搜索

x

留言板

尊敬的读者、作者、审稿人, 关于本刊的投稿、审稿、编辑和出版的任何问题, 您可以本页添加留言。我们将尽快给您答复。谢谢您的支持!

姓名
邮箱
手机号码
标题
留言内容
验证码

人工引发闪电上行负先导的发展传输特征

李宗祥 蒋如斌 吕冠霖 刘明远 孙竹玲 张鸿波 刘昆 李小强 张雄

引用本文:
Citation:

人工引发闪电上行负先导的发展传输特征

李宗祥, 蒋如斌, 吕冠霖, 刘明远, 孙竹玲, 张鸿波, 刘昆, 李小强, 张雄

Characteristics of rocket-triggered positive lightning flashes and propagation properties of their initial upward negative leaders

Li Zong-Xiang, Jiang Ru-Bin, Lü Guan-Lin, Liu Ming-Yuan, Sun Zhu-Ling, Zhang Hong-Bo, Liu Kun, Li Xiao-Qiang, Zhang Xiong
PDF
HTML
导出引用
  • 在地面大气电场为正极性的条件下, 成功实现12次人工引发闪电, 对其放电特征、初始阶段上行负先导的传输特征与机理进行了研究. 引发闪电时地面大气电场强度均值约5 kV/m, 最高超过13 kV/m. 除一次个例的放电发生了正、极性反转并产生多次负回击以外, 其他11次引发闪电均未产生继后回击过程, 闪电放电电流总体上在几百安培量级. 引发闪电起始后, 其向上传输的负梯级先导平均二维速度为1.85 × 105 m/s, 获得132次梯级的长度范围为0.8—8.7 m, 平均3.9 m. 先导起始阶段的电流和电磁场呈现显著的脉冲特征, 其脉冲间隔、电流峰值、转移电荷量、半峰值宽度、电流上升时间T10%—90%平均值分别为17.9 μs, 81 A, 364 μC, 3.1 μs和0.9 μs, 单次梯级的等效线电荷密度为118.5 μC/m. 先导通道的分叉一般伴随梯级过程发生, 存在两种方式: 1) 先导头部前方成簇的空间茎/空间先导在同一梯级周期内先后与先导头部发生连接, 对应的电流脉冲表现为多峰结构, 峰值点时间间隔约2—3 μs, 最长6—7 μs; 2) 曾熄灭的空间茎/空间先导重燃后侧向连接至先导通道.
    Twelve lightning flashes are successfully triggered under the positive atmospheric electric field condition. The discharge properties of the flashes, and the propagation characteristics and mechanism of the involving upward negative leaders are investigated. When lightning flashes are triggered, the average ground atmospheric electric field is around 5 kV/m, with a maximum value exceeding 13 kV/m. Except for one special event showing a discharge polarity reversal (from positive to negative) and producing multiple negative return strokes, none of the remaining 11 triggered lightning flashes involves the subsequent return stroke process. The discharge currents of these flashes are generally of the order of several hundred amperes. The successfully triggered lightning flashes start with the initiation and the upward propagation of negative stepped leaders, of which the average two-dimensional velocity is 1.85 × 105 m/s. For a total of 132 steps captured by the high-speed video camera, the step lengths range from 0.8 m to 8.7 m, with an average of 3.9 m. During the initial stage of the upward negative stepped leader, the current and electromagnetic field present a significant impulsive feature. The mean value of pulse interval, current peak, charge transfer, half-peak-width and current rise time T10%–90% are 17.9 μs, 81A, 364 μC, 3.1 μs, and 0.9 μs, respectively. The equivalent linear charge density of a single step is 118.5 μC/m. The branching of the leader channel generally takes place together with the stepping process in two ways: the first way is to implement the multiple connections of clustering space stems/space leaders to the leader head within an individual step cycle, and the corresponding current waveform presents a multi-peak structure, with a peak interval of about 2–3 μs (up to 6–7 μs); the second way is to reactivate those previously extinguished space stems/space leaders and to connect them to the lateral surface of the channel.
      通信作者: 蒋如斌, jiangrubin@mail.iap.ac.cn
    • 基金项目: 国家重点研发计划(批准号: 2017YFC1501502)、国家自然科学基金(批准号: 41775012, 41630425)、四川省重点研发计划(批准号: 2019YFG0104)和中国科学院青年创新促进会资助的课题
      Corresponding author: Jiang Ru-Bin, jiangrubin@mail.iap.ac.cn
    • Funds: Project supported by National Key R&D Program of China (Grant No. 2017YFC1501502), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 41775012, 41630425), the Key R&D Projects of Sichuan Province, China (Grant No. 2019YFG0104), and the Youth Innovation Promotion Association of Chinese Academy of Sciences
    [1]

