山东夏季两次极端雨强暴雨的滴谱特征研究

王俊; 姚展予; 侯淑梅; 王洪; 张秋晨; 龚佃利

doi:10.3878/j.issn.1006-9895.2201.21104

山东夏季两次极端雨强暴雨的滴谱特征研究

doi: 10.3878/j.issn.1006-9895.2201.21104

王俊^{1, 2,},
姚展予^3, ,,
侯淑梅⁴,
王洪^{1, 2},
张秋晨^{1, 2},
龚佃利^{1, 2}

1.
山东省气象防灾减灾重点实验室, 济南250031
2.
山东省人民政府人工影响天气办公室, 济南250031
3.
中国气象局云降水物理与人工影响天气重点开放实验室/人工影响天气中心, 北京100081
4.
山东省气象台, 济南250031

基金项目: 国家重点研发计划项目2018YFC1507901，山东省气象局课题2012SDQX12

详细信息

作者简介:
王俊，男，1966年出生，正研级高级工程师，研究方向为云降水物理与人工影响天气。E-mail: wangjun818@sohu.com

通讯作者:
姚展予, E-mail: yaozy@cma.gov.cn

中图分类号: P401
计量
- 文章访问数: 261
- HTML全文浏览量: 53
- PDF下载量: 89
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2021-06-23
- 录用日期: 2022-02-16
- 网络出版日期: 2022-02-23

The Characteristics of Raindrop Size Distribution in Two Rainstorms with Extreme Rainfall Rates in Summer in Shandong Province

Jun WANG^{1, 2
,},
Zhanyu YAO^{3
, ,},
Shumei HOU⁴,
Hong WANG^{1, 2},
Qiuchen ZHANG^{1, 2},
Dianli GONG^{1, 2}

1.
Key Laboratory for Meteorological Disaster Prevention and Mitigation of Shandong, Jinan 250031
2.
Shandong Weather Modification Office, Jinan 250031
3.
Cloud–Precipitation Physics and Weather Modification Key Laboratory/Weather Modification Centre, China Meteorological Administration, Beijing 100081
4.
Shandong Meteorological Observatory, Jinan 250031

Funds: National Key R&D Program of China (Grant 2018YFC1507903), Shandong Meteorological Bureau Program (Grant 2012SDQX12)

