YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • AMS
    • Monthly Weather Review
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • AMS
    • Monthly Weather Review
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Structure of a Warm Front: Helsinki Testbed Observations and Model Simulation

    Source: Monthly Weather Review:;2011:;volume( 139 ):;issue: 009::page 2876
    Author:
    Kemppi, Mirja L.
    ,
    Sinclair, Victoria A.
    DOI: 10.1175/MWR-D-10-05003.1
    Publisher: American Meteorological Society
    Abstract: he purpose of this study is to document the structure of a warm front in northeast Europe, identify the effects that the Finnish coastline has on the evolution of the front, and investigate factors that influence the speed that the warm front moves at within, and above, the boundary layer. The warm front formed over Estonia, traveled northward across the Gulf of Finland, and then crossed the southern coastline of Finland. Surface-based measurements from the Helsinki Testbed are analyzed together with output from a high-resolution numerical weather prediction model, Application of Research to Operations at Mesoscale (AROME). During the early stages of development, the warm front interacted with a stationary baroclinic zone and, consequently, evolved into an S shape. As the front approached the southern coast of Finland, the temperature gradient at 1000 hPa increased, as it merged with a diabatically generated temperature gradient. At 1000 hPa, the front stalled at the coastline due to friction-enhanced convergence, while the front?s speed at 860 hPa was almost uniform and unaffected by the coastline. At both 860 and 1000 hPa, the front moved slower than the wind speed. Hence, the front?s movement had a propagating component that was directed in the opposite direction to that of the front?s movement. The distribution of the ageostrophic winds showed that the front?s propagation component was produced by the front?s secondary circulation and surface friction. These results highlight the importance of surface sensible heat fluxes and friction on the evolution and movement of warm fronts.
    • Download: (4.756Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Structure of a Warm Front: Helsinki Testbed Observations and Model Simulation

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4229552
    Collections
    • Monthly Weather Review

    Show full item record

    contributor authorKemppi, Mirja L.
    contributor authorSinclair, Victoria A.
    date accessioned2017-06-09T17:28:52Z
    date available2017-06-09T17:28:52Z
    date copyright2011/09/01
    date issued2011
    identifier issn0027-0644
    identifier otherams-86038.pdf
    identifier urihttp://onlinelibrary.yabesh.ir/handle/yetl/4229552
    description abstracthe purpose of this study is to document the structure of a warm front in northeast Europe, identify the effects that the Finnish coastline has on the evolution of the front, and investigate factors that influence the speed that the warm front moves at within, and above, the boundary layer. The warm front formed over Estonia, traveled northward across the Gulf of Finland, and then crossed the southern coastline of Finland. Surface-based measurements from the Helsinki Testbed are analyzed together with output from a high-resolution numerical weather prediction model, Application of Research to Operations at Mesoscale (AROME). During the early stages of development, the warm front interacted with a stationary baroclinic zone and, consequently, evolved into an S shape. As the front approached the southern coast of Finland, the temperature gradient at 1000 hPa increased, as it merged with a diabatically generated temperature gradient. At 1000 hPa, the front stalled at the coastline due to friction-enhanced convergence, while the front?s speed at 860 hPa was almost uniform and unaffected by the coastline. At both 860 and 1000 hPa, the front moved slower than the wind speed. Hence, the front?s movement had a propagating component that was directed in the opposite direction to that of the front?s movement. The distribution of the ageostrophic winds showed that the front?s propagation component was produced by the front?s secondary circulation and surface friction. These results highlight the importance of surface sensible heat fluxes and friction on the evolution and movement of warm fronts.
    publisherAmerican Meteorological Society
    titleStructure of a Warm Front: Helsinki Testbed Observations and Model Simulation
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume139
    journal issue9
    journal titleMonthly Weather Review
    identifier doi10.1175/MWR-D-10-05003.1
    journal fristpage2876
    journal lastpage2900
    treeMonthly Weather Review:;2011:;volume( 139 ):;issue: 009
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian