1 / 30

FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO A HEAVY SNOWFALL EVENT ACROSS NORTHERN ILLINOIS DECEMBER 2009

FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO A HEAVY SNOWFALL EVENT ACROSS NORTHERN ILLINOIS DECEMBER 2009. Nathan Marsili/Stephen Rodriguez 2010 GLOM Workshop Toronto, Ontario. Introduction. Synoptic Background and Forcing Mechanisms Mesoscale Features/Forcing Mechanisms Snow/Liquid Ratios.

purity
Download Presentation

FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO A HEAVY SNOWFALL EVENT ACROSS NORTHERN ILLINOIS DECEMBER 2009

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. FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO A HEAVY SNOWFALL EVENT ACROSS NORTHERN ILLINOIS DECEMBER 2009 Nathan Marsili/Stephen Rodriguez 2010 GLOM Workshop Toronto, Ontario

  2. Introduction • Synoptic Background and Forcing Mechanisms • Mesoscale Features/Forcing Mechanisms • Snow/Liquid Ratios

  3. OBSERVED SNOWFALL TOTALS

  4. FORECAST SNOWFALL TOTALS 2 to 4 INCHES 1 to 3 INCHES AROUND AN INCH

  5. Radar Overview (06Z-00Z)

  6. Synoptic Overview 300 MB 12/26/09 12Z

  7. Synoptic Overview 700 MB 12/26/09 12Z

  8. Synoptic Overview 850 MB 12/26/09 12Z

  9. Synoptic Overview SFC 12/26/09 12Z

  10. Synoptic Overview DGZ 12/26/09 12Z ROAB KDVN

  11. Radar Evolution (KLOT) 06Z-12Z

  12. Phase 1: 06Z-12Z December 26th • Equally spaced west-east oriented snow bands (max reflectivity 35-40 dBZ). • Bands short-lived but multiple bands affect same areas to produce 2-4 inches of snow accumulation between midnight and 6am. • Occurred in differential negativevorticity advection region, seem to feed off shallow low level convective instability.

  13. Horizontal Convective Rolls (HCRs) Schultz (2003) • Develop from thermal instability. • Enhanced by wind shear, but shear minimized in cross-roll direction. • Noted with large surface/air heat fluxes (warm ground/cold air).

  14. Horizontal Convective Rolls (HCRs) B A A B Reflectivity cross section KLOT 0.5 base reflectivity 0841Z 0-2.5 km shear vectors

  15. Phase 2: 12Z-00Z • Radar Storm Evolution 12Z-00Z

  16. Phase 2: 12Z-00Z Synoptic Forcing • Persistent warm advection associated with slowly retreating cold dome 12Z NAM 280K

  17. Phase 2: 12Z-00Z Mesoscale Factors • Moderate mid level frontogenesis KLOT 0.5 deg base reflectivity ~1800Z 12Z NAM 6-hr forecast 700 mb frontogenesis 12Z NAM 6-hr forecast 700 mb Fvec dvg (color-filled)

  18. Phase 2: 12Z-00Z Mesoscale Factors • Bands become more enhanced when entering mid level frontogenesis region • In addition to area of apparent enhancement due to frontogenesis, smaller scale linear elements also noted with locally more intense snowfall rates. • Complex banding structure shows up early in the event during the overnight hours on KDVN radar.

  19. Radar Imagery (KDVN) KDVN 0.5 base reflectivity (~ 0900Z-1130Z)

  20. Phase 2: 12Z-00Z Mesoscale Factors • West-east banding appears to be convectively driven – horizontal convective rolls • North-south oriented bands do not necessarily line up nicely with DPVA, frontogenesis, or mid level warm advection? • Enhanced reflectivities where bands intersect (and deeper reflectivity signatures) • CSI evaluated and found not to be playing a role in this case • What else could be forcing these bands?

  21. Phase 2: 12Z-00Z Mesoscale Factors • North-south bands may have been enhanced by gravity waves? • Enhancement of updrafts due to HCR/gravity wave interaction. Christian 87

  22. Phase 2: 12Z-00Z Mesoscale Factors Convectively unstable capping layer Stable ducting layer

  23. Phase 2: 12Z-00Z Mesoscale Factors ~1820Z

  24. Snow to Liquid Ratios Images from SLU Snow:Liquid Research webpage (Marty Baxter)

  25. Snow to Liquid Ratios

  26. Snow to Liquid Ratios

  27. Conclusions • Up to 1 foot of snow due to several synoptic/mesoscale factors. • Upper level low and associated isentropic lift with departing cold dome provided extended duration snowfall. • Thermal instability led to HCR development early morning producing storm total forecasted amounts by 12Z over localized areas.

  28. Conclusions • Mid level frontogenetical forcing providing greatest snowfall rates midday. • Frontogenetical forcing co-located with deep DGZ leading to highly anomalous SLR. • Prolonged forcing combined with rare SLR’s led to very challenging forecast.

  29. Thank you • Any questions?

More Related