Next Article in Journal
Toward the Estimation of All-Weather Daytime Downward Longwave Radiation over the Tibetan Plateau
Previous Article in Journal
Investigating the Climate-Growth Response of Scots Pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) in Northern Poland
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Clear-Air Turbulence (CAT) Identification with X-Band Dual Polarimetric Radar Based on Bayesian Approach

Institute of Urban Meteorology (IUM), Beijing 100089, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Submission received: 29 September 2021 / Revised: 22 November 2021 / Accepted: 1 December 2021 / Published: 17 December 2021
(This article belongs to the Section Atmospheric Techniques, Instruments, and Modeling)

Abstract

:
The echo of weather radar is seriously disturbed by clear-air turbulence echo (CAT) which needs identifying and eliminating to improve the data quality of weather radar. Using the data observed with the five X-band dual polarimetric radars in Changping, Fangshan, Miyun, Shunyi, and Tongzhou, Beijing in 2018, the probability density distribution (PDD) of the horizontal texture of four radar moments reflectively factor (ZH), differential reflectivity (ZDR), correlation coefficient (ρHV), differential propagation phase shift (ΦDP), and then the CAT is identified and removed using Bayesian method. The results show that the radar data can be effectively improved after the CAT has been eliminated, which include: (1) the removal rate of CAT is more than 98.2% in the analyzed cases. (2) In the area with high-frequency distribution of CAT, the CAT can be effectively suppressed; in the area with low-frequency distribution, some weather echo in the edge with SNR < 15 dB may be mistakenly identified as CAT, but the proportion of meteorological echoes to the total echoes is more than 85%, which indicate that the error rate is very low and does not affect the radar operation.

1. Introduction

X-band dual-polarization radar (hereinafter X-POL) is applied to monitor small scale basins weather in mountainous regions and urban areas [1,2], and it can be a cost-effective system for filling up gaps in existing national radar networks [3]. Beijing, the capital of China, is often suffering from medium- and small-scale disastrous weather, in order to improve the ability of monitoring and warning for weather disaster, Beijing Meteorological Bureau had built five X-POL radars by the year end of 2018.
Clear air turbulence echoes (hereafter CATs) can be observed by X-band radar [4,5,6]. The CATs of five X-POLs are source of contaminations for radar precipitation estimations, it is need to remove CATs and only retain the precipitation echoes. However, CAT is just one type of echoes observed by X-POL, the others are including, (1) ground clutter (GC), (2) anomalous propagation (AP), (3) biological echo (such as bird or insect echo), (4) meteorological echoes (ME). In order to identify and eliminate CAT, it is necessary to establish CAT dataset for acquiring identification model.
Clear-air echoes(hereafter CAEs) are detected by X-POLs in sunny day, CAEs is usually composed of two types, one is the biological echo, which is caused by the scattering of insects or birds, the biological echoes are mainly dotted echoes, bands, etc., which will have an impact on Doppler velocity [7,8], and the other is the CAT, which is caused by fluctuations of refractive index, CATs are mainly layered, annular, wavy, etc. [9]. CAT has the characteristics of diurnal and seasonal variation [10]. Some machine learning methods have been applied to identify CAT, with the emergence and development of artificial intelligence algorithms [11,12]. These above methods have a certain filtering effect on the CAE of Doppler weather radar, however, there are rare studies carried out for dual polarization radar.
In this study, a Bayes classifier (BC) to identify CAT was developed and demonstrated using data from the Beijing X-POLs. The BC is assessed against an existing method (a fuzzy logic classifier, hereafter FLC) for CAT identification. This paper is organized as follows: Section 2 describes the radar data and introduces the Bayesian approach methodology. A case study and the comparison results between the BC and FLC are presented in Section 3. Section 4 provides the discussion and conclusion.

2. Data and Methods

2.1. Instruments and Data

Five X-POL radars in Beijing were located in Changping (CP), Fangshan (FS), Miyun (MY), Shunyi (SY) and Tongzhou (TZ) districts. Figure 1 shows the sample pictures of the five radars and their geographical location are displayed in Figure 2, the radius distance of the circle is 75 Km. The performance parameters of each radar are shown in Table 1. Five radars operate mode is VCP 21. Nine elevation volume scans were performed every 3 min (0.5°, 1.5°, 2.4°, 3.3°, 4.3 °, 6°, 9.9°, 14.6°, 19.5°).
CAEs and precipitation dataset were collected by using observation data of X-POL in 2018, in which CAEs using sunny detection data and precipitation echoes using rainy detection data. In data processing, GC and AP were firstly eliminated using the method proposed by Rico et al. [13] to ensure that the remaining echoes were CAEs in sunny day or precipitation echoes in rainy day. Biological targets or bird migration are removed by the way used by Lakshmanan et al. [14]. so after GC/AP removing, the rest of echoes were CATs in sunny day, and meteorological echoes (hereafter MEs) in rainy day, then CAT dataset and ME dataset have been acquired.

2.2. Methodology

2.2.1. Bayesian Approach for the Identification of CATs

The standard deviation of X-POL radar polarization parameters is expressed as follows:
S d ( x C ) = i = C N / 2 C N / 2 ( x i x ¯ ) 2 / N
Here, the C is the gate number at which the Sd is calculated. The i indicates the gate number. N denotes the number of radial range bins selected with xC as the center, and N is 7 in this study, x ¯ is the average value of N adjacent range bins. Sd (Z), Sd (ZDR), Sd (ρHV) and Sd (ΦDP) combine to form radar observation discriminant vector y = ( S d ( Z ) ,   S d ( Z d R ) ,   S d ( ρ H V ) ,   S d ( ϕ d P ) ) . After removing GC/AP for a volume scan data, the remaining echoes are including ME and CAT.The observation vector y is identified as CAT, if p(CAT|y) > p(ME|y), here, p is probability density [15]:
p ( C i | y ) = p ( y | C i ) p ( C i ) p ( y )
where Ci = ME and CAT. p(y) is the probability of the vector y, p(y) is the same value for calculation p(CAT|y) and p(ME|y), so it can be regarded as a constant K, p(y) ≡ K, assuming that the probabilities of ME and CAT are the same, i.e., p(CAT) = p(ME) = 1/2, so p(Ci|y) is proportional to p(y|Ci)p(Ci), then Formula (2) can be expressed as:
p ( C i | y ) = 1 2 K p ( y | C i )
So, p(Ci|y) value depends on the value of p(y|Ci). Based on the assumption that categories are independent of each other in simple Bayesian judgment, the conditional probability density can be further decomposed into:
p ( y | C i ) = p ( S d ( Z ) ,   S d ( Z d R ) ,   S d ( ρ H V ) ,   S d ( ϕ d P ) | C i ) = p ( S d ( Z ) | C i ) p ( S d ( Z d R ) | C i ) p ( S d ( ρ H V ) | C i ) p ( S d ( ϕ d P ) | C i )
For CAT, the Equation (1) can be expressed as:
p ( C A T | y ) = 1 2 K p ( S d ( Z ) | C A T ) p ( S d ( Z d R ) | C A T ) p ( S d ( ρ H V ) | C A T ) p ( S d ( ϕ d P ) | C A T )
For ME, Similarly, the Equation (1) can be expressed as:
p ( M E | y ) = 1 2 K p ( S d ( Z ) | M E ) p ( S d ( Z d R ) | M E ) p ( S d ( ρ H V ) | M E ) p ( S d ( ϕ d P ) | M E )
So the problem is transformed into acquiring the probability density distribution of parameters for Sd(Z), Sd(ZDR), Sd(ρHV) and Sd(ΦDP) (hereinafter PDDs). For CAT dataset, it will acquire PDDs of CAT; for ME dataset, it will acquire PDDs of ME. To a certain a range bin’ values for Sd(Z), Sd(ZDR), Sd(ρHV) and Sd(ΦDP), it is easy to acquire the probability of p(Sd(Z)|CAT), p(Sd(ZDR)|CAT), p(Sd(ρHV)|CAT) and p(Sd(ΦDP)|CAT) by using PDDs of CAT, p(CAT|y) can be acquired by Equation (5). The probability of p(Sd(Z)|ME), p(Sd(ZDR)| ME), p(Sd(ρHV)|ME) and p(Sd(ΦDP)|ME) can be acquired by using PDDs of ME, then p(ME|y) can be obtained by Equation (6). if p(CAT|y) > p(ME|y), the echo of this range bin will be distinguished as CAT, otherwise, is ME.

