The European lightning location system EUCLID – Part 1: Performance analysis and validation
-
Published:2016-03-02
Issue:2
Volume:16
Page:595-605
-
ISSN:1684-9981
-
Container-title:Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.
Author:
Schulz WolfgangORCID, Diendorfer Gerhard, Pedeboy Stéphane, Poelman Dieter RoelORCID
Abstract
Abstract. In this paper we present a performance analysis of the European lightning location system EUCLID for cloud-to ground flashes/strokes in terms of location accuracy (LA), detection efficiency (DE) and peak current estimation. The performance analysis is based on ground truth data from direct lightning current measurements at the Gaisberg Tower (GBT) and data from E-field and video recordings. The E-field and video recordings were collected in three different regions in Europe, namely in Austria, Belgium and France. The analysis shows a significant improvement of the LA of the EUCLID network over the past 7 years. Currently, the median LA is in the range of 100 m in the center of the network and better than 500 m within the majority of the network. The observed DE in Austria and Belgium is similar, yet a slightly lower DE is determined in a particular region in France, due to malfunctioning of a relevant lightning location sensor during the time of observation. The overall accuracy of the lightning location system (LLS) peak current estimation for subsequent strokes is reasonable keeping in mind that the LLS-estimated peak currents are determined from the radiated electromagnetic fields, assuming a constant return stroke speed. The results presented in this paper can be used to estimate the performance of the EUCLID network related to cloud-to-ground flashes/strokes for regions with similar sensor baselines and sensor technology.
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Subject
General Earth and Planetary Sciences
Reference33 articles.
1. Baba, Y. and Rakov, V. A.: Lightning strikes to tall objects: Currents
inferred from far electromagnetic fields versus directly measured currents,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 34, L19810, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL030870, 2007. 2. Berger, G. and Pedeboy, S.: Comparison Between Real CG Flashes and CG
Flashes Detected by a Lightning Detection Network, in: vol. 2, International
Conference on Lightning and Static Electricity (ICOLSE), Blackpool, UK, 1–12, 2003. 3. Bermúdez, J.-L., Rachidi, F., Rubinstein, M., Janischewskyj, W.,
Shostak, V. O., Pavanello, D., Chang, J.-S., Hussein, A. M., Nucci, C. A.,
and Paolone, M.: Far-field-current relationship based on the TL model for
lightning return strokes to elevated strike objects, IEEE Trans. Electromagn.
Compat., 47, 146–159, https://doi.org/10.1109/TEMC.2004.842102, 2005. 4. Biagi, C. J., Cummins, K. L., Kehoe, K. E., and Krider, E. P.: National
Lightning Detection Network (NLDN) performance in southern Arizona, Texas,
and Oklahoma in 2003–2004, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 112, D05208,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2006JD007341, 2007. 5. CIGRE Report 549: Lightning Parameters for Engineering Applications, CIGRE, Paris, 2013.
Cited by
138 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|