Upload
hector
View
40
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Interactions between Simulated S upercell Thunderstorms and Dry B oundary L ayer C onvection. Christopher Nowotarski , Paul Markowski , Yvette Richardson Pennsylvania State University George Bryan National Center for Atmospheric Research 14 th Conference on Mesoscale Processes - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Interactions between Simulated Supercell Thunderstorms and Dry
Boundary Layer Convection
Christopher Nowotarski, Paul Markowski, Yvette Richardson
Pennsylvania State University
George BryanNational Center for Atmospheric Research
14th Conference on Mesoscale ProcessesLos Angeles, CAAugust 2, 2011
Motivation• Previous 3D numerical simulations of supercells and
tornadoes generally use horizontally homogeneous environments and exclude surface fluxes.
• Observations and simulations suggest that supercells are favored in areas with significant vertical wind shear and instability (CAPE).
• Convective Boundary Layers (CBLs) are characterized by local variations in these quantities.
• Consequently, supercells simulated in such environments may behave differently than in a homogeneous environment.
Background- Mesoscale variations in low-level vertical wind
shear and moisture “profoundly influence the morphology of deep convective storms” (Richardson et al. 2007, Richardson 1999).
- Storms became more organized and stronger when moving to areas of increased shear.
- Storms propagated towards areas of increased low-level moisture in weak shear regimes
- Isolated supercells in areas of increased moisture showed both higher updraft speeds and stronger low-level rotation.
- Tornadoes tend to be more likely in environments with higher 0-1 km shear and lower lifting condensation levels (e.g., Rasmussen and Blanchard 1998, Thompson et al. 2003, Markowski et al. 2003, Craven and Brooks 2004)
More Shear
Less Shear
Constant Shear
Background- Boundary layer convection is a source of heterogeneity
in the atmosphere.
- Because of low-level shear requirements, supercell environments are likely characterized by horizontal convective rolls (HCRs) or disorganized convection.
- Variations in thermodynamic quantities result from increased convergence in updraft branches. (Weckwerth et al. 1996)
-Potential temperature can be 0.5 K higher in updraft
-Mixing ratio is 1.5 – 2.5 g kg-1 higher in updraft
- Increased instability, lower LCLs, and favored regions for cloud formation in updraft branches.
- Roll axes tends to be aligned with mean CBL wind (Weckwerth et al. 1999)
- Organized boundary layer convection results in local, periodic variations in low-level vertical wind shear.
- Maxima in shear tend to be in areas without strong magnitudes of vertical velocity.
(from: Weckwerth et al. 1996)
(from: Markowski and Richardson 2007)
Background
24 May 2008(from: NOAA comprehensive Large Array-Data Stewardship System)
Low-level winds
HCR axis
Storm motionGravity waves?
Experiment Goals• Simulate a convective boundary layer (CBL) with
horizontal convective rolls
• Simulate supercell thunderstorms using an organized CBL as the base state– compare with a homogeneous base state
• Examine effects of storms, particularly anvil shading, on CBL
Model Configuration• Model
– CM1, version 1, release 15 (Bryan 2002)– Δt = 2.0 s, 0.33 s for acoustic calculations– periodic lateral boundary conditions
• Grid – dimensions: 250 km x 200 km x 18 km– Δx, Δy = 500 m– Δz = stretched from 50 m (below 3 km) to 500 m (above 9.5 km)
• Parameterizations– Ice microphysics (Lin et al. 1983)– Deardorff (1980) 1.5-order subgrid scale (SGS) turbulence schemeCBL simulations only:– Land surface scheme using two-layer soil model – Independent column approximation radiative transfer (NASA Goddard Cumulus
Ensemble; Chou 1990,1992; Chou et al. 1998;Tao et al. 1996; Chou et al. 1999 )
Generating a Convective Boundary LayerInitial Profile:
35 m s-1 unidirectional 0-6 km shear
1521 J kg-1 SBCAPE
323 J kg-1 CIN
3580 J kg-1 MUCAPE
CBL Initialization:
Radiation corresponding to 7:00 a.m. CDT in Northern Oklahoma
+/- 0.1 K potential temperature perturbations added
After 5 hours of simulation time….
Increasing solar angle warms and moistens boundary layer, causing CBL development
Average 11:45 a.m. CDT thermodynamic profile:
3855 J kg-1 SBCAPE
40 J kg-1 SBCIN
3855 J kg-1 MUCAPE
CBL mixes out low-level momentum, but deep layer shear remains relatively similar
CBL Characteristics
Daytime heating drives increase in resolved and subgrid scale (SGS) turbulence kinetic energy (TKE).
