Caleb Routt
EF1
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2014
- Messages
- 50
Hey so can anyone explain why this tornado dosnt seem to have a condensed funnel? I also noticed this type of tornado occurred in Nashville 1998 http://youtu.be/lSJk96dYIZY
-
While Stormtrack has discontinued its hosting of SpotterNetwork support on the forums, keep in mind that support for SpotterNetwork issues is available by emailing [email protected].
Tornado that dosnt seem to have a funnel
- Thread starter Caleb Routt
- Start date
rdale
EF5
I'm not sure what you aren't seeing... The funnel is incredibly apparent through the entire video.
Joey Ketcham
EF4
Did you post the wrong video?
I think he's talking about the latter half of the video, when the tornado is in view and mostly a faint, dusty column.
The answer to your question is within your question. Check up on the definition of the word condensation.
The answer to your question is within your question. Check up on the definition of the word condensation.
Skip Talbot
EF5
It's common for tornadoes, even large and violent ones, to at least temporarily lose their condensation funnels while undergoing some sort of transition. The Henryville, IN tornado on the same day did this as well:
You can see in the middle frame the tornado is still in progress, but lost its condensation funnel temporarily before condensing again as it went on to do EF4 damage through Henryville.
Why? I'd just have to guess based on some concepts, but probably because the condensation funnel is disrupted when the structure of the vortex changes, such as in the process known as vortex breakdown. You see this often on tornadoes transitioning into a multivortex phase. Also, I've often noted that when a lot of rain wrapping occurs, the condensation funnel may dissipate while there is still a tornado in progress. Surges in RFD and variability in precipitation all influence the tornado as they're wrapped around and fed into the tornado. One example of this may be the Pilger EF4 from June 16 this year. Many chasers concluded that the tornado had dissipated as the condensation funnel went away when the tornado became heavily rain wrapped, and a new satellite tornado developed several minutes later. However, a continuous damage path from the survey suggests that it was one tornado in progress the whole time, the condensation funnel had simply dissipated.
The Pilger EF4 is on the right:
A couple minutes later it appears to be gone or hidden in rain while the tornado on the left remains:
Later on a tornado emerges as a satellite (left), but I believe its the original Pilger EF4 that has condensed again:
Whether a tornado consists of a condensed funnel or not depends on two factors: 1) the RH of the inflow parcels and 2) the pressure drop in the tornado. For this reason, even strong tornadoes (with a large pressure drop) can fail to condense if the incoming air has too low of RH, and weak tornadoes can condense if the inflow air is very moist.
Air parcels flowing into a tornado follow a parcel path in the same way that lifted parcels do in parcel theory. If there is a region within the tornado vortex that has a pressure lower than the LCL of an inflow parcel, then that parcel will condense when it reaches that region of the tornado. Just like with parcel theory, one must account for violations of the assumptions (e.g., entrainment). However, since inflow to a tornado is largely horizontal, entrainment is probably not much of an issue.
Air parcels flowing into a tornado follow a parcel path in the same way that lifted parcels do in parcel theory. If there is a region within the tornado vortex that has a pressure lower than the LCL of an inflow parcel, then that parcel will condense when it reaches that region of the tornado. Just like with parcel theory, one must account for violations of the assumptions (e.g., entrainment). However, since inflow to a tornado is largely horizontal, entrainment is probably not much of an issue.
