DISCRIMINATION BETWEEN CONVECTIVE AND NON-CONVECTIVE WIND GUSTS
Keywords:Wind gust. Gust front. Thunderstorm. INMET. Severe weather.
AbstractThe present study ivestigated in detail a serie of 184 wind gusts events originally discarded by Ferreira e Nascimento (2015), which presented a behavior not consistent with local convective activity by persist for several hours. This study aims to confirm or not the convective nature of these wind gusts. Using hourly data from automated weather stations maintained by Brazil National Weather Service (INMET), satellite imagery from the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES 12 and 13), weather radars data and final analysis data from the National Centers for Environment Prediction (NCEP) Global Forecast System (GFS-FNL) the 184 intese wind gusts episodes was analysed, some recorded by weather stations located at high elevations and other in the coastal region of brazilian south. After a detailed analysis only 9 wind gusts events were confirmed as convective origin. For the weather stations located in high altitudes the most frequently forcing mechanism to explain intense wind gusts persisting for several hours was not convective activity, but the presence of a flow from north-northeast like a low-level jet (LLJ). In the coastal stations the most wind gusts originated from low pressure systems in synoptic scale located near the coast of southern Brazil, as extratropical cyclones.
Brooks, H. (2006). A global view of severe thunderstorms: Estimating the current distribution and possible future changes, preprints. Em: AMS Severe Local Storms Special Symposium, J4, p 2.
Cecil, D. J., Blankenship, C. B. (2012). Toward a global climatology of severe hailstorms as estimated by satellite passive microwave imagers. Journal of Climate, 25(2), 687–703.
Engerer, N. A., Stensrud, D. J., Coniglio, M. C. (2008). Surface characteristics of observed cold pools. Monthly Weather Review, 136(12), 4839–4849.
Ferreira, V., Nascimento, E. d. L. (2015). Severe wind gusts generated by thunderstorms as sampled by INMET's surface automated weather stations in southern brazil. Em: 14th International Conference on Wind Engineering.
Fogaccia, C. V. C., Filho, P. A. (2002). Turbulência e cisalhamento do vento na área do aeroporto internacional de são paulo/guarulhos. Em: XII Congresso Brasileiro de Meteorologia, Foz do Iguaçu, PR. Anais... Soc. Bras. Meteorologia.
Fujita, T. T. (1986). Mesoscale classifications: their history and their application to forecasting. Mesoscale Meteorology and Forecasting, P S Ray (Ed), American Meteorological Society, pp. 18–35.
Lima, D., Menezes, W. F. (2004). Queda de estruturas de linha de transmissão de energia elétrica em cachoeira paulista (SP) ea ocorrência de tempestades severas: um estudo de caso. Em: CONGRESSO BRASILEIRO DE METEOROLOGIA, XIII.
Machado, L., Rossow, W., Guedes, R., Walker, A. (1998). Life cycle variations of mesoscale convective systems over the americas. Monthly Weather Review, 126(6), 1630–1654.
Matsudo, C., Salio, P. (2011). Severe weather reports and proximity to deep convection over northern argentina. Atmospheric Research, 100(4), 523–537.
Moller, A. R. (2001). Severe local storms forecasting. Meteorological Monographs, 28(50), 433–480.
Nascimento, E. d. L. (2005). Previsão de tempestades severas utilizando-se parâmetros convectivos e modelos de mesoescala: uma estratégia operacional adotável no brasil. Revista Brasileira de Meteorologia, 20(1), 121–140.
Salio, P., Nicolini, M., Zipser, E. J. (2007). Mesoscale convective systems over southeastern south america and their relationship with the south american low-
level jet. Monthly Weather Review, 135(4), 1290–1309.
Zipser, E. J., Liu, C., Cecil, D. J., Nesbitt, S. W., Yorty, D. P. (2006). Where are the most intense thunderstorms on earth? Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 87(8), 1057–1071.
How to Cite
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.