摘要

摘要: 利用Thies激光雨滴谱仪观测的两次极端雨强暴雨的雨滴谱资料，结合CINRADA/SA多普勒雷达观测资料，分析了极端雨强对流降水雨滴谱和积分参数特征、以及地面雨滴谱的形成机制，主要结论为：（1）两次过程都是受副热带高压外围西南气流与西风槽共同影响，具有高温高湿的特点，有利于强降水的产生。（2）强对流降水（雨强R＞20 mm h⁻¹）雨滴谱参数lgN_w、D₀与雨强R关系显示，2015年8月3日参数D₀随着R增大很快增大，线性拟合线的斜率较大，lgN_w随着R增大逐渐减小，线性拟合线的斜率为负值；2017年7月26日D₀和lgN_w与R都是正相关，但D₀和lgN_w随着R增大较缓慢地增大，线性拟合线的斜率较小。强对流降水雨滴浓度N_T与雨强R之间的关系可以用幂函数拟合，8月3日有较大系数和较小指数，7月26日有较小系数和较大指数。（3）不同雨强的对流降水平均雨滴谱分布显示，8月3日随着雨强增大（R＞50 mm h⁻¹），直径1～3 mm中小粒子数密度相差不大，直径3～6 mm大雨滴的粒子数密度明显增大，对流降水Z–R关系有较大指数（1.61）；7月26日随着雨强增大各直径档的粒子数密度基本同时增大，对流降水Z–R关系有较小指数（1.25）。综合各种参数与雨强关系和平均雨滴谱分布特征判断，8月3日强对流降水雨滴谱属于典型的尺寸控制雨滴谱特征，而7月26日对流降水属于浓度—直径混合控制的雨滴谱特征。（4）雨滴谱归一化Gamma函数参数N_w–D₀分布显示，两次对流降水都具有典型大陆性对流降水雨滴谱特征，对流降水主要属于冰相对流降水雨滴谱，但8月3日过程有较多雨滴谱属于冰相—暖雨混合对流降水雨滴谱特征。
- 雨滴谱 /
- 极端雨强 /
- 尺寸控制 /
- 浓度—直径混合控制
Abstract: Abstrcat The raindrop size distributions and integral parameters of convective precipitation and formation mechanism of ground Raindrop size distribution in two extreme precipitations were analyzed using data from the Thies disdrometer and the CINRADA/SA Doppler radar. The results showed that: (1) The two precipitation processes were both affected by the southwest airflow outside the subtropical high and the westerly trough with the characteristics of high temperature and high humidity, which were conducive to the production of heavy rain. (2) The relationships between parameters lgN_w, D₀ and rain intensity R of severe convective precipitation episodes (rain intensity R＞20 mmh⁻¹) revealed there was a large coefficient and a small index on 3 August 2015, whereas it was just the opposite on 26 July 2017. On 3 August, D₀ rapidly increased as R increased for the median volume diameter of the raindrop, and the slope of the fitting line was large, while lgN_w gradually decreased as R increased. Furthermore, the slope of the linear fitting line was negative. D₀ and lgN_w were both positively correlated with R on 26 July 2017; however, D₀ increased slowly as R increased, and the slope of the fitting line was small. In addition, the slope of the linear fitting line was smaller. For the raindrop concentration (N_T), the exponential function can be used to fit the N_T as R increases. On 3 August, there was a large coefficient and a small index, whereas on 26 July, it was just the opposite. (3) The average raindrop size distribution of convective precipitation with different rainfall intensities show that, On 3 August, with the increase of rain intensity (R＞50 mm h⁻¹), the concentration of small particles in diameter 1–3 mm varied slightly, while the concentration of large raindrops in diameter 3–6 mm increased significantly, and the Z–R relationship of convective precipitation had a large index (1.61). On 26 July, with the increase of rain intensity, the concentration of particles in each diameter range basically increased at the same time, and the Z–R relationship of convective precipitation had a small index (1.25). In conclusion, the precipitation on 3 August had typical size-controlled raindrop size distribution characteristics, whereas the convective precipitation on 26 July had concentration–diameter mixed control of raindrop size distribution characteristics based on the relationship between integral parameters and rain intensity and the average raindrop size distribution. (4) The normalized Gamma N_W–D₀ distributions showed that the convective precipitation in the two cases had the characteristics of the typical raindrop size distribution of continental convective precipitation. Many raindrop size distributions in the processes of 3 August showed the characteristics of ice phase and warm mixed convective precipitation, but most of the convective precipitation in the two processes had the characteristics of ice-based raindrop size distribution.
- Raindrop size distribution /
- Extreme rainfall rate /
- Size controll /
- Number–size mixture controll

HTML全文

图 1 2015年8月3日（a）17:41（北京时，下同）、（b）19:43、（c）20:30济南（36°48'10"N，116°46'51"E）新一代多普勒雷达组合反射率（单位：dBZ），（d）济南雨滴谱仪站点（36°41'N，117°32'E）雷达反射率因子（单位：dBZ）高度—时间剖面

Figure 1. Composite reflectivity (units: dBZ) of new generation Doppler radar at Jinan (36°48'10"N, 116°46'51"E) at (a) 1741 BJT (Beijing time), (b) 1943 BJT, (c) 2030 BJT, and (d) height–time profile of radar reflectivity (units: dBZ) for disdrometer at Jinan station (36°41'N, 117°32'E) on 3 August 2015

