A strong mountain wave, observed over Central Europe on 12 January 2016, is simulated in 2D under two fixed background wind conditions representing opposite tidal phases. The aim of the simulation is to investigate the breaking of the mountain wave and subsequent generation of nonprimary waves in the upper atmosphere. The model results show that the mountain wave first breaks as it approaches a mesospheric critical level creating turbulence on horizontal scales of 8–30 km. These turbulence scales couple directly to horizontal secondary waves scales, but those scales are prevented from reaching the thermosphere by the tidal winds, which act like a filter. Initial secondary waves that can reach the thermosphere range from 60 to 120 km in horizontal scale and are influenced by the scales of the horizontal and vertical forcing associated with wave breaking at mountain wave zonal phase width, and horizontal wavelength scales. Large‐scale nonprimary waves dominate over the whole duration of the simulation with horizontal scales of 107–300 km and periods of 11–22 minutes. The thermosphere winds heavily influence the time‐averaged spatial distribution of wave forcing in the thermosphere, which peaks at 150 km altitude and occurs both westward and eastward of the source in the 2 UT background simulation and primarily eastward of the source in the 7 UT background simulation. The forcing amplitude is
In this paper, we simulate an observed mountain wave event over central Europe and investigate the subsequent generation, propagation, phase speeds and spatial scales, and momentum deposition of secondary waves under three different tidal wind conditions. We find the mountain wave breaks just below the lowest critical level in the mesosphere. As the mountain wave breaks, it extends outwards along the phases and fluid associated with the breaking flows downstream of its original location by 500–1,000 km. The breaking generates a broad range of secondary waves with horizontal scales ranging from the mountain wave instability scales (20–300 km), to multiples of the mountain wave packet scale (420 km+) and phase speeds from 40 to 150 m/s in the lower thermosphere. The secondary wave morphology consists of semi‐concentric patterns with wave propagation generally opposing the local tidal winds in the mesosphere. Shears in the tidal winds cause breaking of the secondary waves and local wave forcing which generates even more secondary waves. The tidal winds also influence the dominant wavelengths and phase speeds of secondary waves that reach the thermosphere. The secondary waves that reach the thermosphere deposit their energy and momentum over a broad area of the thermosphere, mostly eastward of the source and concentrated between 110 and 130 km altitude. The secondary wave forcing is significant and will likely be very important for the dynamics of the thermosphere. A large portion of this forcing comes from nonlinearly generated secondary waves at relatively small‐scales which arise from the wave breaking processes.
more » « less- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10370302
- Publisher / Repository:
- DOI PREFIX: 10.1029
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
- Volume:
- 127
- Issue:
- 5
- ISSN:
- 2169-897X
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
Abstract 2 that of the primary mountain wave breaking and dissipation. This suggests that nonprimary waves play a significant role in gravity waves dynamics and improved understanding of the thermospheric winds is crucial to understanding their forcing distribution. -
null (Ed.)Abstract This paper addresses the compressible nonlinear dynamics accompanying increasing mountain wave (MW) forcing over the southern Andes and propagation into the mesosphere and lower thermosphere (MLT) under winter conditions. A stretched grid provides very high resolution of the MW dynamics in a large computational domain. A slow increase of cross-mountain winds enables MWs to initially break in the mesosphere and extend to lower and higher altitudes thereafter. MW structure and breaking is strongly modulated by static mean and semidiurnal tide fields exhibiting a critical level at ~114 km for zonal MW propagation. Varying vertical group velocities for different zonal wavelengths λ x yield initial breaking in the lee of the major Andes peaks for λ x ~ 50 km, and extending significantly upstream for larger λ x approaching the critical level at later times. The localized extent of the Andes terrain in latitude leads to “ship wave” responses above the individual peaks at earlier times, and a much larger ship-wave response at 100 km and above as the larger-scale MWs achieve large amplitudes. Other responses above regions of MW breaking include large-scale secondary gravity waves and acoustic waves that achieve very large amplitudes extending well into the thermosphere. MW breaking also causes momentum deposition that yields local decelerations initially, which merge and extend horizontally thereafter and persist throughout the event. Companion papers examine the associated momentum fluxes, mean-flow evolution, gravity wave–tidal interactions, and the MW instability dynamics and sources of secondary gravity waves and acoustic waves.