Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4hhp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-19T07:51:25.235Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

On the nonlinear reflexion of a gravity wave at a critical level. Part 1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 April 2006

S. N. Brown
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, University College London, London W.C.1
K. Stewartson
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, University College London, London W.C.1

Abstract

In this paper we examine the nonlinear interaction of a forced internal gravity wave in a stratified fluid with its critical level. The representative Richardson number J is taken to be large and the undisturbed state consists of a hyperbolic-tangent velocity profile and an almost constant density gradient. It is assumed that at large values of a non-dimensional time t the flow outside the critical layer is steady, consisting of the mean shear together with a disturbance periodic in x that corresponds to the single harmonic of the incident wave of small amplitude ε. The requirements of a match across the critical layer lead to a reflected wave and a transmitted wave both of whose amplitudes are Oe−νπ) when 1 [Lt ] t [Lt ] ε−2/3, where ν = (J − ¼)½. For ν [Gt ] 1 the layer therefore acts as a wave absorber, and the purpose of this investigation is to ascertain whether this property persists on an even longer time scale. At times t = O−2/3) the layer has thickness O2/3) and the first few terms of an expansion in powers of ε2/3t show that higher harmonics are forced on the outer flow, and the reflexion and transmission coefficients develop with time. The leading-order correction to these coefficients is calculated explicitly; that to the transmission coefficient is again exponentially small in ν though that to the reflexion coefficient is O−1). The reflexion coefficient is therefore increasing and the critical layer begins to restore wave energy to the outer flow. Owing to the complexity of the calculation higher-order corrections are not obtained here, but the results presented are in agreement with predictions of earlier workers that the layer acts as an absorber and a reflector but not as a transmitter.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 1980 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Béland, M. 1976 J. Atmos. Sci. 23, 2066.
Booker, J. R. & Bretherton, F. P. 1967 J. Fluid Mech. 27, 513.
Breeding, R. J. 1971 J. Fluid Mech. 50, 545.
Bretherton, F. P. 1966 Quart. J. Roy. Met. Soc. 92, 466.
Brown, S. N. & Stewartson, K. 1978 Proc. Roy. Soc. A 363, 175.
Dickinson, R. E. 1970 J. Atmos. Sci. 27, 627.
Fritts, D. C. 1978 J. Atmos. Sci. 35, 397.
Fritts, D. C. 1979 J. Atmos. Sci. 36, 12.
Grimshaw, R. 1975 J. Atmos. Sci. 32, 1779.
Hartman, R. J. 1975 J. Fluid Mech. 71, 89.
Klemp, J. B. & Lilly, D. K. 1978 J. Atmos. Sci. 35, 78.
Lindzen, R. S. & Rosenthal, A. J. 1976 J. Geophys. Res. 81, 1561.
Maslowe, S. A. 1972 Stud. Appl. Math. 51, 1.
Mihaljan, J. M. 1962 Astrophys. J. 136, 1126.
Ramanathan, V. & Cess, R. D. 1975 Icarus 25, 89.
Stewartson, K. 1978 Geophys. Astrophys. Fluid Dyn. 9, 185.
Warn, T. & Warn, H. 1976 J. Atmos. Sci. 33, 2021.
Warn, T. & Warn, H. 1978 Stud. Appl. Math. 59, 37.