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 2017年7月26日（a）19:28、（b）20:15、（c）21:50临沂（35°15'00"N, 118°25'12"E）新一代多普勒雷达组合反射率（单位：dBZ），（d）蒙阴雨滴谱仪站点（35°42'N，117°56'E）雷达反射率因子（单位：dBZ）高度—时间剖面

Figure 2. Composite reflectivity (units: dBZ) of new generation Doppler radar at Linyi (35°15'00"N, 118°25'12"E) at (a) 1928 BJT，(b) 2015 BJT，(c) 2150 BJT, (d) height–time profile of radar reflectivity (units: dBZ) for disdrometer at Mengyin station (35°42'N, 117°56'E) on 26 July 2017

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 2015年08月03日济南（a）雨滴谱N(D)（单位：m⁻³ mm⁻¹），（b）雨滴数浓度N_T（黑色线，单位：m⁻³）、反射率因子Z（蓝色线，单位：dBZ）和雨强R（红色线，单位：mm h⁻¹），（c）归一化Gamma谱参数lgN_w（绿色线）和D₀（黑色线，单位：mm）的时间序列

Figure 3. Temporal evolutions of (a) raindrop size distribution N(D) (units: m⁻³ mm⁻¹), (b) raindrop number concentration N_T (black line, units: m⁻³), reflectivity factor Z (blue line, units: dBZ), and rain rate R (red line, units: mm h⁻¹), (c) normalized Gamma spectral parameters lgN_w (green line) and D₀ (black line, units: mm) at Jinan on 3 August 2015

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 2017年7月26日蒙阴（a）雨滴谱N(D)（单位：m⁻³ mm⁻¹），（b）雨滴数浓度N_T（黑色线，单位：m⁻³）、反射率因子Z（蓝色线，单位：dBZ）和雨强R（红色线，单位：mm h⁻¹），（c）归一化Gamma谱参数lgN_w（绿色线）和D₀（黑色线，单位：mm）的时间序列

Figure 4. Temporal evolutions of (a) raindrop size distribution N(D) (units: m⁻³ mm⁻¹), (b) raindrop number concentration N_T (black line, units: m⁻³), reflectivity factor Z (blue line, units: dBZ), and rain rate R (red line, units: mm h⁻¹), (c) normalized Gamma spectral parameters lgN_w (green line) and D₀ (black line, units: mm) at Mengyin on 26 July 2017

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 （a）2015年8月3日济南、（b）2017年7月26日蒙阴雨滴谱仪观测的雨滴浓度N_T与雨强R的散点图和拟合线

Figure 5. Scatter plots and fitting results of rain concentration N_T versus rain rate R retrieved from raindrop size distributions (a) at Jinan on 3 August 2015 and (b) at Mengyin on 26 July 2017

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 （a、b）2015年8月3日济南、（c、d）2017年7月26日蒙阴雨滴谱仪观测的参数（a、c）D₀、（b、d）lgN_w与雨强R的散点图和拟合线

Figure 6. Scatter plots and fitting results of (a, c) the median volume diameter D₀, (b, d) the intercept parameter lgN_w versus rain rate R retrieved from raindrop size distributions (a, b) at Jinan on 3 August 2015, (c, d) at Mengyin on 26 July 2017

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 （a）2015年8月3日济南、（b）2017年7月26日蒙阴雨滴谱计算的雷达反射率因子Z与雨强R的散点图和拟合线。实线是强对流降水（R＞20.0 mm h⁻¹）拟合方程，点划线是个例一层状降水S2和个例二层状降水拟合方程，虚线是新一代多普勒雷达对流降水Z–R关系

Figure 7. Scatter plots and fitting results of radar reflectivity factor Z versus rain rate R retrieved from raindrop size distributions (a) at Jinan on 3 August 2015 and (b) at Mengyin on 26 July 2017. The solid line represents the fitting equation of strong convective precipitation, the dotted line represents the fitting equation of case 1 stratiform precipitation S2 and case 2 stratiform precipitation, the dotted line represents the new generation Doppler radar convective precipitation Z–R relationship

