Preparing for a “Change” in Severe Hail Warning Criteria in 2010 Brian J. Frugis NWS WFO Albany, NY NROW XI November 4-5, 2009.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Build 10 Tornado Detection Algorithm The Build 9 Tornado Vortex Signature ( TVS ) Detection Algorithm was not very robust, and was designed to be a place.
Advertisements

Radar Climatology of Tornadoes in High Shear, Low CAPE Environments in the Mid-Atlantic and Southeast Jason Davis Matthew Parker North Carolina State University.
The 4 Sep 2011 Tornado in Eastern New York: An Example for Updating Tornado Warning Strategies Brian J. Frugis NOAA/NWS Albany, NY NROW XIII 2-3 November.
Predicting Severe Hail in the WFO LWX County Warning Area Toward Increased Accuracy in Hail Size Forecasts Matthew R. Kramar WFO Baltimore/Washington Jeffrey.
WSR-88D Signatures Associated with One Inch Hail in the Southern Plains Dennis E. Cavanaugh Jessica A. Schultz National Weather Service Weather Forecast.
NEXRAD or WSR-88D [Next Generation Radar] [Weather Surveillance Radar, 1988, Doppler]
THE IMPACTS OF THUNDERSTORM GEOMETRY AND WSR-88D BEAM CHARACTERISTICS ON DIAGNOSING SUPERCELL TORNADOES Steve Piltz – WFO Tulsa, OK Don Burgess – CIMSS.
Clear air echoes (few small insects) -12 dBZ. Echoes in clear air from insects Common is summer. Watch for echoes to expand area as sun sets and insects.
Chapter 10 Section 2 Hypothesis Tests for a Population Mean
A Spatial Climatology of Convection in the Northeast U.S. John Murray and Brian A. Colle National Weather Service, WFO New York NY Stony Brook University,
Northeast Convective Flash Floods: Helping Forecasters Stay Ahead of Rising Water Joe Villani - National Weather Service, Albany, NY Derek Mallia - University.
A Case Study of the August 25, 2007 Severe Weather Event in Eastern New York and Western New England Brian J. Frugis NWS WFO Albany, New York.
RHESSI/GOES Observations of the Non-flaring Sun from 2002 to J. McTiernan SSL/UCB.
Hypothesis Testing After 2 hours of frustration trying to fill out an IRS form, you are skeptical about the IRS claim that the form takes 15 minutes on.
Correlations between observed snowfall and NAM forecast parameters, Part I – Dynamical Parameters Mike Evans NOAA/NWS Binghamton, NY November 1, 2006 Northeast.
Anomalous Propagation Greater density slows the waves more. Less dense air does not slow the waves as much. Since density normally decreases with height,
6/26/2015 RUC Convective Parameters and Upscale Events in Southern Ontario Mike Leduc Environment Canada.
An artificial neural networks system is used as model to estimate precipitation at 0.25° x 0.25° resolution. Two different networks are being developed,
BCOR 1020 Business Statistics Lecture 21 – April 8, 2008.
Using WSR-88D Reflectivity for the Prediction of Cloud-to- Ground Lightning Nowcasting a storm’s first strike Brandon Vincent NWS-Newport Larry Carey Texas.
ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH PROJECTS ON NWS PERFORMANCE Jeff Waldstreicher Scientific Services Division – Eastern Region Northeast Regional.
The 10th annual Northeast Regional Operational Workshop, Albany, NY Verification of SREF Aviation Forecasts at Binghamton, NY Justin Arnott NOAA / NWS.
The Rapid Evolution of Convection Approaching New York City and Long Island Michael Charles and Brian A. Colle Institute for Terrestrial and Planetary.
A Storm-Scale Analysis of the 16 June 2008 Significant Severe Weather Event across New York and Western New England Thomas A. Wasula NOAA/NWS at Albany.
Anticipating Cloud-to-Ground (CG) Lightning Utilizing Reflectivity Data from the WSR-88D. Pete Wolf, SOO National Weather Service Jacksonville, Florida.
An Update on TBSSs and Relatively Moist Environments Matthew J. Bunkers 2006 Spring Training.
Comparison of PPS and QPE Rainfall Estimates for Summer 2013 Heavy Precipitation Events Comparison of PPS and QPE Rainfall Estimates for Summer 2013 Heavy.
Chapter 8 Hypothesis Testing I. Chapter Outline  An Overview of Hypothesis Testing  The Five-Step Model for Hypothesis Testing  One-Tailed and Two-Tailed.
Copyright © 2012 by Nelson Education Limited. Chapter 7 Hypothesis Testing I: The One-Sample Case 7-1.
THE GOES-R GLM LIGHTNING JUMP ALGORITHM (LJA): RESEARCH TO OPERATIONAL ALGORITHM Elise V. Schultz 1, C. J. Schultz 1,2, L. D. Carey 1, D. J. Cecil 2, G.