    苟学强, 张义军, 李亚珺, 陈明理 2018 67 205201Google Scholar

    Gou X, Zhang Y, Li Y, Chen M 2018 Acta Phys. Sin. 67 205201Google Scholar

    [2]

    郄秀书, 袁善锋, 陈志雄, 王东方, 刘冬霞, 孙萌宇, 孙竹玲, 等 2021 中国科学: 地球科学 51 46

    Qie X, Yuan S, Chen Z, Wang D, Liu D, Sun M, Sun Z, et.al 2021 Sci. Sin. Terr. 51 46

    [3]

    Lu W, Gao Y, Chen L, Qi Q, Ma Y, Zhang Y, Chen S, Yan X, Chen C, Zhang Y 2015 J. Atmos. Sol. Terr. Phys. 136 23Google Scholar

    [4]

    Qie X, Yuan S, Chen Z, Wang D, Liu D, Sun M, Sun Z, Srivastava A, Zhang H, Lu J 2020 Sci. China Earth Sci. 64 10

    [5]

    Schonland B F J, Malan D, Collens H 1935 Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 152 595Google Scholar

    [6]

    Berger K 1967 J. Franklin Inst. 283 478Google Scholar

    [7]

    Gorin B, Levitov V, Shkilev A 1976 4th International Conference on Gas Discharges, Swansea, UK, September 7–10, 1976 p274

    [8]

    Biagi C J, Uman M A, Hill J D, Jordan D M 2011 Geophys. Res. Lett. 38 L24809

    [9]

    Hill J D, Uman M A, Jordan D M 2011 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 116 D16117Google Scholar

    [10]

    Qi Q, Lu W, Ma Y, Chen L, Zhang Y, Rakov V A 2016 Atmos. Res. 178 260

    [11]

    Jiang R, Qie X, Zhang H, Liu M, Sun Z, Lu G, Wang Z, Wang Y 2017 Sci. Rep. 7 3457Google Scholar

    [12]

    王雪娟, 袁萍, 岑建勇, 张廷龙, 薛思敏, 赵金翠, 许鹤 2013 62 109201Google Scholar

    Wang X J, Yuan P, Cen J Y, Zhang T L, Xue S M, Zhao J C, Xu H 2013 Acta Phys. Sin. 62 109201Google Scholar

    [13]

    蒋如斌, 郄秀书, 王彩霞, 杨静, 张其林, 刘明远, 王俊芳, 刘冬霞, 潘伦湘 2011 60 079201Google Scholar

    Jiang R B, Qie X S, Wang C X, Yang J, Zhang Q L, Liu M T, Wang J F, Liu D X, Pan L X 2011 Acta Phys. Sin. 60 079201Google Scholar

    [14]

    唐国瑛, 孙竹玲, 蒋如斌, 李丰全, 刘明远, 刘昆, 郄秀书 2020 69 189201Google Scholar

    Tang G Y, Sun Z L, Jiang R B, Li F Q, Liu M Y, Liu K, Qie X S 2020 Acta Phys. Sin. 69 189201Google Scholar

    [15]

    王彩霞, 郄秀书, 蒋如斌, 杨静 2012 61 553

    Wang C X, Qie X S, Jiang R B, Yang J 2012 Acta Phys. Sin. 61 553

    [16]

    Warner T A, Helsdon Jr J H, Bunkers M J, Saba M M, Orville R E 2013 B. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 94 631Google Scholar

    [17]

    Berger K, Anderson R B, Kroninger H 1975 Electra 41 23

    [18]