2.2.2. The Prior Distribution of Polarimetric Parameters

Using CAT and ME dataset collected in 2018 to calculate the prior distribution of polarimetric parameters. Among the five radars, the prior probability density distribution of polarimetric parameters for CATs using the data from the plan position indicator (PPI) scans at 0.5° and 1.5° elevation angle, and the prior density distribution of ME radar parameters using the data from the >4.3° PPIs and 50 km away from the radar, to prevent interference from the near-surface non-meteorological echoes.
Figure 3 shows the probability density distribution (PDD) of texture features of radar parameters obtained from the five radars during 2018. The overlap area of the PDD of the ME and CAT of Sd(ZDR), Sd(ρHV), and Sd(ΦDP) is small, which is helpful to distinguish the CATs and MEs. For each parameter, the width of ME PDD is narrower than that of CAT, and the most Sd(Z) values of ME are less than 4 dBZ, Sd(ZDR) values are less than 2 dB, Sd(ΦDP) values are less than 10° and Sd(ρHV) values are less than 0.02. When a certain range bin parameters for Sd(Z), Sd(ZDR), Sd(ρHV), and Sd(ΦDP) are used in Formula (4), If the ME PDD is used in Figure 3, the probability of ME(PME) is obtained, If the CAT PDD is used in Figure 3, the probability of CAT(PCAT)is obtained, if PCAT > PME, the echo of this bin can be distinguished as CAT, otherwise, is ME.

2.2.3. Evaluation Metrics

The Bayesian method for recognition and elimination of CAT is evaluated using 44 rainfall events in 2019 and 43 rainfall events from January to September 2020. Akin to the method of Huang et al. [16], the occurrence frequencies of different radar echo types that appear in each range bin are counted as follows:
P ( A z , B i n ) = N ( A z , B i n ) T
where N(Az, Bin) indicates the number of range bins with non-null values at the azimuth (Az), and T is the total number of radar scans. Here, P is expressed in dB:
dB P = 10 log 10 P 10 5  
Four different statistics were employed: the occurrence frequency of reflectivity after removing the ground clutter dBPZ, the occurrence frequencies of CAT dBPCAT, meteorology echo (ME) dBPME, and the ratio of the number of range bins of reflectivity to the total numbers of ME dBPMEZ.

3. Results

3.1. Verification by a Case Study

Figure 4 shows the PPIS at 1.5° elevation angle for reflectivity (ZH), differential reflectivity (ZDR), the correlation coefficient (ρHV), and propagation phase shift (ФDP). As shown in Figure 4, a strong clear air signal is prevalent between 90° and 330° within 30 km from the radar (range rings are at 15 km intervals). The correlation coefficient ρHV in this region is relatively small with values between 0.4 and 0.97, and the proportion less than 0.9 accounts for more than 82%. The fluctuations of ZDR and ФDP are large. ZDR and ФDP mainly fluctuate −6 dB–6 dB and 40°–160°, respectively. In addition, the texture distribution of each polarization parameter shows that there is a concentration area of CAT echo within the range of 15 km from radar (Figure 5).
Figure 6 shows the variation of Sd(Z), Sd(ZDR), Sd(ρHV), and Sd(ΦDP) of CATs versus reflectivity Z. The reflectivity Z of CAT varies from −25 dBZ to 30 dBZ, and Sd(Z) is ranging 0–16 dB. Therein, the proportions of Sd(Z) > 2 dBZ, Sd(ZDR)> 0.5 dB, Sd(ρHV) > 0.05 and Sd(ΦDP) > 5° are 69.8%, 97.1%, 93.5% and 97.2%, respectively. The textures of the four parameters (Figure 6) indicate that the characteristics of CATs, that is the fluctuation range of texture is larger than that of meteorological echo, according to the probability density distribution Sd(Z), Sd(ZDR), Sd(ρHV), and Sd(ΦDP) of ME and CAT in Figure 3.
Figure 7 shows the comparison of reflectivity from raw data and after CAT echo filtering at 08:00 (UTC) 2 July 2019. The CAT echo in the 15 km range of Changping radar has been removed, and there are 257 range bins left, accounting for only 1.8% of the total bins of radar echoes, and as high as 98.2% of the CAT echoes has been eliminated, indicating that the Bayesian method is effective in identifying CAT echoes.

