2. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon1 Outline PV basics Seeing the world through PV Waves and vortices Nonconservation Forecasting applications –Short-range forecasting –Tracking disturbances over the Rockies –Understanding the range of possibilities

3. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon2 Mathematical Definitions of PV Rossby: Vorticity divided by theta surface spacing : Relative vorticity in isentropic coordinates Minus sign: makes PV positive since pressure decreases upward

4. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon3 Mathematical Definitions of PV Rossby: Ertel: Vorticity times static stability

5. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon4 Units of Potential Vorticity 1 PVU equals…you don’t want to know Midlatitude Troposphere: -0.2 to 3.0 PVU –Typical value: 0.6 PVU Midlatitude Stratosphere: 1.5 to 10.0 PVU –Typical value: 5.0 PVU

6. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon5 PV Cross Section Pole to Pole at 80W

7. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon6 PV and Westerlies (m/s)

8. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon7 PV and Absolute Vorticity (*10 -5 s -1 )

9. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon8 PV and Potential Temperature (K) 280 310 330 350 380

10. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon9 What do PV gradients imply? Steep PV gradients –Jet streams High PV to left of jet –Vorticity gradients Same sign as PV gradients –Stratification gradients High stratification where PV is large –Vertical tropopause Flat PV gradients –Boring –No wind or vorticity variations –Stratification high where PV is large –Flat tropopause

11. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon10 PV Contours: 0, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8

12. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon11

13. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon12

14. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon13 PV Contours: 0, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8

15. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon14

16. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon15

17. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon16 Strong PV gradients matter; PV maxes and mins are inconsequential Jet stream follows PV gradients Waves in the PV field correspond to waves in the jet stream PV extrema bounded by strong gradients could mean short waves or cutoffs High PV = trough; Low PV = ridge

18. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon17 Forget PV! The Traditional Geopotential Height Maps Work Fine! Advantages of Height Identification and assessment of features Inference of wind and vorticity Inference of vertical motion? Disadvantages of Height Gravity waves and topography Inference of evolution and intensification Role of diabatic processes is obscure Need 300 & 500 mb

19. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon18 What’s PV Got that Traditional Maps Haven’t Got? Advantages of PV PV is conserved PV unaffected by gravity waves and topography PV at one level gives you heights at many levels Easy to diagnose Dynamics Disadvantages of PV Unfamiliar Not as easily available Not easy to eyeball significant features Qualitative inference of wind and vorticity Hard to diagnose vertical motion?

20. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon19 DYNAMICS? A given PV distribution implies a given wind and height distribution If the PV changes, the winds and heights change If you know how the PV is changing, you can infer everything else And PV changes only by advection!

21. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon20 The PV Conundrum Maps of mean PV between pressure surfaces –Encapsulates the PV distribution –Cannot diagnose evolution or dynamics

22. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon21 The PV Conundrum IPV (Isentropic Potential Vorticity) maps –Many isentropic surfaces have dynamically significant PV gradients –Hard to know which isentropic surfaces to look at

23. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon22 The PV Solution: Tropopause Maps Pick a PV contour that lies within the (critical) tropopause PV gradient Overlay this particular contour from all the different isentropic layers (or interpolate to that PV value) Result: one map showing the location of the important PV gradients at all levels Contours advected by horizontal wind

24. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon23 The 1.5 PVU contour on the 320 K isentropic surface is…

25. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon24 …identical to the 320 K contour on the 1.5 PVU (tropopause) surface!

26. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon25 Color Fill Version of Tropopause Map

27. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon26 Tropopause Map with Jet Streams

28. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon27 Tropopause Map, hour 00

29. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon28 Tropopause Map, hour 06

30. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon29 Tropopause Map, hour 12

31. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon30 Tropopause Map, hour 18

32. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon31 Tropopause Map, hour 24

33. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon32 Tropopause Map, hour 30

34. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon33 Tropopause Map, hour 36

35. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon34 Tropopause Map, hour 42

36. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon35 Tropopause Map, hour 48

37. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon36 Tropopause Map, hour 48, with jets

38. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon37 Midway Point Play with some PV Watch a movie

39. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon38

40. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon39

41. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon40

42. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon41

43. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon42 PV Dynamics: The Short Course High PV / Stratosphere / Low Theta on Tropopause Low PV / Troposphere / High Theta on Tropopause

44. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon43 Superposition PV field –Basic state –Anomalies Associated wind field –Basic state wind –Winds associated with each anomaly Add ‘em all up to get the total wind/PV

45. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon44 PV Anomaly: A Wave on the Tropopause +

46. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon45 PV Anomaly: Anomalous Winds + Think of each PV anomaly as a cyclonic or anticyclonic vortex

47. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon46 PV Wind Rules (for Northern Hemisphere) Positive anomalies have cyclonic winds Negative anomalies have anticyclonic winds Winds strongest near anomaly Winds decrease with horizontal distance Winds decrease with vertical distance

48. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon47 PV Anomaly: What will the total wind field be? + + Short Wave Planetary Wave

49. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon48 Wave Propagation Individual waves propagate upstream Short waves move slower than jet Long waves actually retrogress ++

50. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon49 The Making of a Rossby Wave Packet ++ Trough amplifies downstream ridge Ridge amplifies downstream trough, weakens upstream trough Wave packet propagates downstream - + - +

51. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon50 Intensification: Two Ways Increase the size of the PV anomaly –“Amplification” Increase the amount of PV (or number of PV anomalies) within a small area –“Superposition”

52. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon51 Tropopause, Feb. 10, 2001, 00Z Superposition? Amplification

53. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon52 Tropopause, Feb. 10, 2001, 06Z

54. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon53 Tropopause, Feb. 10, 2001, 12Z

55. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon54 Tropopause, Feb. 10, 2001, 18Z

56. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon55 Tropopause, Feb. 11, 2001, 00Z

57. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon56 500 mb, Feb. 10, 2001, 00Z

58. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon57 500 mb, Feb. 10, 2001, 06Z

59. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon58 500 mb, Feb. 10, 2001, 12Z

60. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon59 500 mb, Feb. 10, 2001, 18Z

61. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon60 500 mb, Feb. 11, 2001, 00Z

62. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon61 Low-Level Potential Temperature Acts like upper-level PV –Locally high potential temperature = cyclonic circulation –Locally low potential temperature = anticyclonic circulation But gradient is backwards –Winds from north intensify upper-level PV –Winds from south intensify low-level warm anomaly

63. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon62 MSLP (mb), 950 mb theta-e (K), 700- 950 mb PV, 300 K 1.5 PV contour

64. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon63 Surface, Feb. 10, 2001, 06Z

65. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon64 Surface, Feb. 10, 2001, 12Z

66. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon65 Surface, Feb. 10, 2001, 18Z

67. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon66 Surface, Feb. 11, 2001, 00Z

68. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon67 Cyclogenesis Mutual Amplification –Southerlies assoc. w/ upper-level trough intensify surface frontal wave –Northerlies assoc. w/ surface frontal wave intensify upper-level trough Superposition –Trough and frontal wave approach and occlude

69. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon68 Diabatic Processes Latent heating max in mid-troposphere –PV increases below LH max –PV decreases above LH max It’s as if PV is brought from aloft to low levels by latent heating –Strengthens the surface low and the upper-level downstream ridge

70. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon69 Diabatic Processes: Diagnosis Low-level PV increases Upper-level PV decreases Tropopause potential temperature increases

71. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon70 Diabatic Processes: Prediction Plot low-level equivalent potential temperature instead of potential temperature Compare theta-e to the potential temperature of the tropopause If theta-e is higher: –Deep tropospheric instability –Moist convection likely, rapid cyclogenesis

72. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon71 Forecasting Applications (1): Evolution Can directly diagnose evolution –Motion of upper-level systems –Intensification and weakening –Formation of new troughs and ridges downstream

73. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon72 Forecasting Applications (2): Model Correction Can correct forecast for poor analyses or short-range deviation –Where’s the real trough? –How will it affect the things around it? –How will its surroundings affect its evolution?

74. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon73 Forecasting Applications (3): The Rockies Can track systems over topography –Vorticity is altered by stretching and shrinking as parcels go over mountains –Potential vorticity is conserved on isentropic surfaces –PV shows you what the trough will look like once it leaves the mountains –Better forecasts, better comparison with observations

75. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon74 Forecasting Applications (4): Uncertainty Can understand the range of possibilities –Could this trough intensify? –Could a downstream wave be triggered? –How many “objects” must be simulated correctly for the forecast to be accurate?

76. COMET Feb. 20, 2002 IPV and the Dynamic Tropopause John W. Nielsen-Gammon75 Summary Definition of PV IPV maps and tropopause maps Diagnosis of evolution using PV Dynamics using PV Forecasting applications of PV