    Heidler F H, Manhardt M, Stimper K 2014 IEEE Trans. Electromagn.Compat. 57 102Google Scholar

    [19]

    Liu X, Wang C, Zhang Y, Xiao Q, Wang D, Zhou Z, Guo C 1994 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 99 10727Google Scholar

    [20]

    Azadifar M, Rachidi F, Rubinstein M, Paolone M, Rakov V A, Pavanello D, Metz S, Romero C 2015 International Symposium on Lightning Protection (XIII SIPDA) Balneario Camboriu, Brazil, Sept.28–Oct. 2, 2015 p32

    [21]

    Zhou H, Diendorfer G, Thottappillil R, Pichler H, Mair M 2012 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 117 D06110Google Scholar

    [22]

    Miki M, Miki T, Asakawa A, Shindo T 2014 XV International Conference on Atmospheric Electricity Norman, Oklahoma, U.S.A, June 15–20, 2014

    [23]

    Pu Y, Jiang R, Qie X, Liu M, Zhang H, Fan Y, Xueke W 2017 Geophys.Res. Lett. 44 7029Google Scholar

    [24]

    Ma Z, Jiang R, Qie X, Xing H, Liu M, Sun Z, Qin Z, Zhang H, Li X 2021 Atmos. Res. 249 105314Google Scholar

    [25]

    Sun Z, Qie X, Jiang R, Liu M, Wu X, Wang Z, Lu G, Zhang H 2014 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 119 13Google Scholar

    [26]

    Sun Z, Qie X, Liu M, Cao D, Wang D 2013 Atmos.Res. 129 58Google Scholar

    [27]

    Qie X, Jiang R, Wang C, Yang J, Wang J, Liu D 2011 J. Geophys.Research: Atmos. 116 D10102Google Scholar

    [28]

    Jiang R, Qie X, Wang C, Yang J 2013 Atmos. Res. 129 90

    [29]

    Liu M, Jiang R, Li Z, Qie X, Zheng T, Tan Y, Li X, Zhang H, Liu M, Sun Z, Wang Y, Ma Z, Lu J, Feng R, Liu Y 2020 Atmos. Res. 244 105049Google Scholar

    [30]

    Williams E R 2006 Plasma Sources Sci. Technol. 15 S91Google Scholar

    [31]

    Bazelyan E, Raizer Y 2000 Lightning Physics and Lightning Protection (Florida: CRC Press) p325

    [32]

    van der Velde O A, Montanyà J 2013 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 118 13Google Scholar

    [33]

    Campos L Z, Saba M M, Warner T A, Pinto Jr O, Krider E P, Orville R E 2014 Atmos. Res. 135 285

    [34]

    Shao X, Krehbiel P 1996 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 101 26641Google Scholar

    [35]

    Wu T, Yoshida S, Akiyama Y, Stock M, Ushio T, Kawasaki Z 2015 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 120 9071Google Scholar

    [36]

    Jiang R, Qie X, Li Z, Zhang H, Li X, Yuan S, Liu M, Sun Z, Srivastava A, Liu M 2020 Geophys. Res. Lett. 47 e2020GL088107

    [37]

    Wu T, Wang D, Takagi N 2019 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 124 9983Google Scholar

    [38]

    Orville R E, Helsdon Jr J H, Evans W H 1974 J. Geophys. Res. 79 4059Google Scholar

    [39]

    Uman M A 1964 J. Geophys. Res. 69 583Google Scholar

    [40]

    Qi Q, Lyu W, Ma Y, Wu B, Chen L, Jiang R, Zhu Y, Rakov V A 2019 Geophys. Res. Lett. 46 12580Google Scholar

    [41]

    Chen M, Takagi N, Watanabe T, Wang D, Liu X 1999 J. Geophys. Res. 1042 27573

    [42]

    Lu G, Zhang H, Jiang R, Fan Y, Qie X, Liu M, Sun Z, Wang Z, Tian Y, Liu K 2016 Radio Sci. 51 1432Google Scholar

    [43]

