| Summary: | Work was completed on the height tendency diagnoses of two extratropical cyclones that occurred upstream from the blocking event studied previously. One developed explosively over water 60 to 36 hours before the block first appeared, while the second developed explosively over the southeastern United States during the time of block formation. In both cases, both vorticity and temperature advection were consistently important forcing mechanisms. This is in contrast to the block itself, in which vorticity advection was easily the dominant forcing mechanism. Latent heat release was also significant, accounting for about 50 percent of the total height falls in the cyclone below 850 mb. Estimates of latent heat release were greatly enhanced by coupling parameterized estimates with values derived from GOES IR data using an algorithm developed by Marshall's F. R. Robertson. Among the difficulties encountered in this work was the identification of an appropriate lower boundary condition for the solution of the height tendency equation. The zero value currently used tends to yield underestimates of the lower troposphere height tendencies. To address this problem a new diagnostic technique was developed in cooperation with Dr. Peter Zwack of the University of Quebec at Montreal. Based on an equation Dr. Zwack had previously developed (the Zwack-Okossi development equation), researchers now have a relationship that is completely consistent with the height tendency equation and provides estimates of lower boundary geostrophic vorticity or height tendencies. Finally, comparison of the SAT (satellite data) and NOSAT (no satellite data) analyses is progressing well. The present focus is on both the new diagnostic technique and the SAT/NOSAT comparisons. The former is being tested on the southeastern United States cyclone case previously mentioned and compared with the height tendency diagnoses already completed. The latter are being examined for the blocking case described in the publications cited in this summary. In addition to obtaining statistics that will allow general comparison of the two analyses, it will be possible to determine whether conclusions about the dynamics of the block development are influenced by the analysis set used.
|
|---|