Search for: All records

Abstract Hail research and forecasting models necessarily involve explicit or implicit—and uncertain—physical assumptions regarding hailstones’ shape, tumbling behavior, fall speed, and thermal energy transfer. Whereas most models assume spherical hailstones, we relax this assumption by using hailstone shape data from field observations to establish empirical size–shape relationships with reasonable degrees of randomness considering hailstones’ natural shape variability, capturing the observed distribution of triaxial ellipsoidal shapes. We also incorporate explicit, random tumbling of individual hailstones during their growth to simulate their free-falling behavior and the resultant changes in cross-sectional area (which affects growth by hydrometeor collection). These physical attributes are incorporated in calculating hailstones’ fall speeds, using either empirical relationships or analytical relationships based on each hailstone’s Best and Reynolds numbers. Options for drag coefficient modification are added to emulate hailstones’ rough surfaces (lobes), which then modifies their thermal energy and vapor exchange with the environment. We investigate how applying these physical assumptions about nonspherical hail to the Penn State hail growth trajectory model, coupled with Cloud Model 1 supercell simulations, impacts hail production and examine the reasons behind the resulting variability in hail statistics. The choice of hailstone size–mass relation and fall speed scheme have the strongest influence on hail sizes. Using nonspherical, tumbling hailstones reduces the number of large hailstones produced. Applying shape-specific thermal energy transfer coefficients subtly increases sizes; the effects of lobes vary depending on the fall speed scheme used. These physical assumptions, although adding complexity to modeling, can be parameterized efficiently and potentially used in microphysics schemes. Significance StatementIn numerical modeling of hailstorms, we usually consider hailstones to be spherical to simplify calculations, but in nature, hailstones generally are not spheres and can be rather lumpy and have spikes. The purpose of this study is to examine how the model result would change when nonspherical hailstone shape is implemented. We examine the relationship between hailstone shape and physical processes during hail growth in effort to explain why these changes occur and offer insights on how nonspherical hailstone shape may be parameterized in bulk microphysics schemes. 

Abstract Supercell storms are commonly responsible for severe hail, which is the costliest severe storm hazard in the United States and elsewhere. Radar observations of such storms are common and have been leveraged to estimate hail size and severe hail occurrence. However, many established relationships between radar-observed storm characteristics and severe hail occurrence have been found using data from few storms and in isolation from other radar metrics. This study leverages a 10-yr record of polarimetric Doppler radar observations in the United States to evaluate and compare radar observations of thousands of severe hail–producing supercells based on their maximum hail size. In agreement with prior studies, it is found that increasing hail size relates to increasing volume of high (≥50 dBZ) radar reflectivity, increasing midaltitude mesocyclone rotation (azimuthal shear), increasing storm-top divergence, and decreased differential reflectivity and copolar correlation coefficient at low levels (mostly below the environmental 0°C level). New insights include increasing vertical alignment of the storm mesocyclone with increasing hail size and a Doppler velocity spectrum width minimum aloft near storm center that increases in area with increasing hail size and is argued to indicate increasing updraft width. To complement the extensive radar analysis, near-storm environments from reanalyses are compared and indicate that the greatest environmental differences exist in the middle troposphere (within the hail growth region), especially the wind speed perpendicular to storm motion. Recommendations are given for future improvements to radar-based hail-size estimation. 

Abstract Convective inhibition (CIN) is one of the parameters used by forecasters to determine the inflow layer of a convective storm, but little work has examined the best way to compute CIN. One decision that must be made is whether to lift parcels following a pseudoadiabat (removing hydrometeors as the parcel ascends) or reversible moist adiabat (retaining hydrometeors). To determine which option is best, idealized simulations of ordinary convection are examined using a variety of base states with different reversible CIN values for parcels originating in the lowest 500 m. Parcel trajectories suggest that ascent over the lowest few kilometers, where CIN is typically accumulated, is best conceptualized as a reversible moist adiabatic process instead of a pseudoadiabatic process. Most inflow layers do not contain parcels with substantial reversible CIN, despite these parcels possessing ample convective available potential energy and minimal pseudoadiabatic CIN. If a stronger initiation method is used, or hydrometeor loading is ignored, simulations can ingest more parcels with large amounts of reversible CIN. These results suggest that reversible CIN, not pseudoadiabatic CIN, is the physically relevant way to compute CIN and that forecasters may benefit from examining reversible CIN instead of pseudoadiabatic CIN when determining the inflow layer. 

Abstract Typical environmental conditions associated with horizontal convective rolls (HCRs) and cellular convection have been known for over 50 years. Yet our ability to predict whether HCRs, cellular convection, or no discernable organized (null) circulation will occur within a well-mixed convective boundary layer based upon easily observed environmental variables has been limited. Herein, a large database of 50 cases each of HCR, cellular convection, and null events is created that includes observations of mean boundary layer wind and wind shear, boundary layer depth; surface observations of wind, temperature, and relative humidity; and estimates of surface sensible heat flux. Results from a multiclass linear discriminant analysis applied to these data indicate that environmental conditions can be useful in predicting whether HCRs, cellular convection, or no circulation occurs, with the analysis identifying the correct circulation type on 72% of the case days. This result is slightly better than using a mean convective boundary layer (CBL) wind speed of 6 m s⁻¹to discriminate between HCRs and cells. However, the mean CBL wind speed has no ability to further separate out cases with no CBL circulation. The key environmental variables suggested by the discriminant analysis are mean sensible heat flux, friction velocity, and the Obukhov length.