    樊艳峰, 陆高鹏, 张鸿波, 蒋如斌, 刘明远, 郄秀书 2017 高电压技术 43 987Google Scholar

    Fan Y, Lu G, Zhang H, Jiang R, Liu M, Qie X 2017 High Voltage Eng. 43 987Google Scholar

    [44]

    Fan Y, Lu G, Jiang R, Zhang H, Li X, Liu M, Qie X, Zheng D, Lyu W, Zhang Y, Zhang Y 2018 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 123 11

    [45]

    Petersen D, Bailey M, Beasley W H, Hallett J 2008 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 113 D17205Google Scholar

    [46]

    Huang H, Wang D, Wu T, Takagi N 2018 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 123 12597

    [47]

    Ding Z, Rakov V, Zhu Y, Tran M 2020 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 125 e2020JD033305

    [48]

    Stolzenburg M, Marshall T C, Karunarathne S, Karunarathna N, Orville R E 2015 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 120 3408Google Scholar

  • 图 1  2019年7月29日雷暴过程雷达回波及地面大气电场随时间的演变

    Fig. 1.  The evolution of radar echo and atmospheric electric field during the thunderstorm on July 29, 2019.

    图 2  人工引发闪电1909的通道底部电流(L1), 60米处地面电场变化(L2)以及970处磁场变化(L3)同步波形

    Fig. 2.  Synchronous channel base current, electric field change at distance of 60 m, and magnetic field change at distance 970 m, for the triggered lightning 1909.

    图 3  (a) V711高速相机拍摄的闪电1901其中一帧图像; (b) 2019年6次上行负先导发展二维局部速度随高度的演变, 其中, 各闪电的第一个数据点所对应高度表示先导从引雷导线顶端起始时的高度. 注: 图中黑色点出现高度重叠特征, 是因为闪电1908的上行先导在510—540 m高度范围内转为横向水平发展, 并出现通道头部调转向下发展的情况

    Fig. 3.  (a) A still image of the triggered lightning 1901, as captured by the V711 high-speed camera; (b) evolution of the two-dimensional partial speeds of 6 upward negative leaders. The first points of the curves in the figure indicate the initiating heights of the associated upward negative leaders. Note that the overlapping characteristics of the black curve at the 500–540 m height are due to the leader’s horizontal and even downward propagation there.

    图 4  引发正极性闪电的上行负先导连续6帧光学图像, 时间分辨率为11.1 μs. 注: 上图为原始图像, 下图为反色显示

    Fig. 4.  Six consecutive optical images of the upward negative leader in rocket-triggered positive lightning flash, with a temporal resolution of 11.1 μs. Note that the top panel gives the original images, and the bottom panel gives the reverse color version of the images.

    图 5  引发正极性闪电的上行负先导连续10帧光学图像(反色), 时间分辨率为11.1 μs

    Fig. 5.  Ten consecutive optical images (reverse color) of upward negative leader in rocket-triggered positive lightning flash, with a temporal resolution of 11.1 μs.

    图 6  闪电1901, 1907和1908中的上行负先导共132次梯级过程的步长分布图

    Fig. 6.  The step length distribution diagram of a total of 132 steps in the upward negative leaders of lightning flashes 1901, 1907, and 1908.

    图 7  (a) 闪电1907上行负先导初始阶段的电流、电场变化、磁场变化和通道光强演变; (b) 高速相机拍摄的通道发展图像(逐帧时间间隔为11.11 μs). 注: 图(a)和图(b)中1—27代表相机帧数

    Fig. 7.  (a) The synchronous channel base current, electric field change, magnetic field change and channel luminosity, for the upward negative leader in the triggered lightning flash 1907; (b) the channel evolution of the leader, as captured by the high speed video camera with temporal resolution of 11.11 μs. Note: 1–27 in Figure (a) and Figure (b) represent the number of camera frames.

    图 8  (a) 闪电1908上行负先导初始阶段的电流、电场变化、磁场变化和通道光强演变; (b) 高速相机拍摄的通道发展图像(逐帧时间间隔为11.11 μs). 注: 图(a)和图(b)中1—27代表相机帧数

    Fig. 8.  (a) The synchronous channel base current, electric field change, magnetic field change and channel luminosity, for the upward negative leader in the triggered lightning flash 1908; (b) the channel evolution of the leader, as captured by the high speed video camera with temporal resolution of 11.11 μs. Note: 1–27 in Figure (a) and Figure (b) represent the number of camera frames.

