Editorial Type:
Article
Article Type:
Research Article

The Influence of Preexisting Boundaries on Supercell Evolution

Nolan T. Atkins Advanced Study Program and Mesoscale and Microscale Meteorology Division, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado

Search for other papers by Nolan T. Atkins in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Morris L. Weisman Mesoscale and Microscale Meteorology Division, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado

Search for other papers by Morris L. Weisman in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
, and
Louis J. Wicker Department of Meteorology, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas

Search for other papers by Louis J. Wicker in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
Print Publication:
01 Dec 1999
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1999)127<2910:TIOPBO>2.0.CO;2
Page(s):
2910–2927
Restricted access

Abstract

A three-dimensional nonhydrostatic cloud model is used to study the evolution of supercell thunderstorms, with emphasis on the low-level mesocyclone, interacting with preexisting boundaries. The impacts of low-level environmental shear, storm motion relative to boundary orientation, and boundary strength are assessed. In the low-level shear experiments, significant low-level rotation is consistently observed earlier, tends to be stronger, and is longer lived in storms interacting with a boundary than in storms initiated in a homogeneous environment. Low-level rotation is weaker in storms crossing the boundary and moving into the colder air. In contrast, all storms moving along or into the warm air ahead of the boundary develop significant low-level rotation. Increasing the temperature gradient and shear across the boundary has little impact on the low-level mesocyclone evolution. Storms interacting with a boundary characterized by only horizontal shear produce weaker mesocyclones than those created when a temperature gradient also exists across the boundary.

It will be shown that the mechanisms generating the low-level mesocyclone appear to be different for storms interacting with boundaries than those initiated in a homogeneous environment. Consistent with previous studies, storms initiated in a homogeneous environment derive their low-level rotation from tilting of streamwise horizontal vorticity generated along the storm’s forward flank region. In contrast, for storms interacting with a boundary, a significant fraction of the air composing the low-level mesocyclone originates at low levels from the cool air side of the boundary. These parcels contain significant streamwise vorticity, which is tilted and stretched by the storms updraft. Vertical vorticity along the preexisting boundary may also have contributed to mesocyclogenesis. The forward-flank region appears to play a minor role in generating low-level rotation when a preexisting boundary is present.

* Current affiliation: Department of Meteorology, Lyndon State College, Lyndonville, Vermont.

Corresponding author address: Dr. Nolan T. Atkins, Lyndon State College, Dept. of Meteorology, Lyndonville, VT 05851.

Email: atkinsn@mail.lsc.vsc.edu

Abstract

A three-dimensional nonhydrostatic cloud model is used to study the evolution of supercell thunderstorms, with emphasis on the low-level mesocyclone, interacting with preexisting boundaries. The impacts of low-level environmental shear, storm motion relative to boundary orientation, and boundary strength are assessed. In the low-level shear experiments, significant low-level rotation is consistently observed earlier, tends to be stronger, and is longer lived in storms interacting with a boundary than in storms initiated in a homogeneous environment. Low-level rotation is weaker in storms crossing the boundary and moving into the colder air. In contrast, all storms moving along or into the warm air ahead of the boundary develop significant low-level rotation. Increasing the temperature gradient and shear across the boundary has little impact on the low-level mesocyclone evolution. Storms interacting with a boundary characterized by only horizontal shear produce weaker mesocyclones than those created when a temperature gradient also exists across the boundary.

It will be shown that the mechanisms generating the low-level mesocyclone appear to be different for storms interacting with boundaries than those initiated in a homogeneous environment. Consistent with previous studies, storms initiated in a homogeneous environment derive their low-level rotation from tilting of streamwise horizontal vorticity generated along the storm’s forward flank region. In contrast, for storms interacting with a boundary, a significant fraction of the air composing the low-level mesocyclone originates at low levels from the cool air side of the boundary. These parcels contain significant streamwise vorticity, which is tilted and stretched by the storms updraft. Vertical vorticity along the preexisting boundary may also have contributed to mesocyclogenesis. The forward-flank region appears to play a minor role in generating low-level rotation when a preexisting boundary is present.

* Current affiliation: Department of Meteorology, Lyndon State College, Lyndonville, Vermont.