3.2. Performance of the Bayesian Method

Figure 8 displays four statistics dBPCAT, dBPME, dBPZ, and dBPMEZ of five radar observations from 44 precipitation events observed from January to December 2019 and 43 precipitation events from January to September 2020. Figure 9 shows the occurrence frequency of azimuthal averaging of four statistics over 360 azimuths versus range. P1-P4 indicate the azimuthal averaging of dBPCAT, dBPME, dBPZ, and dBPMEZ, respectively. The CAT echoes of the five radars are mainly concentrated in the 15 km range of the radar site and gradually decrease with the increase of radial distance (Figure 8(a1)–(e1)). Similar results are obtained from P1 in Figure 9. The proportion of CAT for each radar reaches its peak at around 1 km, therein, peak ratio is as high as 93.9% for Fangshan radar. With the increase of distance, the proportion of CAT decreases gradually. The proportion of CAT for each radar is very small close to 75 km. There are about 0.9%, 1.5%, 1.2%, 1.2%, and 0.9% of CAT echoes for Changping radar, Fangshan radar, Miyun radar, Shunyi Radar, and Tongzhou radar, respectively.
After the CAT echoes are removed using the Bayesian method, it can be seen from Figure 8(a2)–(e2) that the CAT echoes with reflectivity greater than 40 dB within the radar 15 km range are significantly reduced. In addition, the azimuthal averaging of dBPME (P2 in Figure 9) showes that the ME ehoes within 15 km is close to the area outside 15 km, and the distribution is much smoother and not steep as P1. P3 of each radar decreases gradually from the peak. After the CAT echoes were removed, P2 of each radar is less than 16%. In the areas with range exceeding 30 km where CAT echoes are less frequent, P2 and P3 tend to be consistent with the increase of distance. The proportions of ME to the total echoes are very high (>49.2 dB) (Figure 8(a4)–(e4)). The distribution of P4 for each radar in Figure 9 is greater than 85%, therein, a higher value of more than 90% appeared from Changping radar, indicating that that the proportion of ME identified as CAT is small.

3.3. Comparisons between Bayesian and Fuzzy Logic Method

Many studies have used fuzzy logic classification schemes to filter out non-meteorological echoes [16]. In this paper, the fuzzy logic functions of ME and CAT are established by using the probability density distribution of ME and CAT echo in Figure 3. The fuzzy logic function adopts a trapezoidal function. According to the probability density distribution of five parameters in Figure 4, the membership functions of five parameters can be obtained (Figure 10).
In this paper, the data of five Beijing radars at 04:00 (UTC) on 28 May 2018 are selected, and the effects of fuzzy logic and Bayesian methods on the elimination of CAT echoes are compared. After preprocessing the radar data, the total radar echo distance database is recorded as N, the remaining range library is identified and eliminated by the Bayesian method as Nb, and the elimination rate is Pb = (N − Nb)/N. The number of distance libraries left after fuzzy logic recognition is eliminated is marked as Nf, and the elimination rate is Pf = (N − Nf) /N. The comparison of the two methods is shown in Table 2. After using the Bayesian method to identify and eliminate CAT echoes, the number of radar bins with CAT echoes is significantly reduced. Overall, the recognition and elimination rate of CAT is more than 98.4%. The CAT echo identified and eliminated by the fuzzy logic method is slightly lower, indicating that the Bayesian method is better than the fuzzy logic method.
Figure 11 shows the 1 km constant altitude PPI (CAPPI) of the radar network from the five radars after using the Bayesian method to identify and eliminate the CAT echoes. It is further filtered out all the clear air turbulence echoes after removing the isolated echo.