    表 1  正极性人工引发闪电放电及先导发展的基本特征

    Table 1.  The general characteristics of the positive triggered lightning discharge and the associated leader propagation.

    日期编号引雷时的地面
    大气电场强度
    /(kV·m–1)
    平台/
    触发
    方式*
    上行负先导
    始发高度
    /m
    先导主通道
    二维平均速度
    /(105 m·s–1)
    闪电持
    续时间
    /ms
    闪电转移
    电荷总量
    /C
    闪电电
    流峰值
    /A
    平均电
    流强度
    /A
    2015/07/2415014.311/传统3562.108616.1443169
    2015/07/3015033.831/传统4537619.7983258
    2019/07/0619014.421/传统2572.44622
    19024.811/传统4251.62288
    19034.961/传统4731.45355
    190410.372/空中
    190513.182/空中668148
    2019/07/1419067.461/传统
    2019/07/2919075.641/传统3392.01208121.41613569
    19085.371/传统3991.5016684.91187503
    19095.121/传统5552.1021068.4883320
    2019/08/0719105.381/空中 > 536
    *注: 表中平台指火箭发射平台, 1代表地面传统平台, 2代表信号塔平台; 传统触发指引雷导线良好接地的方式, 引雷时导线顶端始发单向的上行先导; 空中触发指引雷导线不接地的方式, 导线底部距地面几十米, 引雷时始发双向先导, 上端向雷暴云发展, 下端向地面发展.
    下载: 导出CSV

    表 2  闪电1907和1908上行负先导初始阶段梯级过程的脉冲电流和通道发展特征参量

    Table 2.  The parameters of impulsive current waveform and the channel evolution during initial stepwise development of the upward negative leaders in triggered lightning flashes 1907 and 1908.

    闪电号1907 1908
    脉冲序列号P1P2P3P4P5P6P1P2P3P14P5P6P7P8P9P10P11
    脉冲间隔/μs18.918.124.420.2 17.717.717.411.410.322.721.617.515.317.6
    峰值电流/A931131301069610611093906653504346606363
    脉冲电荷量/μC324396441681470553373359327233240249327241316307352
    半峰值宽度/μs2.52.21.96.34.64.91.52.22.22.34.63.20.43.33.83.64.1
    T10%—90%/μs0.90.60.90.92.42.40.10.60.40.61.81.11.01.20.50.90.6
    梯级长度/m2.43.42.33.94.52.82.35.52.34.62.32.22.84.52.44.43.2
    梯级的等效线电荷密度/(μC·m–1)131.5113.7188.5174.7103.3196.8159.565139.949.9102.9112.8116.75312869.8109.5
    下载: 导出CSV
    Baidu
  • [1]

    苟学强, 张义军, 李亚珺, 陈明理 2018 67 205201Google Scholar

    Gou X, Zhang Y, Li Y, Chen M 2018 Acta Phys. Sin. 67 205201Google Scholar

    [2]

    郄秀书, 袁善锋, 陈志雄, 王东方, 刘冬霞, 孙萌宇, 孙竹玲, 等 2021 中国科学: 地球科学 51 46

    Qie X, Yuan S, Chen Z, Wang D, Liu D, Sun M, Sun Z, et.al 2021 Sci. Sin. Terr. 51 46

    [3]

    Lu W, Gao Y, Chen L, Qi Q, Ma Y, Zhang Y, Chen S, Yan X, Chen C, Zhang Y 2015 J. Atmos. Sol. Terr. Phys. 136 23Google Scholar

    [4]

    Qie X, Yuan S, Chen Z, Wang D, Liu D, Sun M, Sun Z, Srivastava A, Zhang H, Lu J 2020 Sci. China Earth Sci. 64 10

    [5]

    Schonland B F J, Malan D, Collens H 1935 Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 152 595Google Scholar

    [6]