Corresponding author address: Dr. Nolan T. Atkins, Lyndon State College, Dept. of Meteorology, Lyndonville, VT 05851.

Email: atkinsn@mail.lsc.vsc.edu

Save
Cover Monthly Weather Review
Monthly Weather Review

  • Barnes, S. L., 1978: Oklahoma thunderstorms on 29–30 April 1970. Part I: Morphology of a tornadic storm. Mon. Wea. Rev.,106, 673–684.

  • Bluestein, H. B., A. L. Pazmany, J. C. Galloway, and R. E. McIntosh, 1995: Studies of the substructure of severe convective storms using a mobile 3-mm wavelength Doppler radar. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,76, 2155–2169.

  • Brandes, E. A., 1978: Mesocyclone evolution and tornadogenesis: Some observations. Mon. Wea. Rev.,106, 995–1011.

  • ——, 1981: Finestructure of the Del City–Edmond tornadic mesocirculation. Mon. Wea. Rev.,109, 635–647.

  • ——, 1984: Vertical vorticity generation and mesocyclone sustenance in tornadic thunderstorms: The observational evidence. Mon. Wea. Rev.,112, 2253–2269.

  • Brooks, H. E., C. A. Doswell III, and R. Davies-Jones, 1993: Environmental helicity and the maintenance and evolution of low-level mesocyclones. The Tornado: Its Structure, Dynamics, Prediction and Hazards, Geophys. Monogr., No. 79, Amer. Geophys. Union, 97–105.

  • ——, ——, and R. B. Wilhelmson, 1994a: The role of midtropospheric winds in the evolution and maintenance of low-level mesocyclones. Mon. Wea. Rev.,122, 126–136.

  • ——, ——, and J. Cooper 1994b: On the environments of tornadic and nontornadic mesocyclones. Wea. Forecasting,9, 606–618.

  • Burgess, D. W., and L. R. Lemon, 1990: Severe thunderstorm detection by radar. Radar in Meteorology, D. Atlas, Ed., Amer. Meteor. Soc., 619–647.

  • ——, R. J. Donaldson Jr., and P. R. Desrochers, 1993: Tornado detection and warning by radar. The Tornado: Its Structure, Dynamics, Prediction and Hazards, Geophys. Monogr., No. 79, Amer. Geophys. Union, 203–221.

  • Davies-Jones, R. P., 1984: Streamwise vorticity: The origin of updraft rotation in supercell storms. J. Atmos. Sci.,41, 2991–3006.

  • ——, and H. E. Brooks, 1993: Mesocyclogenesis from a theoretical perspective. The Tornado: Its Structure, Dynamics, Prediction and Hazards, Geophys. Monogr., No. 79, Amer. Geophys. Union, 105–114.

  • Foote, G. B., 1984: Influence of gust fronts on the propagation of storms. Proc. Ninth Int. Cloud Physics Conf., Tallinn-Estonia, USSR, Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 419–422.

  • Gilmore, M. S., and L. J. Wicker, 1998: The influence of midtropospheric dryness on supercell morphology and evolution. Mon. Wea. Rev.,126, 943–958.

  • Heymsfield, G. M., 1978: Kinematic and dynamic aspects of the Harrah tornadic storm analyzed from dual-Doppler radar data. Mon. Wea. Rev.,106, 233–254.

  • Klemp, J. B., 1987: Dynamics of tornadic thunderstorms. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.,19, 369–402.

  • ——, and R. B. Wilhelmson, 1978a: The simulation of three-dimensional convective storm dynamics. J. Atmos. Sci.,35, 1070–1096.

  • ——, and ——, 1978b: Simulations of right- and left-moving storms produced through storm splitting. J. Atmos. Sci.,35, 1097–1110.

  • ——, and R. Rotunno, 1983: A study of the tornadic region within a supercell thunderstorm. J. Atmos. Sci.,40, 359–377.

  • Koch, S. E., and C. A. Ray, 1997: Mesoanalysis of summertime convergence zones in central and eastern North Carolina. Wea. Forecasting,12, 56–77.