4. Summary and Conclusions

In this study, a Bayesian method to classify the CAT echoes was developed and tested using radar data from five X-band dual-polarization radars in Beijing. A rainfall case and 87 rainfall events were used to verify and evaluate the performance of the Bayesian method. The main conclusions are as follows:
(1)
The characteristics of CATs observed by the Beijing X-band polarimetric radar show that the high-frequency concentration area of turbulent echoes is within 15 km from radar. The P3 value of the total echo proportion of each range database is high. After the elimination of non-meteorological echoes, the P2 value of ME proportion is maintained within 16%, indicating that the filtering method of CAT echoes is good.
(2)
The Bayesian method can filter the edge of MEs with SNR < 15 dB. When the SNR of ME is < 15 dB, the values of Sd(Z), Sd(ZDR), Sd(ρHV), and Sd(ΦDP) are higher, causing it to filter out as a CAT.
(3)
Compared to traditional fuzzy-logic classification, the Performance of the Bayesian approach is slightly better in identifying the CATs.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.M.; methodology, J.M.; formal analysis, L.L.; resources, M.C.; data curation, S.L.; writing-original draft preparation, J.M.; writing-review and editing, L.L.; project administration, M.C.; visualization, J.M. and S.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Key R&D Program of China (grant: 2018YFF0300102), the Beijing Municipal Science and Technology Project (grant: Z171100004417008), and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant: 42005109).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Anagnostou, M.N.; Kalogiros, J.; Anagnostou, E.N.; Tarolli, M.; Papadopoulos, A.; Borga, M. Performance evaluation of high-resolution rainfall estimation by X-band dual-polarization radar for flash flood applications in mountainous basins. J. Hydrol. 2010, 394, 4–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Park, S.G.; Bringi, V.N.; Chandrasekar, V.; Maki, M.; Iwanami, K. Correction of Radar Reflectivity and Differential Reflectivity for Rain Attenuation at X Band. Part I: Theoretical and Empirical Basis. J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 2005, 22, 1621–1632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Chen, H.; Chandrasekar, V.; Philips, B. Principles of High-Resolution Radar Network for Hazard Mitigation and Disaster Management in an Urban Environment. J. Meteorolog. Soc. Jpn. 2018, 96A, 119–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. Fritts, D.C.; Franke, P.M.; Wan, K.; Lund, T.; Werne, J. Computation of clear-air radar backscatter from numerical simulations of turbulence: 2. Backscatter moments throughout the lifecycle of a Kelvin-Helmholtz instability. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 2011, 116, D11105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Oue, M.; Uyeda, H.; Ohigashi, T.; Kouketsu, T.; Mizutani, F. Airflow Structure of Clear-Air and Precipitation Echoes Observed by an X-band Doppler Radar over the Nobi Plain in Japan in the Summer of 2010. In Proceedings of the Conference on Radar Meteorology, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 26–30 September 2011. [Google Scholar]
  6. Takeda, T.; Murabayashi, S. Observation of Clear-Air Echoes with 3.2-cm Radars. J. Meteor. Soc. Japan 1981, 59, 864–875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Larkin, R.P. Flight speeds observed with radar, a correction: Slow “birds” are insects. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 1991, 29, 221–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Luke, E.P.; Kollias, P.; Johnson, K.L.; Clothiaux, E.E. A Technique for the Automatic Detection of Insect Clutter in Cloud Radar Returns. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol. 2008, 25, 1498–1513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Liu, X.D. Summary on Applications of Stratiform Clear Air Echo in Nowcasting. Meteorol. Environ. Res. 2010, 1, 101–106. [Google Scholar]