    Berger K 1967 J. Franklin Inst. 283 478Google Scholar

    [7]

    Gorin B, Levitov V, Shkilev A 1976 4th International Conference on Gas Discharges, Swansea, UK, September 7–10, 1976 p274

    [8]

    Biagi C J, Uman M A, Hill J D, Jordan D M 2011 Geophys. Res. Lett. 38 L24809

    [9]

    Hill J D, Uman M A, Jordan D M 2011 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 116 D16117Google Scholar

    [10]

    Qi Q, Lu W, Ma Y, Chen L, Zhang Y, Rakov V A 2016 Atmos. Res. 178 260

    [11]

    Jiang R, Qie X, Zhang H, Liu M, Sun Z, Lu G, Wang Z, Wang Y 2017 Sci. Rep. 7 3457Google Scholar

    [12]

    王雪娟, 袁萍, 岑建勇, 张廷龙, 薛思敏, 赵金翠, 许鹤 2013 62 109201Google Scholar

    Wang X J, Yuan P, Cen J Y, Zhang T L, Xue S M, Zhao J C, Xu H 2013 Acta Phys. Sin. 62 109201Google Scholar

    [13]

    蒋如斌, 郄秀书, 王彩霞, 杨静, 张其林, 刘明远, 王俊芳, 刘冬霞, 潘伦湘 2011 60 079201Google Scholar

    Jiang R B, Qie X S, Wang C X, Yang J, Zhang Q L, Liu M T, Wang J F, Liu D X, Pan L X 2011 Acta Phys. Sin. 60 079201Google Scholar

    [14]

    唐国瑛, 孙竹玲, 蒋如斌, 李丰全, 刘明远, 刘昆, 郄秀书 2020 69 189201Google Scholar

    Tang G Y, Sun Z L, Jiang R B, Li F Q, Liu M Y, Liu K, Qie X S 2020 Acta Phys. Sin. 69 189201Google Scholar

    [15]

    王彩霞, 郄秀书, 蒋如斌, 杨静 2012 61 553

    Wang C X, Qie X S, Jiang R B, Yang J 2012 Acta Phys. Sin. 61 553

    [16]

    Warner T A, Helsdon Jr J H, Bunkers M J, Saba M M, Orville R E 2013 B. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 94 631Google Scholar

    [17]

    Berger K, Anderson R B, Kroninger H 1975 Electra 41 23

    [18]

    Heidler F H, Manhardt M, Stimper K 2014 IEEE Trans. Electromagn.Compat. 57 102Google Scholar

    [19]

    Liu X, Wang C, Zhang Y, Xiao Q, Wang D, Zhou Z, Guo C 1994 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 99 10727Google Scholar

    [20]

    Azadifar M, Rachidi F, Rubinstein M, Paolone M, Rakov V A, Pavanello D, Metz S, Romero C 2015 International Symposium on Lightning Protection (XIII SIPDA) Balneario Camboriu, Brazil, Sept.28–Oct. 2, 2015 p32

    [21]

    Zhou H, Diendorfer G, Thottappillil R, Pichler H, Mair M 2012 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 117 D06110Google Scholar

    [22]

    Miki M, Miki T, Asakawa A, Shindo T 2014 XV International Conference on Atmospheric Electricity Norman, Oklahoma, U.S.A, June 15–20, 2014

    [23]

    Pu Y, Jiang R, Qie X, Liu M, Zhang H, Fan Y, Xueke W 2017 Geophys.Res. Lett. 44 7029Google Scholar

    [24]

    Ma Z, Jiang R, Qie X, Xing H, Liu M, Sun Z, Qin Z, Zhang H, Li X 2021 Atmos. Res. 249 105314Google Scholar

    [25]

    Sun Z, Qie X, Jiang R, Liu M, Wu X, Wang Z, Lu G, Zhang H 2014 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 119 13Google Scholar

    [26]

    Sun Z, Qie X, Liu M, Cao D, Wang D 2013 Atmos.Res. 129 58Google Scholar

    [27]

    Qie X, Jiang R, Wang C, Yang J, Wang J, Liu D 2011 J. Geophys.Research: Atmos. 116 D10102Google Scholar

