TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of Near-Surface Wind Speed Estimation Techniques Using Different Damage Indicators from a Damage Survey of Naplate, IL EF-3 Tornado
AU - Rhee, Daniel M.
AU - Nevill, Justin B.
AU - Lombardo, Franklin T.
N1 - Funding Information:
The damage survey of Naplate, IL tornado was funded by the NOAA VORTEX-SE program (Award Nos. NA150AR4590228 and NA16OAR4590219). The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of VORTEX-SE. The authors thank Antonio Zaldivar, Guangzhao Chen, Alexander Zickar, Rishabh Moorjani, Amanda R. Lombardo, and Jennifer Vetrone for contributing to the damage survey. The authors also are grateful to ProVisional Shot (now known as Cantu Media Group, LLC) for the use of their social media images in this paper. Dr. Godfrey and Dr. Peterson for providing the Joplin, MO tornado tree data. Nafiz Rahman for collecting social media images of the Naplate, IL tornado. Jiachen Xin for helping with the data collection and analysis of traffic signs. Special thanks are given to the Village of Naplate and the residents for providing information on structures and being gracious hosts, and NWS Chicago for sharing their findings and rationale for their damage survey of Naplate.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 American Society of Civil Engineers.
PY - 2022/2/1
Y1 - 2022/2/1
N2 - Estimation of tornado wind speed can be extremely difficult, especially near the ground where tornado damage occurs. Because of limitations of in situ measurements, ground-based damage surveys continue to be the most commonly used method to estimate the near-surface wind speed. This study discusses a comprehensive damage assessment of Naplate, Illinois (IL) tornado that occurred in February 2017. The damage survey included the following damage indicators: residential buildings, trees, and traffic signs. Additional data from social media images were collected and used to supplement the damage assessment. This comprehensive data set of damage indicators was used to estimate the characteristics of the Naplate, IL tornado. Multiple wind-speed estimation methods, each suited to a subset of the damage indicators, were applied to estimate the near-surface wind field of the tornado. The results from all independent methods were compared to create a cross-validated estimation of the surface tornado wind field. The similarity between estimates derived from different damage indicators and methods increases confidence in the wind speed estimation and validates the independent application of any of the methods presented, with each being appropriate for given circumstances and data availability.
AB - Estimation of tornado wind speed can be extremely difficult, especially near the ground where tornado damage occurs. Because of limitations of in situ measurements, ground-based damage surveys continue to be the most commonly used method to estimate the near-surface wind speed. This study discusses a comprehensive damage assessment of Naplate, Illinois (IL) tornado that occurred in February 2017. The damage survey included the following damage indicators: residential buildings, trees, and traffic signs. Additional data from social media images were collected and used to supplement the damage assessment. This comprehensive data set of damage indicators was used to estimate the characteristics of the Naplate, IL tornado. Multiple wind-speed estimation methods, each suited to a subset of the damage indicators, were applied to estimate the near-surface wind field of the tornado. The results from all independent methods were compared to create a cross-validated estimation of the surface tornado wind field. The similarity between estimates derived from different damage indicators and methods increases confidence in the wind speed estimation and validates the independent application of any of the methods presented, with each being appropriate for given circumstances and data availability.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85116051064&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85116051064&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000515
DO - 10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000515
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85116051064
SN - 1527-6988
VL - 23
JO - Natural Hazards Review
JF - Natural Hazards Review
IS - 1
M1 - 04021052
ER -