  • Kuhn, P. M., G. L. Darkow, and V. E. Suomi, 1958: A mesoscale investigation of pre-tornado thermal environments. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,39, 224–228.

  • Maddox, R. A., L. R. Hoxit, and C. F. Chappell, 1980: A study of tornadic thunderstorm interactions with thermal boundaries. Mon. Wea. Rev.,108, 322–336.

  • Magor, B. W., 1959: Mesoanalysis: Some operational analysis techniques utilized in tornado forecasting. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,40, 499–511.

  • Markowski, P. M, E. N. Rasmussen, and J. M. Straka, 1998: The occurrence of tornadoes in supercells interacting with boundaries during VORTEX-95. Wea. Forecasting,13, 852–859.

  • Miller, R. C., 1967: Notes on analysis and severe-storm forecasting procedures of the Military Weather Warning Center. Tech. Rep. 200, U.S. Air Force Air Weather Service, 170 pp.

  • Purdom, J. F. W., 1993: Satellite observations of tornadic thunderstorms. The Tornado: Its Structure, Dynamics, Prediction and Hazards, Geophys. Monogr., No. 79, Amer. Geophys. Union, 265–274.

  • Rasmussen, E. N., J. M. Straka, R. Davies-Jones, C. A. Doswell III, F. H. Carr, M. D. Eilts, and D. R. MacGorman, 1994: Verification of the Origins of Rotation in Tornadoes Experiment: VORTEX. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.,75, 995–1006.

  • ——, S. Richardson, J. M. Straka, P. M. Markowski, and D. O. Blanchard, 2000: The association of significant tornadoes with a baroclinic boundary on 2 June 1995. Mon. Wea. Rev., in press.

  • Rhea, J. O., 1966: A study of thunderstorm formation along drylines. J. Appl. Meteor.,5, 58–63.

  • Rotunno, R., 1981: On the evolution of thunderstorm rotation. Mon. Wea. Rev.,109, 577–586.

  • ——, and J. B. Klemp, 1982: The influence of the shear-induced pressure gradient on thunderstorm motion. Mon. Wea. Rev.,110, 136–151.

  • ——, and ——, 1985: On the rotation and propagation of simulated supercell thunderstorms. J. Atmos. Sci.,42, 271–292.

  • Schlesinger, R. E., 1975: A three-dimensional numerical model of an isolated deep convective cloud: Preliminary results. J. Atmos. Sci.,32, 934–957.

  • Simpson, J. E., 1987: Gravity Currents: In the Environment and the Laboratory. John Wiley and Sons, 244 pp.

  • Wakimoto, R. M., C-H. Liu, and H-Q. Cai, 1998: The Garden City, Kansas, storm during VORTEX 95. Part I: Overview of the storm’s life cycle and mesocyclogenesis. Mon. Wea. Rev.,126, 372–392.

  • Weaver, J. F., and S. P. Nelson, 1982: Multiscale aspects of thunderstorm gust fronts and their effects on subsequent storm development. Mon. Wea. Rev.,110, 707–718.

  • ——, and J. F. W. Purdom, 1995: An interesting mesoscale storm–environment interaction observed just prior to changes in severe storm behavior. Wea. Forecasting,10, 449–453.

  • ——, ——, and E. J. Szoke, 1994: Some mesoscale aspects of the 6 June 1990 Limon, Colorado, tornado case. Wea. Forecasting,9, 45–61.

  • Wicker, L. J., 1996: The role of near surface wind shear on low-level mesocyclone generation and tornadoes. Preprints, 18th Conf. on Severe Local Storms, San Francisco, CA, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 115–119.

  • ——, and R. B. Wilhelmson, 1995: Simulation and analysis of tornado development and decay within a three-dimensional supercell thunderstorm. J. Atmos. Sci.,52, 2675–2703.

  • Wilson, J. W., and W. E. Schreiber, 1986: Initiation of convective storms by radar-observed boundary layer convergence lines. Mon. Wea. Rev.,114, 2516–2536.

  • Wurman, J., J. Straka, and E. Rasmussen, 1996: Fine-scale Doppler radar observations of tornadoes. Science,272, 1774–1777.

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 430 201 48
PDF Downloads 229 80 5