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 （a）2015年8月3日济南、（b）2017年7月26日蒙阴不同降水类型的雨强平均雨滴谱

Figure 8. Average raindrop size distributions for different rain rate categories (a) at Jinan on 3 August 2015 and (b) at Mengyin on 26 July 2017

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 （a）2015年8月3日济南、（b）2017年7月26日蒙阴的lgN_w–D₀散点图和对流—层状降水分离线（黑实线）。绿色矩形框自上而下分别是海洋性和大陆性对流分布（Bringi et al, 2003），虚线是层状降水平均分布，点划线是对流与层状云降水之间的分离线（Bringi et al, 2009）

Figure 9. Scatter plots of lgN_w versus D₀ and the convection–stratiform separation (black solid line) line (a) at Jinan on 3 August 2015 and (b) at Mengyin on 26 July 2017. The two green rectangles correspond to the maritime and continental convective clusters reported by Bringi et al. (2003), the dashed line represents the average of stratiform, the dotted-dashed line represents the stratiform–convective separation line proposed by Bringi et al. (2009)

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 2015年8月3日济南8类雨滴谱的雨强、样本数、参数lgN_w和D₀以及平均雨强

Table 1. Rain intensity R, number of samples, parameters lgN_w and D₀, mean rain intensity retrieved from 8 categories of raindrop size distributions at Jinan on 3 August 2015

雨滴谱类型	雨强R/ mm h⁻¹	样本数/ min	lgN_w/m⁻³ mm⁻¹	D₀/ mm	平均雨强/ mm h⁻¹
T	4＜R≤9.9	9	3.49	1.69	7.2
S1	2＜R≤10	24	3.29	1.88	7.3
S2	0.5＜R≤15	120	2.33	2.86	5.5
1	10＜R≤50	31	3.44	2.34	26.3
2	50＜R≤100	24	3.52	2.98	75.6
3	100＜R≤200	18	3.17	4.05	135.9
4	200＜R≤300	2	3.30	4.28	244.3
5	R＞300	2	3.23	4.90	384.8

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 2017年7月26日蒙阴6类雨滴谱的雨强、样本数、参数lgN_w和D₀以及平均雨强

Table 2. Rain intensity R, number of samples, parameters lgN_w and D₀, mean rain intensity retrieved from 6 categories of raindrop size distributions at Mengyin on 26 July 2017

雨滴谱类型	R/ mm h⁻¹	样本数/ min	lgN_w/m⁻³ mm⁻¹	D₀/ mm	平均雨强/ mm h⁻¹
S	0.5＜R≤9.0	70	2.03	2.67	2.7
1	10＜R≤50	21	3.19	2.69	30.6
2	50＜R≤100	16	3.33	3.06	73.2
3	100＜R≤200	15	3.68	3.00	143.9
4	200＜R≤300	3	3.82	3.32	271.9
5	R＞300	1	3.78	3.67	390.6

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(53)