Mike Evans NWS / WFO BGM. CSTAR V – Severe convection in scenarios with low-predictive skill SUNY Albany researchers are examining SPC forecasts and associated.
Lesson Significance Tests: The Basics. Vocabulary Hypothesis – a statement or claim regarding a characteristic of one or more populations Hypothesis.
Verification of the 88D Hail Detection Algorithm at WFO Cheyenne Mike Weiland WFO Cheyenne.
Christopher J. Schultz 1, Walter A. Petersen 2, Lawrence D. Carey 3* 1 - Department of Atmospheric Science, UAHuntsville, Huntsville, AL 2 – NASA Marshall.
The Inland Extent of Lake- Effect Snow (LES) Bands Joe Villani NOAA/NWS Albany, NY Michael L. Jurewicz, Sr. NOAA/NWS Binghamton, NY Jason Krekeler State.
Chapter 6 USING PROBABILITY TO MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT DATA.
National Lab for Remote Sensing and Nowcasting Dual Polarization Radar and Rainfall Nowcasting by Mark Alliksaar.
An Experiment to Evaluate the Use of Quantitative Precipitation Forecasts from Numerical Guidance by Operational Forecasters Joshua M. Boustead and Daniel.
Evaluating the Reliability of VIL Density for Determining Severe Hail in Iowa Penny Zabel.
Justin Schultz¹ Mentors: Karl Jungbluth² and Dr. Mike Chen¹ Department of Geological and Atmospheric Sciences Iowa State University¹ Johnston, Iowa: National.
TOP CWA Golf Ball Size Hail Study Bill Gargan WFO TOP, KS.
Chad Entremont Daniel Lamb NWS Jackson, MS
Kyle J. Pallozzi and Lance F. Bosart
Economics 173 Business Statistics Lecture 4 Fall, 2001 Professor J. Petry
The Rapid Evolution of Convection Approaching the New York City Metropolitan Region Brian A. Colle and Michael Charles Institute for Terrestrial and Planetary.
Northeast Convective Flash Floods: Helping Forecasters Stay Ahead of Rising Water Joe Villani - National Weather Service, Albany, NY Derek Mallia - University.
Cloud to Ground Lightning Climatology and Hail Prediction in the Mid-South Matthew Reagan Mississippi State University.
Story from Topeka George Phillips Science and Operations Officer NWS – Topeka KS.
Updated Radar-Based Techniques for Tornado Warning Guidance in the Northeastern United States Brian J. Frugis & Thomas A. Wasula NOAA/NWS Albany, New York.
Evaluating the ability of climate models to simulate extremes Eric Robinson Natalie McLean Christine Radermacher Ross Towe Yushiang Tung Project 6.
METR February Radar Products More Radar Background Precipitation Mode: -Volume Coverage Patterns (VCP) 21: 9 elevation angles with a complete.
BP-31 Updated Radar-Based Techniques for Tornado Warning Guidance in the Northeastern United States Brian J. Frugis and Thomas A. Wasula NOAA/National.
Tornado Warning Skill as a Function of Environment National Weather Service Sub-Regional Workshop Binghamton, New York September 23, 2015 Yvette Richardson.
TOULOUSE (FRANCE), 5-9 September 2005 OBJECTIVE VERIFICATION OF A RADAR-BASED OPERATIONAL TOOL FOR IDENTIFICATION OF HAILSTORMS I. San Ambrosio, F. Elizaga.
Joe Villani Ian Lee Vasil Koleci NWS Albany, NY NROW – November 2015 Update to Gridded Snowfall Verification: Computing Seasonal Bias Maps.
Intro Radar Workshop.
Investigating Lightning Cessation at KSC Holly A. Melvin Henry E. Fuelberg Florida State University GOES-R GLM Workshop September 2009.
© 2000 Roger Edwards Investigating the Potential of Using Radar to Nowcast Cloud-to-Ground Lightning Initiation over Southern Ontario 18 th Annual GLOMW.
Estimating Rainfall in Arizona - A Brief Overview of the WSR-88D Precipitation Processing Subsystem Jonathan J. Gourley National Severe Storms Laboratory.
SOME OPERATIONAL ASPECTS OF USING LIGHTNING DATA
Severe Thunderstorm Wind Damage Criteria – Is it time for a change?
Paper Review Jennie Bukowski ATS APR-2017
Pamela Eck, Brian Tang, and Lance Bosart University at Albany, SUNY
A Real-Time Automated Method to Determine Forecast Confidence Associated with Tornado Warnings Using Spring 2008 NWS Tornado Warnings John Cintineo Cornell.
Michael L. Jurewicz, Sr. and Christopher Gitro
Outlier Discovery/Anomaly Detection
Warm Season Flash Flood Detection Performance at WFO Binghamton
Brian J. Frugis NOAA/NWS Albany, New York NROW XIX – 7 November 2018
Brian J. Frugis and Thomas A. Wasula NOAA/NWS Albany, New York
Using WSR-88D Reflectivity for the Prediction of Cloud-to-ground Lightning: A Central North Carolina Study A collaborative research project between NCSU.
Presentation transcript:

