Topography and Land-Cover Effects on Tornado Intensity Using Rapid-Scan Mobile
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Topography and Land-Cover Effects on Tornado Intensity using Rapid-Scan Mobile Radar Observations and Geographic Information Systems A thesis presented to the faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of Ohio University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Science Nathaniel L. McGinnis December 2016 © 2016 Nathaniel L. McGinnis. All Rights Reserved. 2 This thesis titled Topography and Land-Cover Effects on Tornado Intensity using Rapid-Scan Mobile Radar Observations and Geographic Information Systems by NATHANIEL L. MCGINNIS has been approved for the Department of Geography and the College of Arts and Sciences by Jana L. Houser Assistant Professor of Geography Robert Frank Dean, College of Arts and Sciences 3 ABSTRACT MCGINNIS, NATHANIEL L., M.S., December 2016, Geography Topography and Land-Cover Effects on Tornado Intensity using Rapid-Scan Mobile Radar Observations and Geographic Information Systems Director of Thesis: Jana L. Houser High spatio-temporal datasets collected by two rapid-scan, mobile, Doppler radars (the University of Oklahoma’s rapid-scan, X-band, polarimetric (RaXPol) radar and the Naval Post-Graduate School’s Mobile Weather Radar 2005 X-Band Phased Array (MWR-05XP)) are used to investigate the relationships between tornado intensity and land cover type. Through the application of Geographic Information System techniques, elevation, slope, and aspect values are derived using the United States Geological Survey’s Digital Elevation Model. Additionally, surface roughness values are extracted using land-cover data from the USGS National Land-Cover Database and surface roughness values from the Environmental Protection Agency AERSURFACE User’s Guide. The extracted topographic and surface roughness values are then compared to the intensity values (∆Vmax) obtained through radar analysis. Linear correlations, comparison of means, and multiple linear regression techniques are used to test the significance of the data in order to determine the possible relationships between tornado intensity and topography/land-cover. While significant statistical relationships are found using these techniques, the relationships do not favor a specific direction and often reversed between cases. However, based upon the results from the multiple linear regression it is hypothesized that the radar beam height was a strong predictor of tornado intensity for 4 these particular cases, which implies that over all of the topographic and land-cover variables, the tornado intensity observed was significantly influenced by the location of the radar’s lowest-level beam height. Nevertheless, several unique topography/land-cover features did appear to affect tornado intensity, encouraging the continued investigation of the potential relationships, despite the contradicting statistical relationships found here. 5 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Over the last two years, I have had the greatest privilege serving the Scalia Lab as Associate Director while completing my master’s degree. The journey was long, and there are many people that assisted me along the way. Firstly, to Dr. Ryan Fogt, thank you for allowing me the opportunity to serve the Scalia Lab. It truly was a great honor to carry that role, and I will never forget the many things holding that position as taught me. Additionally, your passion as an instructor and an advisor creates an environment where the program can thrive. I look forward to seeing the future growth of the program! To Dr. James Lein, thank you for your challenging insight and sincere investment into the furthering of my education. Your classes encouraged creativity which allowed me to develop and strengthen skills that will contribute to my future career. To Dr. Jana Houser, your expertise and passion for severe weather motivates every student you come into contact with. I am extremely grateful for the opportunities you provided to me over the last two years for which many had been lifelong dreams. I would also like to thank you for your inspiration regarding this thesis. As an advisor, you were always there to provide knowledge and ideas. I appreciate the many hours you spent assisting me with this project. It has and will continue to be an honor working with you. To my friends, Doug, Chad, Megan, and Hallie, the laughter during all of our adventures provided an escape from the stresses of graduate school. I can’t imagine what the journey would have been like without you all. 6 To my family, your love and encouragement pushed me through one of the biggest hurdles in my life. Through my moments of doubt, your words and prayers inspired me to continue on. Lastly, to my girlfriend Toni, these simple words do not cover the patience you graced me with over the last two years. Your love has been steadfast through all of my personal endeavors, and I can’t thank you enough. 