[1]	Angulo-Martínez M, Beguería S, Latorre B, et al. 2018. Comparison of precipitation measurements by OTT Parsivel² and Thies LPM optical disdrometers [J]. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22(5): 2811−2837. doi: 10.5194/hess-22-2811-2018
[2]	Beard K V, Johnson D B, Baumgardner D. 1986. Aircraft observations of large raindrops in warm, shallow, convective clouds [J]. Geophys. Res. Lett., 13(10): 991−994. doi: 10.1029/GL013i010p00991
[3]	Blanchard D C, Spencer A T. 1970. Experiments on the generation of raindrop–size distributions by drop breakup [J]. J. Atmos. Sci., 27(1): 101−108. doi: 10.1175/1520-0469(1970)027<0101:EOTGOR>2.0.CO;2
[4]	Bringi V N, Chandrasekar V, Hubbert J, et al. 2003. Raindrop size distribution in different climatic regimes from disdrometer and dual-polarized radar analysis [J]. J. Atmos. Sci., 60(2): 354−365. doi: 10.1175/1520-0469(2003)060<0354:RSDIDC>2.0.CO;2
[5]	Bringi V N, Williams C R, Thurai M, et al. 2009. Using dual-polarized radar and dual-frequency profiler for DSD characterization: A case study from Darwin, Australia [J]. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 26(10): 2107−2122. doi: 10.1175/2009JTECHA1258.1
[6]	Caracciolo C, Prodi F, Battaglia A, et al. 2006. Analysis of the moments and parameters of a gamma DSD to infer precipitation properties: A convective stratiform discrimination algorithm [J]. Atmos. Res., 80: 165−186. doi: 10.1016/j.atmosres.2005.07.003
[7]	Chen B J, Yang J, Pu J P. 2013. Statistical characteristics of raindrop size distribution in the Meiyu season observed in eastern China [J]. J. Meteor. Soc. Japan, 91(2): 215−227. doi: 10.2151/jmsj.2013-208
[8]	Chen B J, Hu Z Q, Liu L P, et al. 2017. Raindrop size distribution measurements at 4, 500 m on the Tibetan Plateau during TIPEX-III [J]. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 122(20): 11092−11106. doi: 10.1002/2017JD027233
[9]	陈磊, 陈宝君, 杨军, 等, 2013.2009～2010年梅雨锋暴雨雨滴谱特征[J]. 大气科学学报, 36(4): 481–488 Chen Lei, Chen Baojun, Yang Jun, et al. 2013. Characteristics of raindrop size distribution of rainstorm on Meiyu front during 2009–2010 [J]. Trans. Atmos. Sci. (in Chinese), 36(4): 481–488. doi:10.13878/j.cnki.dqkxxb.2013.04.012
[10]	崔云扬, 周毓荃, 蔡淼. 2019. 利用微雨雷达研究一次冷锋云系降水的垂直结构分布及演变特征 [J]. 大气科学, 43(3): 618−633. doi: 10.3878/j.issn.1006-9895.1804.17307 Cui Yunyang, Zhou Yuquan, Cai Miao. 2019. Vertical structure and evolution of precipitation associated with clouds along a cold front based on micro rain radar observations [J]. Chinese Journal of Atmospheric Sciences (in Chinese), 43(3): 618−633. doi: 10.3878/j.issn.1006-9895.1804.17307
[11]	D’ Adderio L P, Porcù F, Tokay A. 2015. Identification and analysis of collisional breakup in natural rain [J]. J. Atmos. Sci., 72(9): 3404−3416. doi: 10.1175/JAS-D-14-0304.1
[12]	D’ Adderio L P, Porcù F, Tokay A. 2018. Evolution of drop size distribution in natural rain [J]. Atmos. Res., 200: 70−76. doi: 10.1016/j.atmosres.2017.10.003
[13]	Dolan B, Fuchs B, Rutledge S A, et al. 2018. Primary modes of global drop size distributions [J]. J. Atmos. Sci., 75(5): 1453−1476. doi: 10.1175/JAS-D-17-0242.1
