Chapter 2: basic equations and tools All sections are considered core material, but the emphasis is on the “new” elements in the last three sections: • • • 2.5 – pressure perturbations 2.6 – thermodynamic diagrams 2.7 - hodographs flow vs vorticity: the right-hand rule 𝜂 =𝑗∙𝛻×𝑣 hydrostatic pressure perturbations 2004 – 2046 UTC 2049 – 2130 UTC 2134-2214 UTC H H L H L H L L L H H H Measured height (1-m increments) of the 595-hPa surface during a winter storm over the Med Bow Range Wyoming (11 February 2008) (Parish and Geerts 2013) hydrostatic pressure perturbations: stratified flow over an isolated peak wind H L H L hydrostatic pressure perturbations: 2D stratified flow over a mountain Fig. 6.6: polarization relations between q’, p’, u’, and w’ in a westward tilting, vertically-propagating internal gravity wave blue = cold, red = warm wind U cg H c terrain L H examine column T’ above The pressure perturbation field in a buoyant bubble (e.g. a Cu tower) contains both a hydrostatic and a non-hydrostatic component. B>0 B<0 the buoyancy-induced pressure perturbation gradient acceleration (BPPGA): pB' z narrow buoyant blob x Analyze: B p F B z 2 ' B wide buoyant layer Shaded area is buoyant B>0 This is like the Poisson eqn in electrostatics, with FB the charge density, p’B the electric potential, and p’B show the electric field lines. B 2 L The + and – signs indicate highs and lows: p z ' B where L is the width of the buoyant parcel BPPGA pB' Where p’B>0 (high), 2p’B <0, thus the divergence of [- p’B] is positive, i.e. the BPPGA diverges the flow, like the electric field. The lines are streamlines of BPPGA, the arrows indicate the direction of acceleration. assume _ hydrostatic _ balance Dw 1 pB' i.e. B0 Dt z then ' 2 ' 1 p B pB B Within the buoyant parcel, the BPPGA always opposes the buoyancy, B or z z z 2 thus the parcel’s upward acceleration is reduced. Now because A given amount of B produces a larger net upward acceleration in a B smaller parcel 2 pB' z Proof for a very wide parcel, BPPGA=B we conclude that (i.e. the parcel, though buoyant, is hydrostatically balanced) (in this case the buoyancy source equals d2p’/dz2) 2 pB' 2 pB' 0 x 2 y 2 This pressure field contains both a hydrostatic and a non-hydrostatic component. 1 p'h B z B>0 2 pB' B z p’B explanation: the image on the right shows buoyantly-induced (p’b) perturbation pressure field with a high above and a low below the warm core. The spreading of the isobars in the warm core suggest that these pressure perturbations are at least partly hydrostatic: greater thickness in the warm core. Yet a pure hydrostatic component (p’h) would just have a low below the warm core, down to the surface (Fig. 2.7). interpreting pressure perturbations Note that p’ = p’h+p’nh = p’B+p’D 1 p'h and p’nh = p’-p’h B z B p’B is obtained by solving 2 p B' F B with z p’D = p’-p’B p’h is obtained from B 0 at top and bottom. z Pressure perturbations in a density current pressure units: (Pa) L H L H H L L H H Fig. 2.6 interpretation: use Bernoulli eqn along a streamline 2 v 2 p' Bz const. Pressure perturbations in a buoyant bubble, e.g. a growing cumulus H pressure units: (Pa) L L L L L -250 +225 H H H L L 2K bubble, radius = 5 km, depth 1.5 km, released near ground in an environment with CAPE=2200 J/kg. Fields are shown at t=10 min L H Fig. 2.7 Cumulus bubble observation Example of a growing cu on Aug. 26th, 2003 over Laramie. Two-dimensional velocity field overlaid on filled contours of reflectivity (Z [dBZ]); solid lines are selected streamlines. (source: Rick Damiani) Cumulus bubble observation dBZ 20030826, 18:23UTC 8m/s • Two counter-rotating vortices are visible in the ascending cloud-top. • They are a cross-section thru a vortex ring, aka a toroidal circulation (‘smoke ring’) (Damiani et al., 2006, JAS) Shear interacting with an updraft vh u v S , z z z ambient wind p’D> 0 (a high or “H”) on the upshear side of a convective updraft, and p’D< 0 (L) on the downshear side Shear, buoyant updraft, and linear dynamic pressure gradient S H Shear deforms the parcel in the opposite direction as that due to a convective updraft on the upshear side of that updraft. In other words, the respective horizontal vorticity vectors point in opposite directions on the upshear side, yielding an erect upshear flank. The downshear flank is tilted downwind because the respective vorticity vectors supplement each other. Fig. 2.8 L skew T log p CAPE, and CIN always use virtual temperature ! radiosonde analysis model sounding analysis Fig. 2.9 limitations of parcel theory (section 3.1.2) • 𝑤𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 2𝐶𝐴𝑃𝐸 • factors limiting updraft strength and controlling Cu width: – downward BPPGF … increases with Cu width – entrainment of dry ambient air … undiluted core vanishes faster in more narrow Cu – hydrometeor loading … reduces B directly downdraft CAPE Fig. 2.10 hodographs c : storm motion vr= v-c : storm-relative mean flow S: mean shear wh : mean horizontal vorticity wh = ws+ wc : streamwise & crosswise vorticity Fig. 2.11 and 2.12 horizontal vorticity shear vector S .M c 1 M (u , v )dz o h 0 h mass-weighted deep-layer mean wind storm-relative flow vr horizontal vorticity w v u w ˆ wh , , k S y z z x w w u v assume O , O O , O x y z z directional shear vs. speed shear x storm motion c Fig. 2.13 real hodographs near observed severe storms Fig. 2.14 • • vr w h ws wh cos streamwise ws vr vr v r w h w w w cross-wise c c h sin vr vr streamwise vorticity definition of helicity (Lilly 1979) top top top ˆ ˆ H vr ws dz vr wh dz vr (k S )dz k S vr dz top 0 0 0 0 • the top is usually 2 or 3 km (low level !) • H is maximized by high wind shear NORMAL to the stormrelative flow – strong directional shear • H is large in winter storms too, but static instability is missing storm-relative flow horizontal vorticity streamwise vorticity produces helical flow Fig. 2.15 more on this in chapter 7