Preparing for a “Change” in Severe Hail Warning Criteria in 2010 Brian J. Frugis NWS WFO Albany, NY NROW XI November 4-5, 2009

Motivation for Study NWS ER will be changing severe hail criteria from 0.75” to 1.00” on January 1, 2010 All current hail studies for the region are based on 0.75” –VIL of the Day –VIL Density –Common warning techniques using dBZ heights relative to the -20° C level New thresholds and techniques are needed to accurately warn for the new hail criteria

What was done Examined radar returns for each report of severe hail (0.75” or larger) from the major severe cases of hail from the summer of 2009 –July 16 th and June 15 th hail events Compiled data and compared averages of each parameter that was examined

Data for Study Total Number of Hail Reports70 Hail Reports Measuring 0.75”20 Hail Reports Measuring 1.00”25 Total Number of Report less than 1.00” (Penny and Nickel) 33 Total Numbers of Reports 1.00” or Greater (Quarters and Larger) 37 3 additional hail reports were rejected due to probable errors in locations and/or times

Storm Reports for Study

Parameters Studied 50 dBZ Echo Top 55 dBZ Echo Top 60 dBZ Echo Top 65 dBZ Echo Top Vertically Integrated Liquid (VIL) Storm Echo Tops (ET) VIL Density Height of 50 dBZ Echo Top above -20° Celsius isotherm

Why dBZ heights? In a warning situation, the height of the 50+ dBZ level in correlation with the -20° Celsius level is often examined. The increasing amount of height above this level increases the level of confidence of severe hail in a particular thunderstorm.

Why VIL Density? VIL Density = (VIL/ET) * 1000 Units are in g m -3 This helps “normalize” the VIL to produce a common values for thunderstorms producing hail, independent of the particular air mass.

Previous Studies on VIL Density Previous studies have been done examining VIL Density for the ALY CWA –VIL density values of 3.50 g m -3 identified 82% of severe hail based on a 0.75” criteria in a paper by Blaes et. al in 1998 –They also determined that a VIL density of 3.70 g m -3 would depict 91% of severe hail cases based on a proposed 1.00”criteria (based on 154 total reports) –However, this study also mentioned that this isn’t reliable since there would also be a False Alarm Rate (FAR) of 48% based on the data set used There were limited 1.00” reports in their database It was recommended that additional studies be done

Methodology Used FSI 4D Storm Investigator to get heights of different dBZ thresholds Also used 4 panels displays of the lowest tilts from adjacent radar sites (BGM, OKX, TYX and CXX) Used D2D gridded VIL and ET displays to get specific values at times of each report

Limitation of Radar Location Radar Location –The KENX radar’s cone of silence made judging echo tops difficult for storm’s close to the RDA A solution to this was to view other radars, such as KTYX, KBGM, KCXX, and KOKX.