[14]	Frasson R P D M, Da Cunha L K, Krajewski W F. 2011. Assessment of the Thies optical disdrometer performance [J]. Atmos. Res., 101(1–2): 237–255. doi:10.1016/j.atmosres.2011.02.014
[15]	Friedrich K, Kalina E A, Aikins J, et al. 2016. Raindrop size distribution and rain characteristics during the 2013 great Colorado flood [J]. J. Hydrometeor., 17(1): 53−72. doi: 10.1175/JHM-D-14-0184.1
[16]	Fulton R A, Breidenbach J P, Seo D J, et al. 1998. The WSR-88D rainfall algorithm [J]. Wea. Forecasting, 13(2): 377−395. doi: 10.1175/1520-0434(1998)013<0377:TWRA>2.0.CO;2
[17]	Gatlin P N, Thurai M, Bringi V N, et al. 2015. Searching for large raindrops: A global summary of two-dimensional video disdrometer observations [J]. J. Appl. Meteor. Climatol., 54(5): 1069−1089. doi: 10.1175/JAMC-D-14-0089.1
[18]	Guyot A, Pudashine J, Protat A, et al. 2019. Effect of disdrometer type on rain drop size distribution characterisation: a new dataset for south-eastern Australia [J]. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23(11): 4737−4761. doi: 10.5194/hess-23-4737-2019
[19]	Hobbs P V, Rangno A L. 2004. Super-large raindrops [J]. Geophys. Res. Lett., 31(13): L13102. doi: 10.1029/2004GL020167
[20]	Hodson M C. 1986. Raindrop size distribution [J]. J. Appl. Meteor. Climatol., 25(7): 1070−1074. doi: 10.1175/1520-0450(1986)025<1070:RSD>2.0.CO;2
[21]	Hu Z, Srivastava R C. 1995. Evolution of raindrop size distribution by coalescence, breakup, and evaporation: Theory and observations [J]. J. Atmos. Sci., 52(10): 1761−1783. doi: 10.1175/1520-0469(1995)052<1761:EORSDB>2.0.CO;2
[22]	黄兴友, 印佳楠, 马雷, 等. 2019. 南京地区雨滴谱参数的详细统计分析及其在天气雷达探测中的应用 [J]. 大气科学, 43(3): 691−704. doi: 10.3878/j.issn.1006-9895.1805.18113 Huang Xingyou, Yin Jia’nan, Ma Lei, et al. 2019. Comprehensive statistical analysis of rain drop size distribution parameters and their application to weather radar measurement in Nanjing [J]. Chinese Journal of Atmospheric Sciences (in Chinese), 43(3): 691−704. doi: 10.3878/j.issn.1006-9895.1805.18113
[23]	Johannsen L L, Zambon N, Strauss P, et al. 2020. Comparison of three types of laser optical disdrometers under natural rainfall conditions [J]. Hydrol. Sci. J., 65(4): 524−535. doi: 10.1080/02626667.2019.1709641
[24]	Kumjian M R, Prat O P. 2014. The impact of raindrop collisional processes on the polarimetric radar variables [J]. J. Atmos. Sci., 71(8): 3052−3067. doi: 10.1175/JAS-D-13-0357.1
[25]	Low T B, List R. 1982. Collision, coalescence and breakup of raindrops. Part I: Experimentally established coalescence efficiencies and fragment size distributions in breakup [J]. J. Atmos. Sci., 39(7): 1591−1606. doi: 10.1175/1520-0469(1982)039<1591:CCABOR>2.0.CO;2
[26]	Luo L, Xiao H, Yang H L, et al. 2020. Raindrop size distribution and microphysical characteristics of a great rainstorm in 2016 in Beijing, China [J]. Atmos. Res., 239: 104895. doi: 10.1016/j.atmosres.2020.104895
[27]	罗亚丽, 孙继松, 李英, 等. 2020. 中国暴雨的科学与预报: 改革开放40年研究成果 [J]. 气象学报, 78(3): 419−450. doi: 10.11676/qxxb2020.057 Luo Yali, Sun Jisong, Li Ying, et al. 2020. Science and prediction of heavy rainfall over China: Research progress since the reform and opening-up of the People’ s Republic of China [J]. Acta Meteor. Sinica, 78(3): 419−450. doi: 10.11676/qxxb2020.057