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Abstract A companion paper by Lund et al. (2020) employed a compressible model to describe the evolution of mountain waves arising due to increasing flow with time over the Southern Andes, their breaking, secondary gravity waves and acoustic waves arising from these dynamics, and their local responses. This paper describes the mountain wave, secondary gravity wave, and acoustic wave vertical fluxes of horizontal momentum, and the local and large-scale three-dimensional responses to gravity breaking and wave/mean-flow interactions accompanying this event. Mountain wave and secondary gravity wave momentum fluxes and deposition vary strongly in space and time due to variable large-scale winds and spatially-localized mountain wave and secondary gravity wave responses. Mountain wave instabilities accompanying breaking induce strong, local, largely-zonal forcing. Secondary gravity waves arising from mountain wave breaking also interact strongly with large-scale winds at altitudes above ~80km. Together, these mountain wave and secondary gravity wave interactions reveal systematic gravity-wave/mean-flow interactions having implications for both mean and tidal forcing and feedbacks. Acoustic waves likewise achieve large momentum fluxes, but typically imply significant responses only at much higher altitudes.more » « less
-
Abstract Dong et al. (2020,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD030691 ) employed a new compressible model to examine gravity wave (GW) self‐acceleration dynamics, instabilities, secondary gravity wave (SGW) generation, and mean forcing for GW packets localized in two dimensions (2D). This paper extends the exploration of self‐acceleration dynamics to a GW packet localized in three dimensions (3D) propagating into tidal winds in the mesosphere and thermosphere. As in the 2D packet responses, 3D GW self‐acceleration dynamics are found to be significant and include 3D GW phase distortions, stalled GW vertical propagation, local instabilities, and SGW and acoustic wave generation. Additional 3D responses described here include refraction by tidal winds, localized 3D instabilities, asymmetric SGW propagation, reduced SGW and acoustic wave responses at higher altitudes relative to 2D responses, and forcing of transient, large‐scale, 3D mean responses that may have implications for chemical and microphysical processes operating on longer time scales. -
Primary Versus Secondary Gravity Wave Responses at F‐Region Heights Generated by a Convective Source
Abstract A 2D nonlinear, compressible model is used to simulate the acoustic‐gravity wave (AGW, i.e., encompassing the spectrum of acoustic and gravity waves) response to a thunderstorm squall‐line type source. We investigate the primary and secondary neutral AGW response in the thermosphere, consistent with waves that can couple to the F‐region ionospheric plasma, and manifest as Traveling Ionospheric Disturbances (TIDs). We find that primary waves at
z = 240 km altitude have wavelengths and phase speeds in the range 170–270 km, and 180–320 m/s, respectively. The secondary waves generated have wavelengths ranging from ∼100 to 600 km, and phase speeds from 300 to 630 m/s. While there is overlap in the wave spectra, we find that the secondary waves (i.e., those that have been nonlinearly transformed or generated secondarily/subsequently from the primary wave) generally have faster phases than the primary waves. We also assess the notion that waves with fast phase speeds (that exceed proposed theoretical upper limits on passing from the mesosphere to thermosphere) observed at F‐region heights must be secondary waves, for example, those generated in situ by wave breaking in the lower thermosphere, rather than directly propagating primary waves from their sources. We find that primary waves with phase speeds greater than this proposed upper limit can tunnel through a deep portion of the lower/middle atmosphere and emerge as propagating waves in the thermosphere. Therefore, comparing a TID's/GWs phase speed with this upper limit is not a robust method of identifying whether an observed TID originates from a primary versus secondary AGW.