt, and Steve Rutledge

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Convective Variability Across the East Pacific Rob Cifelli Steve Nesbitt, and Steve Rutledge Colorado State University Walt Petersen University of Alabama Sandra Yuter University of Washington Support from NSF and NOAA OGP

  2. TRMM 1998-2000 JAS Climatology PR Rainrate (mm/dy) TMI Rainrate (mm/dy) Conv. Fraction/SST 30 dBZ Ht./Max. Length

  3. OLR Composite • Near normal conditions in EPIC region during September 2001 • Enhanced activity in TEPPS regions during August 1997 associated with El Niño

  4. Precipitation Feature Area • Sub-MCS’s and NC’s are larger in TEPPS • MCS’s are larger in EPIC

  5. EPIC convective rain fraction is consistent with 1998-2000 TRMM climatology • TEPPS convective rain fraction is higher than 1998-2000 TRMM climatology

  6. Maximum Echo Height Distribution • Relatively few TEPPS sub-MCS’s and NC’s in lowest height bin

  7. Rain Volume vs. Maximum Echo Height • Majority of rainfall comes from “deep” MCSs

  8. Rain Rate Distributions • EPIC features tend to rain “harder” than TEPPS features

  9. Maximum 30 dBZ Height vs Feature Area • Mixed phase processes and “cold” rain probably more efficient in EPIC

  10. MCS Cumulative Frequency Distribution • EPIC MCSs more intense above the melting level

More Related