[28]	Ma Y, Chen H N, Ni G H, et al. 2020. Microphysical and polarimetric radar signatures of an epic flood event in southern China [J]. Remote Sens., 12(17): 2772. doi: 10.3390/rs12172772
[29]	McFarquhar G M. 2004. A new representation of collision-induced breakup of raindrops and its implications for the shapes of raindrop size distributions [J]. J. Atmos. Sci., 61(7): 777−794. doi: 10.1175/1520-0469(2004)061<0777:ANROCB>2.0.CO;2
[30]	Murata F, Terao T, Chakravarty K, et al. 2020. Characteristics of orographic rain drop–size distribution at Cherrapunji, Northeast India [J]. Atmosphere, 11(8): 777. doi: 10.3390/atmos11080777
[31]	Park S G, Kim H L, Ham Y W, et al. 2017. Comparative evaluation of the OTT PARSIVEL² using a collocated two-dimensional video disdrometer [J]. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 34(9): 2059−2082. doi: 10.1175/JTECH-D-16-0256.1
[32]	Porcù F, D’ Adderio L P, Prodi F, et al. 2014. Rain drop size distribution over the Tibetan Plateau [J]. Atmos. Res., 150: 21−30. doi: 10.1016/j.atmosres.2014.07.005
[33]	Prat O P, Barros A P, Testik F Y. 2012. On the influence of raindrop collision outcomes on equilibrium drop size distributions [J]. J. Atmos. Sci., 69(5): 1534−1546. doi: 10.1175/jas-d-11-0192.1
[34]	Ryzhkov A V, Kumjian M R, Ganson S M, et al. 2013. Polarimetric radar characteristics of melting hail. Part II: Practical implications [J]. J. Appl. Meteor. Climatol., 52(12): 2871−2886. doi: 10.1175/JAMC-D-13-074.1
[35]	Seela B K, Janapati J, Lin P L, et al. 2017. A comparison study of summer season raindrop size distribution between Palau and Taiwan, two islands in western Pacific [J]. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 122(21): 11787−11805. doi: 10.1002/2017JD026816
[36]	Steiner M, Smith J A, Uijlenhoet R. 2004. A microphysical interpretation of radar reﬂectivity–rain rate relationships [J]. J. Atmos. Sci., 61(10): 1114−1131. doi: 10.1175/1520-0469(2004)061<1114:AMIORR>2.0.CO;2
[37]	Straub W, Beheng K D, Seifert A, et al. 2010. Numerical investigation of collision-induced breakup of raindrops. Part II: Parameterizations of coalescence efficiencies and fragment size distributions [J]. J. Atmos. Sci., 67(3): 576−588. doi: 10.1175/2009jas3175.1
[38]	Testud J, Oury S, Black R A, et al. 2001. The concept of “normalized” distribution to describe raindrop spectra: A tool for cloud physics and cloud remote sensing [J]. J. Appl. Meteor., 40(6): 1118−1140. doi: 10.1175/1520-0450(2001)040<1118:TCONDT>2.0.CO;2
[39]	Thompson E J, Rutledge S A, Dolan B, et al. 2015. Drop size distributions and radar observations of convective and stratiform rain over the equatorial Indian and West Pacific Oceans [J]. J. Atmos. Sci., 72(11): 4091−4125. doi: 10.1175/JAS-D-14-0206.1
[40]	Tokay A, Short D A. 1996. Evidence from tropical raindrop spectra of the origin of rain from stratiform versus convective clouds [J]. J. Appl. Meteor., 35(3): 355−371. doi: 10.1175/1520-0450(1996)035<0355:EFTRSO>2.0.CO;2
