Maintenance of a Mesoscale Convective System over Lake Michigan Nicholas D. Metz and Lance F. Bosart Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences University at Albany/SUNY, Albany, NY Support provided by the NSF ATM th Northeast Regional Operational Workshop Albany, New York 6 November 2008
Motivation MCS maintained its identity crossing Lake Michigan while intense supercell dissipated (will focus on MCS) associated with supercell associated with MCS/MCS boundary MCS and associated convection not well forecast by large-scale models
Purpose Describe synoptic/mesoscale flow evolution leading to convection that was not well forecast by the large-scale models Explain why a severe weather-producing MCS was maintained while crossing Lake Michigan Discuss cold-pool-induced boundaries that focused additional severe weather in the wake of the MCS
Datasets 20-km 20-km RUC analyses (50 vertical levels) NCDC NEXRAD level 3 radar base reflectivity NPVU 24-h QPE images RAP infrared and water vapor satellite images University at Albany surface data archives University at Albany sounding archives
Radar Evolution
1145 UTC 1102 UTC 7 June 08 MCS forms near northeastern extent of surface boundary warm advection to east of MCS previous MCS convection 15–20 cm 24-hr QPE ending 1200 UTC 7 June 08
MCS 1404 UTC 7 June UTC boundary extending eastward associated with cold pool (will focus here) L
1701 UTC 7 June UTC L boundary associated with cold pool from previous MCS
2004 UTC 7 June UTC L
supercell MCS development along cold-pool-induced boundary 2105 UTC 7 June UTC L
2200 UTC 7 June UTC L
2304 UTC 7 June UTC L supercell MCS convection along cold-pool-induced boundary
0001 UTC 8 June UTC
0104 UTC 8 June UTC MCS
0302 UTC 8 June UTC
0600 UTC 8 June UTC 8–12 cm 24-hr QPE ending 1200 UTC 8 June 08
Upper-level Overview
1500 UTC 7 June hPa Heights (dam), 200-hPa Wind (m s -1 ), 850-hPa Wind (barbs; m s -1 ) LLJ & warm advection 1515 UTC shortwave
1800 UTC 7 June hPa Heights (dam), 200-hPa Wind (m s -1 ), 850-hPa Wind (barbs; m s -1 ) shortwave 1815 UTC
2100 UTC 7 June hPa Heights (dam), 200-hPa Wind (m s -1 ), 850-hPa Wind (barbs; m s -1 ) 2115 UTC
0000 UTC 8 June hPa Heights (dam), 200-hPa Wind (m s -1 ), 850-hPa Wind (barbs; m s -1 ) 0015 UTC
Mesoscale Evolution and Convective Development
1600 UTC 7 June 08 CAPE (J kg -1 ), 0–1 km Shear (m s -1 ), 0–6 km Shear (barbs; m s -1 ) MCS previous convection
1600 UTC 7 June cold-pool- induced boundary SLP (hPa), Surface Temperature ( C), and Surface Mixing Ratio (> 18 g kg -1 ) MCS previous convection cold-pool- induced boundary
1600 UTC 7 June Dry Air ~900 J kg -1 SLP (hPa), Surface Temperature ( C), and Surface Mixing Ratio (> 18 g kg -1 )
1800 UTC 7 June 08 CAPE (J kg -1 ), 0–1 km Shear (m s -1 ), 0–6 km Shear (barbs; m s -1 )
1800 UTC 7 June 08 ~3300 J kg -1 DVN-1800 UTC CAPE (J kg -1 ), 0–1 km Shear (m s -1 ), 0–6 km Shear (barbs; m s -1 )
1800 UTC 7 June 08 Frontogenesis Surface Frontogenesis (ºC 100 km -1 3h -1 ), Surface Winds (barbs; m s -1 )
2000 UTC 7 June 08 MCS CAPE (J kg -1 ), 0–1 km Shear (m s -1 ), 0–6 km Shear (barbs; m s -1 )
2000 UTC 7 June SLP (hPa), Surface Temperature ( C), and Surface Mixing Ratio (> 18 g kg -1 ) cold-pool- induced boundary warm advection cold-pool- induced boundary
2000 UTC 7 June supercells 2004 UTC cold-pool- induced boundary SLP (hPa), Surface Temperature ( C), and Surface Mixing Ratio (> 18 g kg -1 )
2200 UTC 7 June 08 convection along cold- pool-induced boundary CAPE (J kg -1 ), 0–1 km Shear (m s -1 ), 0–6 km Shear (barbs; m s -1 )
3-h e differences at 2300 UTC 7 June hPa ∆ e (K), 0–3-km Shear (m s -1 )∆ e (K), (K), Wind (m s -1 ) cold pool A A’ A A A 2000 UTC 2300 UTC
950-hPa ∆ e (K), 0–3 km Shear (m s -1 ) MSN T, T d, p ºC hPa 3-h e differences at 2300 UTC 7 June 08
950-hPa ∆ e (K), 0–3 km Shear (m s -1 ) 3-h e differences at 2300 UTC 7 June 08 ºC hPa T, p Buoy 45007
0000 UTC 8 June 08 CAPE (J kg -1 ), 0–1 km Shear (m s -1 ), 0–6 km Shear (barbs; m s -1 )
0000 UTC 8 June cold-pool- induced boundary MCS convection along cold- pool-induced boundary SLP (hPa), Surface Temperature ( C), and Surface Mixing Ratio (> 18 g kg -1 )
UTC 8 June cold-pool- induced boundary MCS convection along cold- pool-induced boundary Surface Frontogenesis (ºC 100 km -1 3h -1 )
0000 UTC 8 June 08 PV (PVU), Pressure (hPa), Wind (barbs; m s -1 ) on 305 K isentrope isentropic ascent B’ B
0000 UTC 8 June 08 PV (PVU), Pressure (hPa), Wind (barbs; m s -1 ) on 305 K isentrope isentropic ascent B’ B ILX DVN ILX DVN LFC=891 hPa LFC=885 hPa
0000 UTC 8 June 08 Convergence ( s -1 ), (K), ( s -1 ), Wind (barbs; m s -1 ) cold-pool- induced boundary B B’
Evolution and Dissipation of Supercell 2200 UTC2300 UTC 0000 UTC 0100 UTC 2330 UTC incipient supercell
0300 UTC 8 June 08 CAPE (J kg -1 ), 0–1 km Shear (m s -1 ), 0–6 km Shear (barbs; m s -1 )
Concluding Hypothesis WE z x Strong Shear 3 km time = ttime = t + ∆T Cold Pool Circ. Shear Circ. – + + W Strong Shear 3 km Cold Pool Circ. Shear Circ. – + MCS developed in high shear environment and created strong cold pool in association with dry air aloft Vigorous ascent was maintained over lake as MCS cold pool depth >> lake cold pool depth and ascent was aided by: –ageostrophic circulation associated with frontogenesis –strong low-level jet stream advecting warm/unstable air –weak short-wave trough E
Conclusions MCS cold pool created quasi-stationary boundary that: –increased low-level shear (better supercell environment) –acted as a warm front (focus for isentropic ascent) Illinois supercell dissipated over Lake Michigan where water temperature was near 8ºC Cold-Pool- Induced Boundary Supercells SSW Flow and Isentropic Ascent Supercell Track MCS Track Cold Lake Boundary from previous MCS convection