    [28]

    Jiang R, Qie X, Wang C, Yang J 2013 Atmos. Res. 129 90

    [29]

    Liu M, Jiang R, Li Z, Qie X, Zheng T, Tan Y, Li X, Zhang H, Liu M, Sun Z, Wang Y, Ma Z, Lu J, Feng R, Liu Y 2020 Atmos. Res. 244 105049Google Scholar

    [30]

    Williams E R 2006 Plasma Sources Sci. Technol. 15 S91Google Scholar

    [31]

    Bazelyan E, Raizer Y 2000 Lightning Physics and Lightning Protection (Florida: CRC Press) p325

    [32]

    van der Velde O A, Montanyà J 2013 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 118 13Google Scholar

    [33]

    Campos L Z, Saba M M, Warner T A, Pinto Jr O, Krider E P, Orville R E 2014 Atmos. Res. 135 285

    [34]

    Shao X, Krehbiel P 1996 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 101 26641Google Scholar

    [35]

    Wu T, Yoshida S, Akiyama Y, Stock M, Ushio T, Kawasaki Z 2015 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 120 9071Google Scholar

    [36]

    Jiang R, Qie X, Li Z, Zhang H, Li X, Yuan S, Liu M, Sun Z, Srivastava A, Liu M 2020 Geophys. Res. Lett. 47 e2020GL088107

    [37]

    Wu T, Wang D, Takagi N 2019 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 124 9983Google Scholar

    [38]

    Orville R E, Helsdon Jr J H, Evans W H 1974 J. Geophys. Res. 79 4059Google Scholar

    [39]

    Uman M A 1964 J. Geophys. Res. 69 583Google Scholar

    [40]

    Qi Q, Lyu W, Ma Y, Wu B, Chen L, Jiang R, Zhu Y, Rakov V A 2019 Geophys. Res. Lett. 46 12580Google Scholar

    [41]

    Chen M, Takagi N, Watanabe T, Wang D, Liu X 1999 J. Geophys. Res. 1042 27573

    [42]

    Lu G, Zhang H, Jiang R, Fan Y, Qie X, Liu M, Sun Z, Wang Z, Tian Y, Liu K 2016 Radio Sci. 51 1432Google Scholar

    [43]

    樊艳峰, 陆高鹏, 张鸿波, 蒋如斌, 刘明远, 郄秀书 2017 高电压技术 43 987Google Scholar

    Fan Y, Lu G, Zhang H, Jiang R, Liu M, Qie X 2017 High Voltage Eng. 43 987Google Scholar

    [44]

    Fan Y, Lu G, Jiang R, Zhang H, Li X, Liu M, Qie X, Zheng D, Lyu W, Zhang Y, Zhang Y 2018 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 123 11

    [45]

    Petersen D, Bailey M, Beasley W H, Hallett J 2008 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 113 D17205Google Scholar

    [46]

    Huang H, Wang D, Wu T, Takagi N 2018 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 123 12597

    [47]

    Ding Z, Rakov V, Zhu Y, Tran M 2020 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 125 e2020JD033305

    [48]

    Stolzenburg M, Marshall T C, Karunarathne S, Karunarathna N, Orville R E 2015 J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 120 3408Google Scholar

