70 likes | 205 Views
CSTAR workshop: High-shear, low-CAPE (“HSLC”) tornadoes/sig . severe introduction. Matthew D. Parker North Carolina State Univ. Raleigh, NC. 16 November 2012. NC STATE UNIVERSITY. Mean Tornado Environment: ML CAPE & 0-6 km Shear.
E N D
CSTAR workshop: High-shear, low-CAPE (“HSLC”) tornadoes/sig. severe introduction Matthew D. Parker North Carolina State Univ. Raleigh, NC 16 November 2012 NC STATE UNIVERSITY
Mean Tornado Environment: ML CAPE & 0-6 km Shear ML CAPE (J/kg, color fill), 0-6 km Shear (kt, blue barbs) (year=2004-2005, month=ALL) Max MLCAPE Over Plains Lower MLCAPE and Stronger Shear individual report influence - 160 km radius 2004-2005: 3277 tornado reports | 344 tornado days courtesy: Steve Weiss
ML CAPE≥ 2000 J kg -1| 0-6 km Shear ≥ 35 kt| ML CIN ≥- 100 J kg -1 Max 240 hr or 60 hr/yr Integrated 2003 - 2006 “environment hours”High CAPE; Strong Shear; Moderate CIN Integrated 2003 - 2006 “environment hours”High CAPE; High Shear; Moderate CIN courtesy: Steve Weiss
ML CAPE≤ 1000 J kg -1| 0-6 km Shear ≥ 35 kt| 0-1 km Shear ≥ 20 kt ML LCL ≤ 1000 m |ML CIN ≥ - 100 J kg -1 Max 480 hr or 120 hr/yr Integrated 2003 - 2006 “environment hours” Low CAPE; High Shear; Low LCL; Mod. CIN courtesy: Steve Weiss
High CAPE | Strong Shear Low CAPE | Strong Shear 48% of all F2+ tornadoes • 22% of F2+ tornadoes • widespread 80-120 hr/year • 26% of F2+ tornadoes • local axis 30-60 hr/year courtesy: Steve Weiss
Basic parameters: • Monthly conference calls for planning, O2R/R2O, etc. • By consensus, HSLC is considered to be: 0-6 km shear > 35 kts and SBCAPE < 500 J.kg • By consensus, landfalling TC cases are omitted • Initial “training dataset” of regional cases identified by NWS collaborators • Baseline for radar and parameter studies • Best events singled out for detailed NWS case studies • Additional data from SPC to supplement our work • Mesoanalysis data for detailed case studies (delivered online for use in Google Earth) • Relational database for all reports (not just the collaborator-identified cases)
Specific aims (end products): • Quantification of significant differences in ingredients for events vs. nulls; a new composite parameter idealized for HSLC (Sherburn lead) • Statistical assessment of radar signatures (convective mode, trackablemesovortices, other signatures like broken-S) associated with events vs. nulls (Davis lead) • Stats for groupings of interest: day vs. night, summer vs. winter, near vs. far from radar, S.E. U.S. vs. other regions, etc. (both projects) • A population of thorough case studies (events and nulls) whose environments and radar signatures will be compared to (and motivate) the longitudinal environmental and radar statistics (Moore, Lane, Coleman team leaders)