1 / 23

Refractivity During IHOP_2002

Refractivity During IHOP_2002. Tammy M. Weckwerth (NCAR/ATD), Crystalyne R. Pettet (NCAR/ATD), Frédéric Fabry (McGill University), ShinJu Park (McGill University) and James W. Wilson (NCAR/ATD). Intercomparisons. Fixed and mobile surface stations AERIBAGO SRL Aircraft. Intercomparisons.

lumina
Download Presentation

Refractivity During IHOP_2002

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Refractivity During IHOP_2002 Tammy M. Weckwerth (NCAR/ATD), Crystalyne R. Pettet (NCAR/ATD), Frédéric Fabry (McGill University), ShinJu Park (McGill University) and James W. Wilson (NCAR/ATD)

  2. Intercomparisons • Fixed and mobile surface stations • AERIBAGO • SRL • Aircraft

  3. Intercomparisons Mean Bias Stn-Radar = 1.68 N units

  4. Intercomparisons Bias is not related to propagation effects since it’s not diurnally dependent Bias is worse at higher humidities

  5. Surface Station Intercomparisons

  6. Surface Station Intercomparisons • Excellent correlations • Radar has negative bias

  7. Mobile Mesonet comparisons Correlation = 0.81

  8. Correlation = 0.88

  9. AERIBAGO comparisons Correlation=0.89 Correlation=0.75 Correlation=0.42

  10. SRL comparisons

  11. UWKA comparisons Correlation drop occurs between 358 m leg (0.96) and 673 m leg (0.74) Correlation=0.93

  12. Correlation=0.88

  13. Summary • Radar Refractivity may be a proxy for water vapor during the warm season. • Radar Refractivity shows excellent correlation with surface station and aircraft refractivity. • Radar Refractivity has a low bias vs fixed surface stations • Vertical depth represented appears to be lower levels of the ABL (<~300 m?). • Horizontal resolution is approximately 4 km (although it sometimes appears better).

  14. Ongoing Work • Evaluate accuracy of low-level refractivity retrieval • Fixed and mobile mesonets • Plan to: Add GPS intercomparisons • Plan to: Add DRI MMR intercomparisons • Evaluate layer over which refractivity retrieval is representative • Aircraft in situ measurements • SRL intercomparisons • AERI intercomparisons • Plan to: Add Sounding & Dropsonde comparisons • Plan to: Add horizontal and vertical pointing airborne DIAL • Plan to: Add TAOS intercomparisons • Possibly add: MIPS profiling radiometer intercomparisons • Plan to: Evaluate two more days in detail

  15. Comments and Suggestions?

  16. 2 km 11 km Correlation=0.88

  17. S-Pol Refractivity Retrieval dryline dryline cool/moist • Variations in q, T and p • Boundary detection • Advection • Pettet et al., next; • Fabry and Park, 1700 warm/dry

  18. Refractivity: One Day After Heavy RainfallAircraft in-situ data Northern edge of aircraft track Ts=45 deg C, Theta60=307 K, q60 = 8.5 g/kg warm/dry Southern edge of aircraft track Ts=32 deg C, Theta60=306.2 K, q60 = 11 g/kg cool/moist

  19. warm/dry cool/moist

  20. Surface station comparisons Correlation = 0.99

  21. Correlation = 0.92 Correlation = 0.98

  22. Correlation = 0.14

  23. Correlation = 0.68

More Related