Limitation of Radar Location Radar Beam Blockage –Portions of the Catskills (whose terrain reaches heights of 4180 feet) can block the lowest tilts of the radar beam This could give inaccurate VIL values for storms in these areas

Problems with Hail Reports –Size is not always accurately measured Spotters don’t always use rulers and some reports are from the untrained public –Location and time Some locations and times listed on hail report may be estimated and some spotters may not have given their exact latitude and longitude –Have tried to include only the reports that made sense based on radar for this study Some hail reports may have occurred in unpopulated areas or in places where spotters were not available

Truncation and Rounding Errors Estimating ETs of various levels is difficult higher up and further away from the storm

0.75” vs. 1.00” Hail 0.75” (Penny) Hail 1.00” (Quarter) Hail Difference Avg Height of 50 dBZ Echo Top 25.7 kft27.9 kft2.2 kft Avg Height of 50 dBZ Echo Top above -20° Celsius Isotherm 5.4 kft6.8 kft1.4 kft Avg VIL (kg/m 3) 44 kg/m 3 49 kg/m 3 5 kg/m 3

Severe vs. Non-Severe (based on new warning criteria) ” (Penny or Nickel) Hail 1.00”+ (Quarter or Larger) Hail Difference Avg Height of 50 dBZ Echo Top 26.1 kft32.6 kft6.5 kft Avg Height of 50 dBZ Echo Top above -20° Celsius Isotherm 5.8 kft10.0 kft4.2 kft Avg VIL (kg/m 3 ) 45 kg/m 3 52 kg/m 3 7 kg/m 3

Severe vs. Non-Severe (based on new warning criteria) ” (Penny or Nickel) Hail 1.00”+ (Quarter or Larger) Hail Difference Avg Height of 55 dBZ Echo Top 21.0 kft27.7 kft6.7 kft Avg Height of 60 dBZ Echo Top 15.9 kft22.5 kft6.6 kft Avg Height of 65 dBZ Echo Top 11.6 kft18.6 kft7.0 kft

Storm Echo Top vs. VIL Based on a severe hail criteria of 1.00”

VIL Density Threshold Probability of Detection (POD) False Alarm Rate (FAR) Based of a VIL Density of 3.50 g/m 3 81%76% Based on a VIL Density of 3.60 g/m 3 81%61% Based on a VIL Density of 3.70 g/m 3 76%48% Based on a VIL Density of 3.80 g/m 3 70%48% Based on a VIL Density of 4.00 g/m 3 54%36%

VIL Density as an Indicator of Severe Hail Not a good correlation between increasing VIL Density and severe hail in these cases as there was still a high FAR –May be based on small data set of only 70 severe reports Previous data set by Blaes et al. did not have a large number of hail cases over 1.00” –Their study had large FAR of 48% for a value of 3.70” (despite POD of 91%) showing low correlation for VIL Density and severe hail based on a 1.00” criteria This study also had a FAR of 48% and POD of only 76%

Summary The 50 dBZ ETs are in general about 10 kft above the -20° Celsius level –Average height is around 32.6 kft The dBZ echo tops (for 50, 55, 60 and 65 dBZ) are about 6-7 kft higher in a severe over a non- severe storm based on the new criteria No particular values of VIL Density seem to correlate well in our area for severe hail –At least based off this limited sample

Future Work Compile statistics from other events from 2009 as well as previous years –Will differences between severe and non- severe storms be similar? Create a new “VIL of the Day” nomogram for operational use Attempt to see if VIL Density has a better correlation with a larger database

Acknowledgements Many thanks to Joe Villani and Tom Wasula for their help and guidance on this project!

Questions? Any questions or comments?