Empirical thoughts about tornadogenesis

I just don't see how you'd get air to spin horizontally.

Mike,

If I understand what you mean by spinning horizontally, then you are talking about rotating air columns that are horizontal? You have seen these many times really, for instance when you look at cloud streets. These are caused by organized horizontal roll vortices. Of course, you don't always get organized horizontal roll vortices, but only when the vertical stability and vertical change in wind speed with height are in certain regimes (and the moisture is appropriate to put clouds on the top of the rolls only).

Still, if you have wind speed changing with height, this vertical speed shear, if somehow tilted (by say an updraft or downdraft) will put some component of that 'spin' into the vertical. Another way to think of this is the momentum of air at different heights. For a typical scenario, the westerly winds increase with increasing height. Let's assume for simplicity the air at the ground is stationary. Then, if you displaced this air from near the ground to some height above, the displaced air is stationary, and the mid-level air will have to flow around it, (so looking to the east) with cyclonic spin on the right side and anti-cyclonic spin on the left side. This idea gets more complicated with a veering wind profile with height, but the net effect is still that an updraft in an environment with vertical shear will have a tendency to rotate. This is rotation on a relatively large scale - the entire updraft, so the tornado cyclone is a much smaller circulation embedded within the larger mesocyclone circulation.

Generally, the mesocyclone circulations, since they are larger, tend to have longer life spans (the bigger the circulation, the more stable it is). There has been some research on what controls the life span of mesocyclones, but not much. The embedded tornado cyclones are typically much shorter lived and transient. When you see the clear slot isolating a small component of the updraft - where you typically find the wall cloud and sometimes obvious cloud base rotation, you are seeing a component of the tornado cyclone. As noted above, these may sometimes have a shroud of dust in them, as the dust becomes sort of trapped in the swirl of air in the tornado cyclone. Researchers are generally stuck on several components. What initiated the RFD surge (visually the development of the clear slot)? What controls the size of the tornado cyclone and the amount of circulation in it? What storm processes favor the tornado cyclone circulation being maintained for longer windows of time? Once the tornado cyclone is in place, what controls whether this circulation will tighten up into a tornado or not. When is the tornado a sub-vortex within the tornado cyclone vs. at the center of it? How are all of the above controlled by aspects of the larger scale environment?

There are some researchers that believe tornadoes must serve some distinct purpose (like Chuck), and finding this will yield some insight into when a tornado is 'necessary'. I'm not sure I buy into that camp yet, as it still seems more like an accident to me, though I do think we are making steady progress on recognizing when one of these 'accidents' is likely to occur. It might not be possible to ever accurately predict most tornadoes, though the odds of reasonably predicting the stronger ones is probably more achievable, since these are much more common with mesocyclones, and there is a larger body of active researchers looking at mesocyclone tornadoes.

That mentioned, I would note that there is no barrier to mesocyclones producing tornadoes from the same mechanism that an ordinary updraft would (confusingly now called a landspout tornado). In fact, they are probably better at it since the updraft rotation enhances the strength of the updraft leading to more effective stretching and concentration of the 'spin' along the boundary. While it is generally believed that a supercell is capable of creating a tornado without the aid of external sources of rotation (such as a boundary), there is no knowledge of how often mesocyclone tornadoes are 'supplemented' by other rotation sources that made the difference in whether that storm produced a tornado or not.
 
I don't know of a single study that states tornadogenesis is a result of vertical tilting of a horizontal tube of vorticity. This theory is often offered to explain how the parent mesocyclone is formed. I can easily put up a portion of a lab I put together this fall for the introductory class I'm teaching demonstrating how this works. If you want, I can also put the presentation up that has the mathematics included.

While the formation of the low-level rotation is still being studied, recent studies seem to be leading toward baroclinic vorticity generation as the main culprit. Granted this is for tornadoes developing with a parent mesocyclone.

For those challenging the tilting of horizontal vorticity as the driving force of mesocyclone generation, what do you propose is the mechanism for developing a mesocyclone?
 
I don't know of a single study that states tornadogenesis is a result of vertical tilting of a horizontal tube of vorticity.


You might want to take a look at Walko (1993). I'm not supporting or denying it by adding it here, but worth noting that he suggested you could depress horizontal vortex lines to the surface via a downdraft (so it's still tilting - but tilting via a downdraft, not an updraft).