[41]	Uijlenhoet R, Smith J A, Steiner M. 2003. The microphysical structure of extreme precipitation as inferred from ground-based raindrop spectra [J]. J. Atmos. Sci., 60(10): 1220−1238. doi: 10.1175/1520-0469(2003)60<1220:TMSOEP>2.0.CO;2
[42]	Ulbrich C W, Atlas D. 2007. Microphysics of raindrop size spectra: Tropical continental and maritime storms [J]. J. Appl. Meteor. Climatol., 46(11): 1777−1791. doi: 10.1175/2007JAMC1649.1
[43]	王洪, 雷恒池, 杨洁帆, 等. 2020. 山东不同云系降水微物理参数特征 [J]. 大气科学, 44(2): 315−326. doi: 10.3878/j.issn.1006-9895.1905.18243 Wang Hong, LEI Hengchi, YANG Jiefan, et al. 2020. Characteristics of rain microphysical parameters for different cloud systems in Shandong Province [J]. Chinese Journal of Atmospheric Sciences (in Chinese), 44(2): 315−326. doi: 10.3878/j.issn.1006-9895.1905.18243
[44]	Wang H, Wang W Q, Wang J, et al. 2021. Rainfall microphysical properties of landfalling typhoon Yagi (201814) based on the observations of micro rain radar and cloud radar in Shandong, China [J]. Adv. Atmos. Sci., 38(6): 994−1011. doi: 10.1007/s00376-021-0062-x
[45]	王俊, 姚展予, 侯淑梅, 等. 2016. 一次飑线过程的雨滴谱特征研究 [J]. 气象学报, 74(3): 450−464. doi: 10.11676/qxxb2016.034 Wang J, Yao Z Y, Hou S M, et al. 2016. Characteristics of the raindrop size distribution in a squall line measured by Thies optical disdrometers [J]. Acta Meteor. Sinica (in Chinese), 74(3): 450−464. doi: 10.11676/qxxb2016.034
[46]	王俊, 王文青, 王洪, 等. 2021. 山东北部一次夏末雹暴地面降水粒子谱特征 [J]. 应用气象学报, 32(3): 370−384. doi: 10.11898/1001-7313.20210309 Wang J, Wang W Q, Wang H, et al. 2021. Hydrometeor particle characteristics during a late summer hailstorm in northern Shandong [J]. J. Appl. Meteor. Sci. (in Chinese), 32(3): 370−384. doi: 10.11898/1001-7313.20210309
[47]	Wen L, Zhao K, Wang M Y, et al. 2019. Seasonal variations of observed raindrop size distribution in East China [J]. Adv. Atmos. Sci., 36(4): 346−362. doi: 10.1007/s00376-018-8107-5
[48]	Willis P T. 1984. Functional fits to some observed drop size distributions and parameterization of rain [J]. J. Atmos. Sci., 41(9): 1648−1661. doi: 10.1175/1520-0469(1984)041<1648:FFTSOD>2.0.CO;2
[49]	Willis P T, Tattelman P. 1989. Drop–size distributions associated with intense rainfall [J]. J. Appl. Meteor. Climatol., 28(1): 3−15. doi: 10.1175/1520-0450(1989)028<0003:DSDAWI>2.0.CO;2
[50]	Witt A, Eilts M D, Stumpf G J, et al. 1998. An enhanced hail detection algorithm for the WSR-88D [J]. Wea. Forecasting, 13(2): 286−303. doi: 10.1175/1520-0434(1998)013<0286:AEHDAF>2.0.CO;2
[51]	Wu Y H, Liu L P. 2017. Statistical characteristics of raindrop size distribution in the Tibetan Plateau and southern China [J]. Adv. Atmos. Sci., 34(6): 727−736. doi: 10.1007/s00376-016-5235-7
[52]	Yu N, Delrieu G, Boudevillain B, et al. 2014. Unified formulation of single and multi-moment normalizations of the raindrop size distribution based on the Gamma probability density function [J]. J. Appl. Meteor. Climatol., 53(1): 166−179. doi: 10.1175/JAMC-D-12-0244.1
[53]	Zawadzki I, Antonio M D A. 1988. Equilibrium raindrop size distributions in tropical rain [J]. J. Atmos. Sci, 45(22): 3452−3459. doi: 10.1175/1520-0469(1988)045<3452:ERSDIT>2.0.CO;2