  10. Chang, P.-L.; Wang, B.-S.; Shieh, S.-L.; Jou, B.J.-D. Clear-air echo statistics and beam blockage patterns of Taiwan Doppler radar network. In Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Radar Meteorology, Seattle, WA, USA, 8 August 2003. [Google Scholar]
  11. Abernethy, J.; Sharman, R.; Bradley, E. An Artificial Intelligence Approach to Operational Aviation Turbulence Forecasting. In Proceedings of the Thire International Conference On Research in Air Transportation, Farfax, VA, USA, 1–4 June 2008. [Google Scholar]
  12. Williams, J.K. Detection and Nowcasting of Convective Turbulence Using Artificial Intelligence Techniques. In Proceedings of the 93rd American Meteorological Society Annual Meeting, Austin, TX, USA, 9 January 2013. [Google Scholar]
  13. Rico-Ramirez, M.A.; Cluckie, I.D. Classification of ground clutter and anomalous propagation using dual-polarization weather radar. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2008, 46, 1892–1904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Lakshmanan, V.; Zhang, J.; Howard, K. A Technique to Censor Biological Echoes in Radar Reflectivity Data. J. Appl. Meteorol. Climatol. 2010, 49, 453–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Papoulis, A.; Pillai, S.U. Probability, Random Variables and Stochastic Processes, 4th ed.; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1991. [Google Scholar]
  16. Huang, X.y.; LI, Y.; Zhang, S.; Huang, S.; Wei, K. The algorithm and verification of ground clutter identification based on fuzzy logic. J. Trop. Meteorol. 2018, 34, 305–313. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. Installation of Beijing X-band dual-polarization radars(X-POL). The letter symbols, such as “CP”, correspond to the name of various radars. More information about the deployment of the five radars can be found in Table 1.
Figure 1. Installation of Beijing X-band dual-polarization radars(X-POL). The letter symbols, such as “CP”, correspond to the name of various radars. More information about the deployment of the five radars can be found in Table 1.
Atmosphere 12 01691 g001
Figure 2. The layout of the dual-polarization X-band radars (75 km range rings). The letter symbols, such as “CP”, correspond to the name of various radars.
Figure 2. The layout of the dual-polarization X-band radars (75 km range rings). The letter symbols, such as “CP”, correspond to the name of various radars.
Atmosphere 12 01691 g002
Figure 3. Probability density distribution of parameters (a) Sd(Z), and, (b) Sd(ZDR), (c) Sd(ρHV), and (d) Sd(ΦDP) for ME and CAT.
Figure 3. Probability density distribution of parameters (a) Sd(Z), and, (b) Sd(ZDR), (c) Sd(ρHV), and (d) Sd(ΦDP) for ME and CAT.
Atmosphere 12 01691 g003aAtmosphere 12 01691 g003b
Figure 4. The parameters of (a) Z, (b) ZDR, (c) ρHV, (d) ΦDP from Changping radar, 1.5° PPIs, at 08:00 (UTC) 2 July 2019.
Figure 4. The parameters of (a) Z, (b) ZDR, (c) ρHV, (d) ΦDP from Changping radar, 1.5° PPIs, at 08:00 (UTC) 2 July 2019.
Atmosphere 12 01691 g004
Figure 5. As Figure 4, but for (a) Sd(Z), (b) Sd(ZDR), (c) Sd(ρHV), and (d) Sd(ΦDP).
Figure 5. As Figure 4, but for (a) Sd(Z), (b) Sd(ZDR), (c) Sd(ρHV), and (d) Sd(ΦDP).
Atmosphere 12 01691 g005
Figure 6. Scatterplots of (a) Sd(Z), (b) Sd(ZDR), (c) Sd(ΦDP), and (d) Sd(ρHV) versus Z for CAT from Changping radar, 1.5° PPI, at 08:00 UTC 2 July 2019.