7 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………3 Acknowledgments…………………………………………………………………………5 List of Tables……………………………………………………………………………...9 List of Figures……………………………………………………………………………14 Chapter 1: Introduction and Motivation…………………………………………………19 1.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………..19 1.2 Motivation……………………………………………………………21 Chapter 2: Literature Review…………………………………………………………….24 2.1 Tornado Structure……………………………………………………24 2.2 Elevation and Land-Cover Effects…………………………………...33 2.2.1 Elevation…………………………………………………...34 2.2.2 Land-Cover………………………………………………...40 2.3 Storm Mechanisms…………………………………………………..45 Chapter 3: Instrumentation and Methodology…………………………………………...51 3.1 Instrumentation………………………………………………………51 3.2 Methodology…………………………………………………………54 3.2.1 Radar Analysis……………………………………………..54 3.2.2 GIS Analysis……………………………………………….56 3.2.3 Statistical Analysis…………………………………………64 3.3 Case Studies………………………………………………………….69 3.3.1 Goshen County, Wyoming- 5 June 2009…………………..69 3.3.2 Lookeba, Oklahoma- 24 May 2011………………………..71 3.3.3 El Reno/Piedmont, Oklahoma- 24 May 2011……………...73 3.3.4 Carney, Oklahoma- 19 May 2013………………………….78 3.3.5 Shawnee, Oklahoma- 19 May 2013………………………..80 3.4 Instrumentation and Methodology Limitations……………………...83 Chapter 4: Results………………………………………………………………………..89 8 4.1 Individual Cases……………………………………………………...89 4.1.1 Goshen County, Wyoming- 5 June 2009…………………..89 4.1.2 Lookeba, Oklahoma- 24 May 2011………………………103 4.1.3 El Reno/Piedmont, Oklahoma- 24 May 2011…………….114 4.1.4 Carney, Oklahoma- 19 May 2013………………………...157 4.1.5 Shawnee, Oklahoma- 19 May 2013………………………165 4.2 Cumulative Review…………………………………………………181 Chapter 5: Discussion…………………………………………………………………..191 Chapter 6: Conclusion…………………………………………………………………..199 References………………………………………………………………………………205 9 LIST OF TABLES Page Table 3.1: Basic information regarding the differences between the WSR-88D (Crum and Alberty 1993) and the two mobile radars, RaXPol (Pazmany et al. 2013) and MWR- 05XP (Bluestein et al. 2010). ............................................................................................ 51 Table 3.2: Surface roughness lengths from EPA’s AERSURFACE User’s Guide organized according to the 2011 land-cover data from NLCD. ........................................ 59 Table 3.3: Information summary regarding the time periods analyzed for the Goshen tornado. Tornadogenesis or Tornado Dissipation categories with N/A indicate that those processes were not associated with those periods............................................................. 71 Table 3.4: As in Table 3.3, but the Lookeba tornado. ...................................................... 73 Table 3.5: As in Table 3.3, but for the data collected by RaXPol during the El Reno tornado. ............................................................................................................................. 76 Table 3.6: As in Table 3.3, but for the data collected by the MWR-05XP during the El Reno tornado. .................................................................................................................... 78 Table 3.7: As in Table 3.3, but for the Carney tornado. ................................................... 80 Table 3.8: As in Table 3.3, but for the Shawnee tornado. ................................................ 83 Table 4.1: A summary of basic information for the second period of the Goshen County, WY case.. .......................................................................................................................... 90 Table 4.2: A summary of correlations and the associated probabilities for the topographic parameter, elevation, slope, and aspect. Bolded values are significant (p < 0.05 for a two- tailed t-test). ...................................................................................................................... 93 Table 4.3: Unstandardized coefficient summary from the multiple linear regression output containing the coefficient value, standard error, t-value, and probability for each variable used in test 1 (all predictors available are used). Probability values that are significant at the 95% confidence interval (p < 0.05) are bolded. .................................... 97 Table 4.4: As in test 1, but excluding beam height (test 2). ............................................. 97 Table 4.5: As in Table 4.1, but for the third observational period. ................................... 98 10 Table 4.6: As in Table 4.2, but for the second period of the Goshen case. .................... 101 Table 4.7: As in Table 4.3, but for time period 3............................................................ 103 Table 4.8: As in Table 4.4