Latest developments in global and total lightning detection

Lojou, Jean-Yves; Honma, Naoki; Cummins, K. L.; Said, R.; Hembury, Nikki

doi:10.1109/apl.2011.6111048

Cited by 12 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Different methods have been proposed to determine the time of arrival of a measured signal used by the ToA technique (e.g., Lojou et al, ; Schulz, ). In this study, the so‐called onset time is used to determine the time of arrival of a field pulse at a given sensor of a ToA‐based LLS.…”

Section: Analysis Simulation Results and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Location Accuracy Evaluation of ToA‐Based Lightning Location Systems Over Mountainous Terrain

Rubinstein²,

Rachidi

et al. 2017

JGR Atmospheres

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we analyze the location error of time of arrival (ToA)‐based lightning location systems (LLSs) caused by propagation effects over mountainous terrain around the Säntis tower located in the Swiss Alps. The study is based on a full‐wave three‐dimensional (3‐D) finite difference time domain approach using the topographic map including the Säntis tower and the nearby sensors belonging to LLSs. It is found that the vertical electric fields are strongly affected by the presence of the mountainous terrain and the finite ground conductivity and that the location error associated with the ToA technique depends strongly on the used onset time estimation technique. The evaluated location errors associated with amplitude thresholds of 10% and 20% and the time of the linear extrapolation of the tangent at maximum field derivative are found to be smallest (about 300 m or less). Finally, we assess the accuracy of two simplified methods (terrain envelope method and tight‐terrain‐fit method) to account for the location error due to propagation over mountainous terrain. These two methods might represent an efficient alternative to estimate the additional time delay due to propagation over a nonflat terrain by using available topographic data. In addition, a possible real‐time location error compensation algorithm using the elongated propagation path method to improve the location error of the LLSs in mountainous regions is presented and discussed.

show abstract

Section: Analysis Simulation Results and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Location Accuracy Evaluation of ToA‐Based Lightning Location Systems Over Mountainous Terrain

Rubinstein²,

Rachidi

et al. 2017

JGR Atmospheres

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These grids are generated by reprojecting and interpolating GLM event pixel polygons onto a desired output grid, and generating imagery that aggregate parameters describing the flashes that extend into each pixel on the output grid. For example, the Flash Extent Density (FED: Lojou & Cummins, 2004) product describes spatial variations in flash rate. Despite being termed a “density,” there is no areal scaling in the GLM product, and it is specified as either a flash rate or a flash count within a temporal bin (Bruning et al., 2019).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Survey of Thunderstorms That Produce Megaflashes Across the Americas

Peterson

2023

Earth and Space Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We previously observed that long‐horizontal lightning flashes exceeding 100 km in length, known as “megaflashes,” occur preferentially in certain thunderstorms. In this study, we develop a cluster feature approach for automatically documenting the evolutions of thunderstorm systems from continuous lightning observations provided by the Geostationary Lightning Mapper (GLM) on NOAA's Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites (GOES). We apply this methodology to GOES‐16 GLM observations from 2018 to mid‐2022 to improve our understanding of megaflash‐producing storms. We find that megaflashes occur in long‐lived (median: 14 hr) storms that grow to exceptional sizes (median: 11,984 km2) while they propagate across long distances (median: 622 km) compared to ordinary storms. The first megaflashes are typically produced within 15 min of the storm reaching its peak intensity and extent. However, most megaflashes occur ≥13 hr after the initial megaflash activity, and are sufficiently close to convection to suggest initiation in the thunderstorm core (where GLM has difficulty detecting faint early light sources from megaflashes). Megaflashes generated outside of convection are rare, accounting for 2.7% of the sample using a 50 km convective distance threshold, but also tend to be larger than normal megaflashes, possibly due to having direct access to electrified stratiform clouds through which megaflashes propagate.

show abstract

“…Rather than match WWLLN strokes to GLM groups, we place our focus on linking these WWLLN events to their parent thunderstorm region. We accomplish this by identifying the nearby (i.e., within 0.25 degrees) gridpoint with the greatest value in the Flash Extent Density (FED: Lojou and Cummins, 2004) imagery product. FED is a spatial representation of GLM flash rates, and this peak value should correspond to the most active thunderstorm region in the vicinity of the WWLLN stroke.…”

Section: The Geostationary Lightning Mapper (Glm)mentioning

confidence: 99%

WWLLN Energetic Lightning Events are Different from Optical Superbolts

Peterson

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The most powerful optical emissions from lightning have been described as “superbolts” since the 1970s. In 2019, Holzworth et al. (2019) applied the superbolt label to the most energetic Radio Frequency (RF) emissions measured by the World Wide Lightning Location Network (WWLLN). In this study, we compare the WWLLN energies to optical measurements by the photodiode detector (PDD) on the Fast On-orbit Recording of Transient Events (FORTE) satellite and the Geostationary Lightning Mappers (GLMs) on NOAA’s Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites (GOES) to assess whether WWLLN high energy events coincide with optical superbolts. We find no overlap between traditional superbolts and WWLLN high energy events. Optical superbolts are not energetic to WWLLN, while WWLLN superbolts are not optically bright. Additionally, the top WWLLN sources occur in a different meteorological context than superbolts. Despite some similarities in their overall global patterns of occurrence, WWLLN high energy events correspond to a different phenomenon.

show abstract

Latest developments in global and total lightning detection

Cited by 12 publications

References 14 publications

Location Accuracy Evaluation of ToA‐Based Lightning Location Systems Over Mountainous Terrain

Location Accuracy Evaluation of ToA‐Based Lightning Location Systems Over Mountainous Terrain

A Survey of Thunderstorms That Produce Megaflashes Across the Americas

WWLLN Energetic Lightning Events are Different from Optical Superbolts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About