While I would agree with you that tilting of horizontal vorticity has it's limits on the tornado scale circulation in getting a vortex all the way to the ground - it is not as clear how close to the ground you can (or need to) get from tilting alone. At some height near the ground - you need vertical circulation and convergence beneath an updraft.
 
Cloud streets, I figured that would be brought up. I think of more rising and sinking in/between those than I do spinning. Roll clouds sometimes associated with gust fronts, maybe some spin, but never anything strong enough to further strengthen into a tornado of any worth. And that's besides the fact those are already formed and associated with strong cold pool generation anyway.

I could see the storm itself creating this horizontal spin along its FFD front, I guess.

As for nothing saying tornadoes form from that tilted into the vertical? Hmmm, seems I've seen it in books and on tv programs plenty of times. It was even on the Discovery Channel show, along with Wurman stating it. Maybe my wrong eye and ear were open, lol...sadly it's possible. Everytime I've seen that, they seemed to be saying it lead to tornado formation, more than they were trying to convey it lead to a supercell.....but I'm sure you know what you are talking about over them/producers(not being sarcastic). It's just everytime I've seen that horizontal animation in a book or on tv it seemed like they were always trying to explain tornadogenisis.

Glad I'm not a scientist and can let subjects go once they become annoying.
 
Roll clouds sometimes associated with gust fronts, maybe some spin, but never anything strong enough to further strengthen into a tornado of any worth.

Agreed. I don't mean to suggest these could become tornadoes, though I have seen video of some impressive horizontal vortices feeding into tornadoes, such as the early stages of the Manchester tornado. I don't think this was in any way associated with a cloud street, but couldn't prove it wasn't either.

I could see the storm itself creating this horizontal spin along its FFD front, I guess.

The idea of circulation being developed along the forward flank downdraft gust front has lost some popularity in recent years.

As for nothing saying tornadoes form from that tilted into the vertical?

Agree, I've seen this shown numerous times to try and simplify the idea of how tornadoes form, but really this is more about how supercells (mesocyclones) form. I guess this is an improvement still over tornadoes forming from the clashing air masses of cool Canadian air meeting warm, moist air from the Gulf of Mexico. Still see that sometimes too though.
 
Cloud streets, I figured that would be brought up. I think of more rising and sinking in/between those than I do spinning. Roll clouds sometimes associated with gust fronts, maybe some spin, but never anything strong enough to further strengthen into a tornado of any worth. And that's besides the fact those are already formed and associated with strong cold pool generation anyway.

I could see the storm itself creating this horizontal spin along its FFD front, I guess.

As for nothing saying tornadoes form from that tilted into the vertical? Hmmm, seems I've seen it in books and on tv programs plenty of times. It was even on the Discovery Channel show, along with Wurman stating it. Maybe my wrong eye and ear were open, lol...sadly it's possible. Everytime I've seen that, they seemed to be saying it lead to tornado formation, more than they were trying to convey it lead to a supercell.....but I'm sure you know what you are talking about over them/producers(not being sarcastic). It's just everytime I've seen that horizontal animation in a book or on tv it seemed like they were always trying to explain tornadogenisis.

Glad I'm not a scientist and can let subjects go once they become annoying.


This is a fascinating, meat-and-potatoes discussion of tornadogenesis, and I thought I'd like to participate since it has been the focus of so much research/speculation.

I am not certain about the horizontal vorticity (streamwise) ingestion into the updraft as a be all/end all answer to tornadogenesis, in spite of the widespread acceptance of it as a likely candidate.

There are two processes I am more inclined to subscribe to with regard to tornado formation. The first process is referred to as the Dynamic Pipe Effect, or DPE, in which the ambient vertical vorticity associated with the parent mesocyclone builds toward the ground as it creates its own low-level convergence. Air cannot enter the "pipe" laterally, but instead enters the lower end creating a new level of cyclostrophic balance.

The second theory is that described by Lemon & Doswell in which the mesocyclone takes on a divided structure, with the tornado forming in the interface where the maximum vertical velocity gradient exists. Angular momentum is then transported to the ground via precipitation loading and evaporative cooling (RFD).

These two possibilities just seem to be the most logical to me. Does anyone care to discuss?

John
 
I am not certain about the horizontal vorticity (streamwise) ingestion into the updraft as a be all/end all answer to tornadogenesis, in spite of the widespread acceptance of it as a likely candidate.

I think one point that is getting confused is related to that comment. Those of us talking about the horzonal vorticity getting tilted are not saying that is how tornadogenesis (actual tornado formation) occurs. Rather what we are saying is that this provides the rotation in the updraft of a supercell.
 
... At this point the interference cells get absorbed by your supercell and this kills the possibility to drop down the tube. ...
Back to Andrea's post, I'm actually inclined to think the opposite. I know of several occasions where cell mergers actually intensified the dominant cell and resulted in a tornado...and not necessarily a short-lived one at that. Granted, this is not a hardened rule as several promising supercells have been cut short due to a collision with a left split or simply by persistent seeding from an upstream cell, but an '07 study from TTU shows a strong relationship between tornadoes and cell mergers. If interested, here's the link: http://etd.lib.ttu.edu/theses/available/etd-07092007-023008/unrestricted/Rogers_Jaret_Thesis.pdf

You have seen these many times really, for instance when you look at cloud streets. These are caused by organized horizontal roll vortices.

Glen, I hate to nitpick, but maybe you meant billow clouds? Cloud streets are just alternating rows of ascent and descent with little/no horizontal spin. On the other hand, billow clouds, K-H waves and rotor clouds all exhibit some degree of horizontal spin.

From the posts it seems pretty clear most people agree horizontal vorticity generation, at least from the FFD, is not critical in tornadogenesis. However, I'd still say it plays some factor considering it supports the parent rotation, which most times will have an influence on a potential tornado. On the other hand, the RFD (along with its temperature and moisture deficits) has been shown to be more critical in tornado production and its vortex lines are one key element. Markowski has certainly played a role in this understanding and he has a great, albeit idealized, image explaining the theory here:
http://met.psu.edu/~marko/arches5.jpg

I agree with a previous post that there is no one means for tornadogenesis, but the above theory caters to most of the organized tornadic events storm chasers are interested in.
 
You might want to take a look at Walko (1993). I'm not supporting or denying it by adding it here, but worth noting that he suggested you could depress horizontal vortex lines to the surface via a downdraft (so it's still tilting - but tilting via a downdraft, not an updraft).

While I would agree with you that tilting of horizontal vorticity has it's limits on the tornado scale circulation in getting a vortex all the way to the ground - it is not as clear how close to the ground you can (or need to) get from tilting alone. At some height near the ground - you need vertical circulation and convergence beneath an updraft.

Glen, thanks for the reference as I was not aware of its existence.

I guess I should have watched my words more carefully. I was already late to class and didn't re-read what I had written to ensure it conveyed what I meant to say.

I simply meant that the tilting theory is not as widely accepted for tornadogenesis as other current theories.


As for nothing saying tornadoes form from that tilted into the vertical? Hmmm, seems I've seen it in books and on tv programs plenty of times. It was even on the Discovery Channel show, along with Wurman stating it. Maybe my wrong eye and ear were open, lol...sadly it's possible. Everytime I've seen that, they seemed to be saying it lead to tornado formation, more than they were trying to convey it lead to a supercell.....but I'm sure you know what you are talking about over them/producers(not being sarcastic). It's just everytime I've seen that horizontal animation in a book or on tv it seemed like they were always trying to explain tornadogenisis.

As was stated above, I've also seen where books and people claim to be explaining tornadogenesis when in reality they are explaining mesocyclogenesis. When first learning all about this, I believed that tornadogenesis resulted from these very mechanisms, only to learn that it is the mesocyclone that is formed this way. It's when people try to over simplify things that confusion creeps in. Again, by no means is this to be an attack on what other people think.

Explaining tornadogenesis is a very hard thing. If it were easy, there would be a lot of scientists right now looking for new jobs / sources of funding.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Glen, I hate to nitpick, but maybe you meant billow clouds? Cloud streets are just alternating rows of ascent and descent with little/no horizontal spin. On the other hand, billow clouds, K-H waves and rotor clouds all exhibit some degree of horizontal spin.

