4.7 Article

Sensitivity and variability redux in hot-Jupiter flow simulations

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 454, Issue 4, Pages 3423-3431

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stv1947

Keywords

hydrodynamics; waves; turbulence; methods: numerical; planets and satellites: atmospheres

Funding

  1. UK's Science and Technology Facilities Council
  2. NASA
  3. STFC [ST/J001546/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  4. Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/J001546/1] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We revisit the issues of sensitivity to initial flow and intrinsic variability in hot-Jupiter atmospheric flow simulations, issues originally investigated by Cho et al. and Thrastarson & Cho. The flow in the lower region (similar to 1 to 20 MPa) 'dragged' to immobility and uniform temperature on a very short time-scale, as in Liu & Showman, leads to effectively a complete cessation of variability as well as sensitivity in three-dimensional (3D) simulations with traditional primitive equations. Such momentum (Rayleigh) and thermal (Newtonian) drags are, however, ad hoc for 3D giant planet simulations. For 3D hot-Jupiter simulations, which typically already employ a strong Newtonian drag in the upper region, sensitivity is not quenched if only the Newtonian drag is applied in the lower region, without the strong Rayleigh drag: in general, both sensitivity and variability persist if the two drags are not applied concurrently in the lower region. However, even when the drags are applied concurrently, vertically propagating planetary waves give rise to significant variability in the similar to 0.05-0.5 MPa region, if the vertical resolution of the lower region is increased (e.g. here with 1000 layers for the entire domain). New observations on the effects of the physical setup and model convergence in 'deep' atmosphere simulations are also presented.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available