  • [1] 罗小军, 石立华, 张琪, 邱实, 李云, 刘毅诚, 段艳涛. 一次人工触发闪电回击过程的光辐射色散特性分析.  , 2022, 71(17): 179201. doi: 10.7498/aps.71.20220479
    [2] 唐国瑛, 孙竹玲, 蒋如斌, 李丰全, 刘明远, 刘昆, 郄秀书. 一次对地转移电荷极性两次反转的人工引发雷电特征及反转机制分析.  , 2020, 69(18): 189201. doi: 10.7498/aps.69.20200374
    [3] 苟学强, 张义军, 李亚珺, 陈明理. 闪电双向先导理论及观测:极性不对称、不稳定及间歇性.  , 2018, 67(20): 205201. doi: 10.7498/aps.67.20181079
    [4] 司马文霞, 范硕超, 杨庆, 王琦. 雷云电场作用下长地线表面正极性辉光电晕放电的仿真研究.  , 2015, 64(10): 105205. doi: 10.7498/aps.64.105205
    [5] 李元, 穆海宝, 邓军波, 张冠军, 王曙鸿. 正极性纳秒脉冲电压下变压器油中流注放电仿真研究.  , 2013, 62(12): 124703. doi: 10.7498/aps.62.124703
    [6] 王彩霞, 郄秀书, 蒋如斌, 杨静. 一次人工触发闪电上行正先导的传输特征.  , 2012, 61(3): 039203. doi: 10.7498/aps.61.039203
    [7] 罗诗裕, 邵明珠, 罗晓华. 晶体摆动场辐射系统的全局分叉与混沌行为.  , 2010, 59(4): 2685-2690. doi: 10.7498/aps.59.2685
    [8] 赵阳, 郄秀书, 孔祥贞, 张广庶, 张彤, 杨静, 冯桂力, 张其林, 王东方. 人工触发闪电电流波形特征参数分析.  , 2009, 58(9): 6616-6626. doi: 10.7498/aps.58.6616
    [9] 刘素华, 唐驾时. Langford系统Hopf分叉的线性反馈控制.  , 2007, 56(6): 3145-3151. doi: 10.7498/aps.56.3145
    [10] 戎海武, 王向东, 徐 伟, 方 同. 谐和与噪声联合作用下Duffing振子的安全盆分叉与混沌.  , 2007, 56(4): 2005-2011. doi: 10.7498/aps.56.2005
    [11] 王飞鹏, 夏钟福, 裘晓敏, 吕 航, 邱勋林, 沈 军. 压力膨化处理对正极性聚丙烯蜂窝膜的驻极体性质的影响.  , 2005, 54(9): 4400-4405. doi: 10.7498/aps.54.4400
    [12] 戎海武, 王向东, 徐 伟, 方 同. 有界随机噪声激励下软弹簧Duffing振子的安全盆分叉.  , 2005, 54(10): 4610-4613. doi: 10.7498/aps.54.4610
    [13] 罗诗裕, 谭永明, 邵明珠, 韦洛霞, 邓立虎. 沟道效应的运动阻尼与系统走向混沌的临界特征.  , 2004, 53(4): 1157-1161. doi: 10.7498/aps.53.1157
    [14] 罗诗裕, 邵明珠, 韦洛霞, 刘曾荣. 位错动力学与系统的全局分叉.  , 2004, 53(6): 1940-1945. doi: 10.7498/aps.53.1940
    [15] 张孝彬, 甘 波, 杨杭生, 齐仲甫, 李文铸, 张 泽. 纳米碳管的分叉结构.  , 1999, 48(5): 913-916. doi: 10.7498/aps.48.913
    [16] 朱顺泉, 谢发根, 胡岗. Duffing方程的分叉结构及其标度特性.  , 1992, 41(10): 1638-1646. doi: 10.7498/aps.41.1638
    [17] 王鹏业, 戴建华, 张洪钧. 液晶混合光学双稳装置中的分叉、混沌和暂态行为.  , 1985, 34(5): 581-587. doi: 10.7498/aps.34.581
    [18] 戴建华, 张洪钧, 王鹏业, 金朝鼎. 液晶混合光学双稳态的分叉图.  , 1985, 34(8): 992-999. doi: 10.7498/aps.34.992
    [19] 张洪钧, 戴建华, 王鹏业, 金朝鼎, L. M. NARDUCCI. 液晶混合光学双稳装置中分叉和混沌行为.  , 1984, 33(7): 1024-1030. doi: 10.7498/aps.33.1024
    [20] 王光瑞. 带强迫振动项的三分子模型的倍周期分叉序列.  , 1983, 32(7): 960-972. doi: 10.7498/aps.32.960
计量
  • 文章访问数:  4659
  • PDF下载量:  73
  • 被引次数: 0
出版历程
  • 收稿日期:  2021-02-06
  • 修回日期:  2021-04-23
  • 上网日期:  2021-06-07
  • 刊出日期:  2021-10-05

/

返回文章
返回
Baidu
map