[1] Four field campaigns were conducted in southern Arizona (AZ) and in northern Texas and southern Oklahoma (TX-OK) in 2003 and 2004 to evaluate the performance of the U.S. National Lightning Detection Network TM (NLDN) in detecting cloud-to-ground (CG) lightning after an upgrade in 2002 and 2003. The 2-year average flash detection efficiency (DE) in AZ was 93% (1024/1097), and the measured (first plus subsequent) stroke DE was 76% (2746/3620). The corresponding values in TX-OK were 92% (338/367) and 86% (755/882), respectively. After correcting for the time resolution of the video camera (16.7 ms), we estimate that the actual NLDN stroke DE and video multiplicities were about 68% and 3.71 in AZ and 77% and 2.80 in TX-OK. The average DE for negative first strokes (92%) was larger than the measured DE for subsequent strokes that produced a new ground contact (81%) and the DE for subsequent strokes that remained in a preexisting channel (67%). The primary cause of the NLDN missing strokes was that the peak of the radiated electromagnetic field was below the NLDN detection threshold. The average estimated peak current (I p ) of negative first strokes and the average multiplicity of negative flashes varied from storm to storm and between the two regions, but this variability did not affect the DE as long as the recording sessions had more than 60 flashes. By analyzing the NLDN locations of subsequent strokes that remained in the same channel as the first stroke we infer that the median random position error of the NLDN was 424 m in AZ and 282 m in TX-OK. An evaluation of the classification of lightning type by the NLDN (i.e., CG stroke versus cloud pulse) showed that 1.4-7% (6/420 to 6/86) of the positive NLDN reports with an I p 10 kA in TX-OK were produced by CG strokes; 4.7-26% (5/106 to 5/19) of the positive reports with 10 kA < I p 20 kA were CGs; and 67-95% (30/45 to 30/32) of the reports with I p ! +20 kA were CG strokes. Some 50-87% (52/104 to 52/60) of the negative, single-stroke NLDN reports in AZ and TX-OK with jI p j 10 kA were produced by CG flashes. Both the upper and lower bounds in these classification studies have observational biases.
[1] Lightning discharges generate broadband electromagnetic pulses with a peak component in the very low frequency (VLF; 3-30 kHz) range. VLF waves propagate through the Earth-ionosphere waveguide with relatively low attenuation, enabling the detection of these radio atmospherics at great distances from the lightning discharge. A new technique of long-range (≤6000 km) global lightning geolocation via sferic detection is presented. This new technique catalogs the dominant variation in expected received waveforms in a set of waveform banks, which are then used to estimate the propagation distance and accurately determine the arrival time. Using three sensors in a trial network, this new technique is used to demonstrate a median accuracy of 1-4 km, depending on the time of day. An overall cloud-to-ground (CG) stroke detection efficiency between ∼40 and 60% is estimated by correlating individual lightning stroke events to data from the National Lightning Detection Network (NLDN). Additional events reported by the trial network are shown to have a tight spatial clustering to storm clusters identified by NLDN, suggesting that many of the unmatched events correspond to weak cloud-toground strokes, M components, or cloud pulses. Exploiting an empirical correlation between peak VLF field strength and peak current values reported by NLDN, we also provide unvalidated estimates of the peak current and lightning channel polarity. The trial network does not distinguish between cloud and ground discharges, so these peak current estimates only relate to an Earth-referenced channel current for the subset of reported events that are return strokes.
[1] In this paper we present lightning statistics for more than three million cloud-toground (CG) flashes located during the 10-year operation period 1992-2001 of the Austrian lightning location system (LLS) called ALDIS (Austrian Lightning Detection and Information System). Like a majority of other LLS operated worldwide, ALDIS underwent configuration changes and continuous performance improvement. Since these changes can alter the lightning statistics, we also relate the variation of the individual lightning parameters during the period of operation to changes in ALDIS configuration and performance. This analysis should be useful to other network operators and data users. Flash densities in Austria are normally between 0.5 and 4 flashes km À2 yr À1 depending on terrain. Flashes are classified as negative, positive, or bipolar. Seventeen percent of the flashes were classified as positive, and 2.3% of the total number of flashes were bipolar. Fifty percent of the positive multiple-stroke flashes were bipolar flashes with positive first stroke; this influences the positive flash multiplicity and interstroke interval statistics. Compared to many other networks, the ALDIS network reports much lower median negative peak currents. For 2001, the median first-stroke peak current for negative flashes was 10 kA. Estimated multiplicity of negative flashes for the 10-year period is affected by the algorithm that groups strokes into flashes, as well as the improved DE of the network as a result of the integration of ALDIS into the European LLS (EUCLID). This performance improvement also resulted in a higher number of single-stroke flashes.Interstroke interval and median first-stroke peak current show a clear correlation with multiplicity for negative flashes, irrespective of detection efficiency. Negative flashes with higher multiplicity show smaller average interstroke intervals and larger first stroke median peak currents. No correlation between interstroke interval and stroke order was found. On average, regions with higher flash density show slightly higher flash multiplicity.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.