Around 11:30 a.m. CDT, large increase in resolved TKE associated with transition from nocturnal to convective boundary layer
CBL deepens with time through early afternoon hours
CBL Results• Simulated CBL (before storm initiation)
CBL is organized into SW-NE oriented horizontal convective rolls (HCRs)
Velocity and temperature perturbations of scales expected by theory/observations
z
zi
HCR axis
CBL ResultsWater vapor mixing ratio (qv) increases in HCR updraft branches by up to 0.3 g kg-1
0-1 km shear is locally increased by up to 3 m s-1
Shear maxima tend to be where vertical velocity is weak
Experiment Design
• Three simulations of supercell thunderstorms with varying environments
• CBL_fixed– Initializes deep convection in an organized CBL, with incoming solar radiation fixed and
no cloud shading effects
• CBL_evolve– Initializes deep convection in an organized CBL with evolving radiation, including cloud
shading effects
• Control– Supercell is simulated in a horizontally-homogeneous base state (average profiles from
initialization of CBL_fixed/CBL_evolve), without radiation or surface fluxes
• Compare simulations, focusing on behavior and structure of mature storms (rather than initiation).
Supercell Initiation• Each supercell experiment is initialized using CBL
environment or a homogeneous base state with average values from CBL environment at 11:45 a.m. CDT.
• Deep convection is initialized with an ellipsoidal warm bubble perturbation – 3 K potential temperature perturbation– 10 km x 10 km x 1 km radius
• Simulations are continued for 2 hours while supercells evolve
Simulation ResultsMaximum vertical velocity
Time
4 km AGL
125 m AGL
Aloft: Largely similar midlevel updraft strength
With time, CBL simulations display slightly stronger updraft
(likely the influence of increasing CAPE in CBL simulations due to radiation/surface fluxes)
Low levels:Initially stronger updrafts in CBL simulations due to HCRs
Similar strength low-level updraft once deep convection develops
w (m
s-1)
Simulation ResultsSurface maximum vertical vorticity
Time
ζ (s
-1)
Low-level vorticity is initially stronger in CBL simulations (owing to HCRs)
After 1:30 p.m., control displays stronger low-level vertical vorticity than either CBL simulation, despite having less CAPE
CBL_evolve also has a period of strong low-level rotation
Simulation Results – 4 km AGL
All three simulations have similar strength updrafts co-located with vertical vorticityw max = ~40 m s-1
ζ max = ~0.05 s-1
CBL_fixed and CBL_evolve contain numerous vertical vorticity maxima associated with cumulus congestus clouds in both the cold pool and inflow regions
1:50 p.m.
Simulation Results – low levels
- Control has strong, organized low-level updraft along gust front, with well-defined vertical vorticity maximum
- CBL_fixed has slightly weaker, less organized low-level updraft and little evidence of a low-level mesocyclone. More misocyclone-like vort maxima along gust front
- CBL_evolve shares characteristics with both simulations, likely owing to less vigorous boundary layer convection
1:50 p.m.
Effects of cold pool and anvil-shading
Anvil cloudedge
Decreased incoming shortwave radiation at surface
Colder surface temperature under anvil
HCR updrafts in “sunny” areas
Weaker boundary layerconvection under anvil…
… and in cold pool
Conclusions• Inclusion of radiation and surface fluxes, (causing CAPE to
increase during simulation) leads to slight increase in midlevel updraft strength
• CBL does not cause significant differences in overall storm strength (i.e., midlevel updraft strength or rotation)
• Presence of HCRs appears to disrupt development of low-level mesocyclone in CBL simulations, but leads to increased misocyclone activity along gust front
• Anvil-shading weakens boundary layer convection in inflow, perhaps mitigating its effects on storm evolution
Future Work• Higher resolution simulations to better resolve
fine-scale differences• Vary orientation of HCRs relative to storm
motion• Vary position of storm anvil relative to storm
motion/inflow• More realistic radiation scheme (e.g., the titled
independent pixel approximation)• Simulate during late afternoon/evening hours
when supercells tend to be at their prime
Acknowledgments
• NSF grant AGS-0644533
• Computing resources and support provided by NCAR CISL
• Thanks to Nels Shirer, Marcelo Chamecki, and Jim Marquis for helpful input