Not to nitpick a nitpick, but I'm not sure that's entirely correct. If there are alternating regions of ascent and descent in close proximity, then there is likely a vortex sheet between those two areas. In the case of cloud streets, there are horizontal vortices involved (at least if we speak of cloud streets as a result of boundary layer rolls)... The cloud streets tend to develop along the ascent area between two boundary layer rolls. In this case, the cloud streets themselves are not necessarily rotating, but they are the result of horizontal boundary layer vortices (i.e. "[cloud streets] are caused by organized horizontal roll vortices", as Glen stated) ;)

bound4.jpg

From: http://earth.esa.int/applications/ERS-SARtropical/atmospheric/boundlay/intro/, which is a pretty good explanation of boundary layer rolls, actually. That site also has some good images and explanations of other atmospheric phenomena, such as gravity waves and katabatic flow (start HERE).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm sure most of you have seen this video, but it bears mention with all this talk of horizontal vorticity. It isn't exactly helpful when trying to solve the mystery of how/if pre-tornadogenesis horizontal vorticity is translated into vertical vorticity, but is fascinating none the less. The footage is of the Moore, OK tornado and shows a horizontal vortex around the 4:40 mark:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CGam7GohfQ
http://www.stormtrack.org/forum/showthread.php?t=12189


I think that's an aweosme theory. It kinda agrees with the idea Chuck Doswell threw at some of us during the rememberance for Eric, that the tornado has a distinct purpose, serving a distinct atmospheric need. Until that night, I'd always considered tornadoes more of a random accident.

That is a great insight, Shane. In my (limited) studies, here are the two reoccurring, underlying themes I see:

1) Every event in our atmosphere is the direct result of an imbalance and the consequences of these imbalances manifest themselves as our weather
2) There are no 'accidents' or wasted motion in nature
 
Not to nitpick a nitpick, ...

Nitpicks welcome! When describing the rate of horizontal vorticity in cloud streets, my choice of wording probably should have been "negligible" rather than "little/no". No arguments that there isn't rotation, but the rate is certainly not visually apparent when looking at a Cu street. I tend to think more of the rotor clouds in this case.

Back to the topic, computer simulations of tornadogenesis do have their weaknesses, but for now its the most detailed means available to even begin to understand the process. Lou Wicker's modeling has shown the RFD to be the main "kicker" in getting horizontal vorticity tilted into the parent circulation:

"...if a downdraft is involved in the tilting process, then vertical vorticity can be advected toward the surface as it is produced via tilting...".

Until I own a computer able to model such advanced resolutions OR a chase group can accurately trace the near surface trajectories during tornadogenesis, I'll side with the experts!
 
On the other hand, the RFD (along with its temperature and moisture deficits) has been shown to be more critical in tornado production and its vortex lines are one key element. Markowski has certainly played a role in this understanding and he has a great, albeit idealized, image explaining the theory here:
http://met.psu.edu/~marko/arches5.jpg

This is a nice graphic, sure, though some of the ideas behind it (vortex line analysis) have been around for quite a while (like back to Davies-Jones work in the early 80's) and this recent work of his and others was looking to tie some of that earlier work together with some more recent observations. The graphic shows vortex rings surrounding a core downdraft, with some mechanism acting to lift the rings on the downshear (closest to the viewer in the image) edge (such as forced ascent on the nose of the RFD gust front), which generates a pair of counter-rotating vortices through tilting of a portion of the vortex rings with the cyclonic member on the right in the graphic, closer to the main mesocyclone. Note that the vortex lines associated with the low-level cyclonic vortex arch across to the anti-cyclonic vortex at some height (2-3 km AGL?), and is disconnected from the mid-level mesocyclone entirely. There are aspects to this that seem to not blend well with other observations. So, this concept offers a plausible explanation for a source (probably among many) for the low-level circulation, but is not a complete explanation for tornadogenesis (nor do they claim it to be).


Back to the topic, computer simulations of tornadogenesis do have their weaknesses, but for now its the most detailed means available to even begin to understand the process. Lou Wicker's modeling has shown the RFD to be the main "kicker" in getting horizontal vorticity tilted into the parent circulation:

It's no secret that the RFD has some role in tornadogenesis in supercells at least some of the time - though most RFD surges do not produce tornadoes. It might be posible to understand this better from simulations someday. Currently we don't have adequate observations to verify computer simulations against at the appropriate level of resolution. That said, even if we were to correctly simulate it, we may not be able to ever understand it (you end up with a lot of chicken or the egg type arguments so knowing the root causes of things is very difficult to follow).
 
Back
Top