Figure 6. Scatterplots of (a) Sd(Z), (b) Sd(ZDR), (c) Sd(ΦDP), and (d) Sd(ρHV) versus Z for CAT from Changping radar, 1.5° PPI, at 08:00 UTC 2 July 2019.
Atmosphere 12 01691 g006
Figure 7. PPI displays of raw reflectivity ZH (a) and CAT-removed ZH (b) using the Bayesian method from Changping radar at 1.5 ° elevation angle at 08:00 (UTC) 2 July 2019.
Figure 7. PPI displays of raw reflectivity ZH (a) and CAT-removed ZH (b) using the Bayesian method from Changping radar at 1.5 ° elevation angle at 08:00 (UTC) 2 July 2019.
Atmosphere 12 01691 g007
Figure 8. The statistical results of dBPCAT (the first column), dBPME (the second column), dBPZ (the third column), and dBPMEZ (the fourth column) for Changping radar (a1a4), Fangshan radar (b1b4), Miyun radar (c1c4), and Shunyi radar (d1d4), Tongzhou radar (e1e4), respectively.
Figure 8. The statistical results of dBPCAT (the first column), dBPME (the second column), dBPZ (the third column), and dBPMEZ (the fourth column) for Changping radar (a1a4), Fangshan radar (b1b4), Miyun radar (c1c4), and Shunyi radar (d1d4), Tongzhou radar (e1e4), respectively.
Atmosphere 12 01691 g008
Figure 9. The occurrence frequency of azimuthal averaging of four statistics (dBPCAT, dBPME, dBPZ, and dBPMEZ) over 360 azimuths versus range for (a) CP, (b) FS, (c) MY, (d) SY, and (e) TZ radars, respectively.
Figure 9. The occurrence frequency of azimuthal averaging of four statistics (dBPCAT, dBPME, dBPZ, and dBPMEZ) over 360 azimuths versus range for (a) CP, (b) FS, (c) MY, (d) SY, and (e) TZ radars, respectively.
Atmosphere 12 01691 g009
Figure 10. Membership functions of CAT and ME for (a) Sd(Z), (b) Sd(ZDR), (c) Sd(ΦDP), (d) Sd(ρHV), and (e) ρHV.
Figure 10. Membership functions of CAT and ME for (a) Sd(Z), (b) Sd(ZDR), (c) Sd(ΦDP), (d) Sd(ρHV), and (e) ρHV.
Atmosphere 12 01691 g010
Figure 11. (a) CAT echoes from the five radars, the (b) CAT-removed echoes using the Bayesian method, and (c) the isolated echo filtered after Bayesian method.
Figure 11. (a) CAT echoes from the five radars, the (b) CAT-removed echoes using the Bayesian method, and (c) the isolated echo filtered after Bayesian method.
Atmosphere 12 01691 g011
Table 1. Specification of X-POL radar.
Table 1. Specification of X-POL radar.
Transmitting Frequency9.3–9.5 GHz (X-Band)
Wavelength3.2 cm
Peak power70 kw
Average Power112 w
Max. Duty Cycle0.16%
Antenna type (diameter)Front-fed parabolic (2.4 m)
3-dB beam width0.94°
PolarizationDual linear, H and V channel
Range resolution75 m
Maximum pulse width1 μs
VariablesZ, V, W, ZDR, ρHV, KDP, ФDP, SNR
Table 2. The effect of CAT echo recognition and elimination.
Table 2. The effect of CAT echo recognition and elimination.
RadarsNNbNfPbPf
Changping3361237397798.8%97.1%
Fangshan2185614349499.3%97.7%
Miyun2634421362499.1%97.6%
Shunyi2723915160199.4%97.8%
Tongzhou1433522460598.4%95.8%
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ma, J.; Luo, L.; Chen, M.; Li, S. Clear-Air Turbulence (CAT) Identification with X-Band Dual Polarimetric Radar Based on Bayesian Approach. Atmosphere 2021, 12, 1691. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/atmos12121691

AMA Style

Ma J, Luo L, Chen M, Li S. Clear-Air Turbulence (CAT) Identification with X-Band Dual Polarimetric Radar Based on Bayesian Approach. Atmosphere. 2021; 12(12):1691. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/atmos12121691

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ma, Jianli, Li Luo, Mingxuan Chen, and Siteng Li. 2021. "Clear-Air Turbulence (CAT) Identification with X-Band Dual Polarimetric Radar Based on Bayesian Approach" Atmosphere 12, no. 12: 1691. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/atmos12121691

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop