19

A common, matter-efficient science-fiction habitat is a hollow cylinder or ring in space that is spun to simulate the pull of gravity on its interior surface. These habitats have been imagined as small as a spaceship, mere meters in radius, up to a ringworld, 1 AU in radius.

Say we have a rotating space habitat designed to mimic Earth’s gravity and atmosphere at sea level. Assume that the habitat has been rotating for however long it takes to reach whatever equilibrium state can be achieved. Will the rotational motion of the habitat generate winds in its atmosphere? In which direction will they prevail, spinward (with the direction of rotation) or anti-spinward (against it)? Will they circle the ring in a single direction or will there be antiparallel winds at different altitudes?

Ideally answers would be applicable to rotating habitats of various size, however, if the answers would vary widely between habitats please use a ring 10,000 km in radius for the answer.

Edit: There have been some previous questions about weather on rotating habitats such as my own What would the weather be like in an asteroid habitat? and Weather on a mini-ringworld/Banks Orbital. These questions are quite broad as weather is a complex subject, to put it mildly, and so were not very answerable. Here I have attempted to narrow the focus of the question to a single aspect of weather, the wind, in the hopes of generating more complete answers.

Ash
  • 44,753
  • 7
  • 97
  • 214
Mike Nichols
  • 13,805
  • 7
  • 42
  • 85
  • 2
    @Aify It's funny being told my question is a duplicate of my own question from almost 4 years ago. I think part of why that old question didn't generate many useful responses is that it was far too broad. I've intentionally tried to narrow this question to only discuss wind which I think is much more answerable and certainly wasn't covered in any of the answers to the previous question. – Mike Nichols Jul 31 '18 at 22:22
  • 1
    A dupe is a dupe. The last paragraph of the accepted answer on that question specifically includes a line stating that depending on which way the "wind" was blowing, the weather (thus the air, and therefore the wind) would either be stagnant ("wind" moving with the rotation) or travel in loops (against the rotation). – Aify Jul 31 '18 at 22:27
  • 1
    10,000 km is more than 2x the radius of Earth. That's really big. – RonJohn Jul 31 '18 at 22:29
  • 6
    @RonJohn, Larry Niven's ringworld is really big. As far as alien megastructures go, this is just a golf ball. – JBH Jul 31 '18 at 22:34
  • 1
    @Aify But my question is "which way will the wind blow?" Obviously, an answer that includes the phrase "depending on which way the wind (artificial?) was blowing." doesn't answer the question of which way is the wind blowing, right? There's also the larger issue that HDE did not appear to be considering that the asteroid habitat was rotating. It was a poorly written question that generated a fair amount of confusion. – Mike Nichols Jul 31 '18 at 22:38
  • "Which way does it blow" - does it matter? Facing one end of the tube, it blows left to right, facing the other side, it blows right to left, the only thing that actually matters is "does it blow" which depends on "are you rotating with or against the wind" - something that HDE did seem to have taken into account in his answer. – Aify Aug 01 '18 at 04:14
  • 6
    I disagree that this is a duplicate. My answer only briefly talks about wind patterns, and definitely doesn't describe in what directions they move. I used the line "Either it would be stagnant - not a good thing - or it would travel in loops, depending on which way the wind (artificial?) was blowing.", but I don't say explicitly that the wind would travel in loops. It was a guess, an unsupported guess, and not really elaborated on in much detail. I don't think my answer there answers this question, and so I don't think this question is a duplicate. – HDE 226868 Aug 01 '18 at 14:54
  • @HDE226868 I suppose if you, the answerer, doesn't think the question has been answered, then it logically follows that it is not the same question. I've retracted my close vote. – Aify Aug 01 '18 at 17:29
  • Is the habitat fully enclosed, like Rama, or open, like a Ringworld? Is it the same setup as in the first linked question? – Upper_Case Aug 06 '18 at 23:04
  • 2
    @Upper_Case Let's say it's open like a Ringworld but not nearly as large. I would like it to be small so that the angular velocity changes significantly as you go up in altitude. In this case, based on its size it would be more like a Bishop Ring or a Banks' Orbital. – Mike Nichols Aug 06 '18 at 23:52
  • 20,000km across is cool but how wide is it? The width of the ring "floor" is going to have some interesting potential effects. – Ash Aug 07 '18 at 14:46
  • 1
    @Ash I didn't include the width because I didn't think it was important. I'll be very interested to hear what potential effects you think it will have. Let's say the ring is 200 km in width. – Mike Nichols Aug 07 '18 at 14:49

5 Answers5

9

Convection is the answer.

Imagine you are inside a car, traveling at (just to say any speed) 65 mph. You, your clothes, your seat, and (of course) the air inside the car will be traveling at the same speed: 65 mph. And you will not feel any air current inside despite the fact you are moving fast.

If you have an isolated gas inside a rotating cylinder or a ring (no matter the size), the gas will rotate at the same speed as the other objects inside the cylinder or ring, so you will not feel any wind at all. BUT (here comes the interesting part): what really causes the wind currents in the atmosphere are the thermal differences. And here goes a further explanation:

If your cylinder has a "night" part and a "day" part, the part in the daylight will be hotter than the part in the dark. Therefore, you will then have the first "convection circuit": The hot ground in the day will heat the air nearby, and the air will raise (as a hot air balloon), dragging cold air from the night side. If you have water involved (lakes, oceans) the water acts as a heat reservoir, and includes additional convection circuits in the loop.

And of course there are the cities. The cities generate a lot of hot air that goes upward, and creates additional air currents.

And finally, now that you have "moving air" then yes, your moving air is affected by the rotation of your space station the same way the sea and air currents are affected by the Earth rotation.

The more "realistic" model you want your air currents to be, the more variables you need to include in your model. And, well... it is actually a science by itself. But you can have a very good starting point defining your day and night regions, and your water regions.

Carlos Zamora
  • 4,148
  • 11
  • 28
  • 2
    An interesting note (though I don't know if it will change your answer), but the air inside your car does in fact move (or slosh around) when you accelerate or decelerate. You can think of air as a very thin liquid. In a rotating cylinder you have air close to the axis that will not be moving, and air near the surface that will be moving fast, and along with convection I think you could also get some wind from the differences in these layers. Of course the size of the station does matter. You might not notice this effect on the Ringworld. – AndyD273 Aug 01 '18 at 15:11
  • 1
    Also, this effect would be a lot different on a ring than a cylinder. In an air filled cylinder you have a spot in the middle where things aren't moving, and the whole outer surface is. In a closed ring the ceiling would also be moving, and so the lower air and higher air would be pulled along almost equally. This is also different than a large open ring like the Ringworld, where there is nothing but centripetal force holding the air in, but there is still no still air at the axis, since the axis is in vacuum. – AndyD273 Aug 01 '18 at 15:33
  • this really isn’t an answer, though it might be a starting point for a simulation that could provide the answer – taylor swift Aug 07 '18 at 21:17
  • @AndyD273 The rotating habitat doesn't accelerate or decelerate though – endolith Oct 05 '20 at 14:29
  • @endolith That was just to illustrate that air sloshes. The point was that you're going to have areas of more or less air movement, depending on how close to the center of rotation you are. A ring would have less of this than a cylinder, since it has both a floor and ceiling to drag the air along, as well as any internal structures. A cylinder will have that near the "ground", but less so up near the axis of rotation. This could create turbulence and potentially wind. – AndyD273 Oct 05 '20 at 15:08
  • @AndyD273 The air will rotate with the structure, no matter how close or far from the axis of rotation, no? – endolith Oct 05 '20 at 16:13
  • @endolith Have you ever participated in making a "whirlpool" in a swimming pool? If not, it's when you get a bunch of energetic kids to swim around the outside of a round pool until the water is moving pretty fast. If you try to move against the flow it is really hard, but if you move to the center it's very calm, with almost no movement at all. If air behaves similar to a very thin liquid, then you'll have fast moving air around the edges and calm air toward the center. Will this make wind? I don't know, maybe? It's at least a good hypothesis to test against. – AndyD273 Oct 05 '20 at 18:29
  • @AndyD273 Yes the air moves faster at the outside than the middle, but everything is moving along with the air, so there is no wind – endolith Oct 05 '20 at 20:19
8

The real answer is we don't know, we can make some guesses though.

Lets start with ground effects; the range of effect of pure physical topography on the atmosphere, not including heating effects, is only about half a kilometer. On Earth this is purely vertical, as are a number of other effects that we'll talk about, but on a Ringworld type structure the effects are also horizontal because of the side walls that keep the atmosphere in. So near the floor and walls the winds are going to be relatively turbulent but the prevailing wind pattern will be a gentle anti-spinward breeze as the air is dragged at by the ground topography, and the walls, but doesn't move quite as fast as the ground. The ground will be moving at roughly $ 10000m/s$ to supply $ 1g $ of pseudogravity, if the air immediately above it is only doing an average of say $9990m/s $ local winds could be quite strong due to turbulent flow but the air mass as a whole will be doing $ 10m/s $, or $36km/h $, anti-spinward; while I'm not sure of the magnitude I would expect that to be the case.

Then there's heat effects; the floor of the ring will be hotter than the walls due to solar angle effects this is going to create a wind system very similar to a Hadley Cell with the centre of the ring as the equator/tropics and the walls as the subtropical desert zone. The reason I asked about the width of the ring is that over millions of kilometres, like Niven's ring, this effect wouldn't be so singular but a "narrow" 200km ring is going to see an almost perfect singular formation.

Net effect; surface winds are going to be turbulent but blow prevailingly from the edge inwards along the floor of the ring with an anti-spinwards twist, similar to the Coriolis Effect but with less deflection, high altitude winds are going to be fairly laminar and travel from the centre of the ring out towards the walls with ever more anti-spinward drift as they gain altitude. The wall areas will be relatively dry as most rain will fall as the air initially rises close to the centre of the ring.

Note this answer assumes reasonably vertical walls rather than some smooth bowl shape, not sure how that would go, probably broadly similar. It also assumes that the ring floor is "flat" not meaning particularly smooth but without any full-width profiling to either a "^" or "v" shape. I have not included the effects of a Shadow Square system in this model at all, I can try but they'll be extremely complex and vary considerably according to proportional day length and a number of other variables.

SurpriseDog
  • 3,883
  • 4
  • 21
  • 35
Ash
  • 44,753
  • 7
  • 97
  • 214
  • Excellent answer, your assumptions about ring shape are all reasonable. I was wondering if you had considered the effect of the system's rotation on rising and falling hot and cold air currents. As air near the surface of the ring heats and rises it will have a greater spinward velocity than the cool air it displaces which will, in turn, have a large anti-spinward velocity compared to the air it is descending in to. I think this would add another dimension to your theorized air cells deflecting rising warm air spinwards and cool air anti-spinwards. – Mike Nichols Aug 07 '18 at 16:29
  • Another interesting aspect of this model that you could incorporate if you cared to do so is the Eötvös effect. This is simply the idea that spinwards winds will be effectively heavier than "stationary" air anti-spinward winds will be lighter. The effects are relatively small on Earth but I imagine would be magnified on the rapidly spinning ring. – Mike Nichols Aug 07 '18 at 16:40
  • 1
    @MikeNichols With regard to the velocity differences in rising and falling air I think you'd find that compared with the turbulence introduced by the land and wall friction and the way that the surface winds interface along the central strip of the ring floor the temperature based mixing effects would be overwhelmed and obscured by larger effects. The Eötvös effect may be magnified considerably, since Ω is effectively doubled, but I'm not sure that the Eötvös effect model holds for the atmosphere in this situation, out of contact with the ground on a ringworld things get a bit odd. – Ash Aug 07 '18 at 17:10
  • a great answer, i might add a smooth bowl shape would probably make the hadley cell more prominent as the continuous temperature gradient would help stabilize it more – taylor swift Aug 07 '18 at 21:20
  • @taylorswift It may but I think the relatively low difference in angle of incidence between the floor and walls of a bowl would actually act to weaken the overall effect. – Ash Aug 08 '18 at 17:02
  • idk, convection requires a cold region for the rising air to fall into. if the entire floor is flat, then the entire surface is effectively hot, save for the shadow regions cast by the retention walls, assuming they are tall enough relative to the width of the ring. but since the shadowed areas would move around the circulation patterns would be far more complex – taylor swift Aug 08 '18 at 21:15
  • @taylorswift The walls themselves are much colder than the floor, they get very little sunlight per square metre, they'll cool the air that gets close to the edges. There's a permanent cold zone along both sides of the ring. – Ash Aug 13 '18 at 15:14
  • "but doesn't move quite as fast as the ground" Why wouldn't it? On a Ringworld-type structure, the whole atmosphere would move along with the structure. There's no force to slow it down, is there? – endolith Oct 02 '20 at 21:00
  • @endolith Atmospheric friction, the base of the air column is dragged along by the surface terrain but it only imparts energy to higher layers through particle collisions that slow down the overall air mass. – Ash Jan 13 '21 at 19:20
  • @Ash You mean if it were (somehow) loaded with air while stationary and then spun up? But after it's been spinning for many years, the air will all be moving together at the same rotational velocity, no? You think there is some force that slows down the higher layers? – endolith Jan 13 '21 at 20:21
  • @endolith You would have to spin the ring up before you tried to add atmosphere beyond a very minimal point. No, the act of speeding up the air loses energy to particle collisions constantly, you can't get the whole mass moving together at the same speed because you can only effect a very thin layer close to the surface. The act of rising to the upper layers will always strip kinetic energy from convecting air as it expands and cools. – Ash Jan 14 '21 at 15:39
  • @Ash Yes, so you spin up the ring, and then you add atmosphere, and the atmosphere spins with the ring. There is no difference in (rotational) speed at different heights, and no force that would cause such a difference. – endolith Jan 14 '21 at 18:10
  • @endolith That statement ignores the realities of rotational physics completely. Leaving that aside only the atmosphere that is in the direct topographic interaction zone at the bottom of the atmosphere ever gets any rotational energy imparted to it and that dissipates into directionless turbulence at a rate dictated by Feigenbaum's Number. Without the effects of convection currents most of the air column would never gain any rotational energy whatsoever because it would never be close enough to the ground. The air close to the ground at any time is gaining energy relative to that at altitude. – Ash Jan 14 '21 at 18:29
  • @Ash It doesn't need any turbulence or circulation at all. Each layer is accelerated to the same speed from friction with the next layer below it. After a long enough time (ignoring solar heating effects) all circulation and turbulence would cease and the air would just rotate all at the same rotational speed. – endolith Jan 14 '21 at 19:35
  • @Ash To put it a different way, if you start with all the air rotating at the same rotational speed, with no turbulence or circulation, and with the correct density at different altitudes already in place, what force do you think exists that would cause the upper layers to slow down? – endolith Jan 14 '21 at 19:37
  • @endolith No, just no. Air is a fluid that constantly undergoes molecular scale turbulence (Brownian Motion) that slows it's net movement in any given direction over time. Edge effects in a completely smooth rotating ring would still cause frictional heating where the air interacted with the structure and perturb the air flow you can't have a turbulence free environment where a fluid is in contact with a solid structure that is permanently in motion. – Ash Jan 14 '21 at 20:13
  • @Ash It's no different from completely still air sitting on the surface of a non-rotating planet. Thermal motion will be the only motion. There is no force that will create turbulence or convection without an energy source. In the rotating case, what force do you think exists that would cause the upper layers to slow down? – endolith Jan 15 '21 at 03:03
  • @endolith It's completely different, the motion of the ground will effect the air directly in contact with it, moreso if there is topography than if the ground is completely smooth (because the ground/air interface has a greater cross-section), the rotation, and the friction that occurs between the ground at the base of the air column, IS an energy input; an uneven one that creates heating and turbulence. The upper layers will be slowed in a number of ways that I have repeatedly listed and I'm not interested in doing so again. – Ash Jan 17 '21 at 11:55
  • @Ash There is no motion of the ground relative to the air... – endolith Jan 17 '21 at 20:07
  • @endolith You're talking about air like it's a homogeneous solid, it is not, it's a heterogeneous fluid in constant internal motion. Even if the larger body of the atmosphere was moving at the same rate as the ring floor, which it won't be as detailed repeatedly, the air molecules are moving in every possible direction all the time. – Ash Jan 18 '21 at 19:48
  • @Ash Without an energy source to create convection, it will eventually settle into a motionless state (relative to the rotation). We're talking about the larger body of atmosphere, not the individual particles (which are always in thermal motion regardless and which is irrelevant). My claim is that the entire atmosphere will be moving at the same rate as the ring floor, since there is no force to act against its rotation. I think we should ask this on Physics.SE, since these comments are just going around in circles (like the atmosphere)... – endolith Jan 19 '21 at 01:52
  • @Ash Does it make more sense to you if the orbital has walls? Like if you take a cylinder and fill it with water, and then spin it at a constant velocity for a long time, do you think the water in the middle would not be spinning along with the rest? – endolith Jan 19 '21 at 01:58
  • @Ash https://vimeo.com/419978552 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCg1tK4arNM https://mirjamglessmer.com/2013/11/25/water-in-solid-body-rotation/ – endolith Jan 19 '21 at 02:14
  • @endolith You're still talking about a body of air like a uniform solid, not an active atmosphere, in thermal flux, being stirred by terrain. The video shows fluid on a flat rotating disk, this is the mixing that we might then expect to see on a Alderson Disk but has no bearing on the suggested model whatsoever. Walls make your turbulence free model even more far-fetched. – Ash Jan 21 '21 at 09:44
  • @Ash Yes, I'm talking about a body of air in uniform solid-body rotation. I explicitly said there's no thermal convection. Terrain or no terrain is irrelevant, as the air is stationary relative to it. Walls are also irrelevant; I'm just adding them to help your understanding. – endolith Jan 22 '21 at 01:18
  • @endolith You're talking about something that doesn't exist, can't exist, not in nature, not in the scenario of the question, not in any but the most theoretical of idealised models for ideal gases, all of which state "this is not a real thing" in their foundation parameters. – Ash Jan 24 '21 at 19:45
  • @Ash Which part of my comment do you think is impossible to exist? – endolith Jan 24 '21 at 22:01
  • @endolith Air in contact with a moving solid object will incur turbulence unless the reaction is frictionless in which case, by definition, no exchange of energy occurs. You are proposing a body of air that behaves frictionlessly in regards to turbulence while still picking up kinetic energy, no. You are also proposing a body of air that, given it's uniformity of behaviour, must have no pressure or temperature gradient yet is being affected by friction, to pick up velocity, and therefore is acquiring thermal energy, and is an atmosphere that fades to vacuum, a pressure gradient, again no. – Ash Feb 04 '21 at 12:34
  • @Ash There is no turbulence because the air and solid object are both in motion together. Relative to its own motion, the air is not in contact with a moving solid object. The relative motion existed when it was first spun up, but all that turbulent energy has since dissipated. No, it would have a pressure gradient like our atmosphere does, denser at the ring surface and less dense, fading to vacuum, closer to the center of the ring. – endolith Feb 04 '21 at 14:41
  • @endolith No they're not, air is a fluid, it does not, cannot, act as a solid block, and it would have to in order to achieve homogeneous motion in the way you are insisting it somehow will. – Ash Feb 04 '21 at 15:17
  • @Ash Yes, on a macroscopic scale, fluids can absolutely act as a solid block. After a long time period, any circulation or turbulence energy dissipates, and the only motion is the random thermal motion of the individual molecules. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrostatics – endolith Feb 04 '21 at 15:21
  • @endolith No, you can model bodies of air, or water, as solid blocks under certain very peculiar conditions, laminar flow and adiabatic motion for example, but those are highly unstable situations that occur rarely and break down readily not ongoing systemic states. – Ash Feb 04 '21 at 15:35
  • @Ash No, it's not a "very peculiar condition"; it's the natural state of a fluid. Hydrostatics is the stable situation. Flowing fluids are "unstable", in the sense that all fluids with flow will eventually settle into hydrostatic equilibrium, without an outside force to keep them flowing. I made a crude simulation of the fluid and ring for you: http://www.algodoo.com/algobox/details.php?id=232826 :D – endolith Feb 04 '21 at 15:59
  • @endolith Peculiar mean both rare ans particular laminar flow is both adiabatic motion is less rare but just as particular. The key phrase there is "without an outside force to keep them flowing." like a massive continuous input of kenetic and thermal energy that kind of external force? You appear to have created a simulation that A. states an end point, and B. doesn't actually do anything, you have also created a simulation that ignores the reality of the situation the OP is asking about. – Ash Feb 04 '21 at 16:09
  • @Ash I don't understand your first sentence, can you retype it? "like a massive continuous input of kenetic and thermal energy that kind of external force" Such as what? A rotating ring in the vacuum of space requires no force to keep it rotating. "You appear to have created a simulation that A. states an end point" I don't know what this means. "B. doesn't actually do anything" The simulation has a spinning ring and a fluid in the middle. Through friction/collisions, every particle of the fluid will eventually be spun up to the same rotational velocity as the ring, in solid-body rotation. – endolith Feb 05 '21 at 21:59
  • @Ash The fluid will eventually reach hydrostatic equilibrium, relative to the ring, and there will be no more flow. My comments aren't about OP's question, they're about your answer: "not including heating effects…the prevailing wind pattern will be a gentle anti-spinward breeze as the air is dragged at by the ground topography…but doesn't move quite as fast as the ground" What force do you think is present that prevents the atmosphere from being dragged along at exactly the same speed as the ground? That's my fundamental question. I don't see any reason why the speeds would differ. – endolith Feb 05 '21 at 22:04
7

Example with an O´Neill cylinder

Because this is a question science based, let´s take a standard O´Neill cylinder. This was a space settlement design proposed by American physicist Gerard K. O'Neill in his 1976 book "The High Frontier: Human Colonies in Space". You can find more information here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O%27Neill_cylinder

This design is a cylinder with six stripes along. 3 of them for settlement (land) and 3 of them as windows. Each of the windows has a movable mirror that simulates the day-night cycle. There is plenty of documentation about this concept. In this link you can find a nice diagram (I am also including the image): https://www.artstation.com/artwork/28NNB
ONeill Space Colony

And this is how it may look from the inside: enter image description here

That space colony, viewed from the top of the cylinder will look like this:
enter image description here

And the sun will enter into the space colony this way (remember the mirrors open and close to simulate day and night): enter image description here

Now here comes the answer to the wind question:
The 3 land stripes will be heated by the direct sunlight, and the 3 glass windows will be cold (just like the glass window in your house when you touch it on a very cold day. Space is quite cold when not in the sunlight, and the windows must be transparent so the sun can enter. Therefore, the windows will be cold and the land will be hot. That creates the first convection circuit (the first winds in your cylinder): enter image description here

However, the cylinder has to rotate to generate gravity. And the wind particles (as mentioned above in previous answers) will be rotating faster in the positions away from the center of the cylinder, and motionless in the axis along the center of the cylinder. So the loops of the wind currents will suffer a slight deformation as depicted below. Note the additional effect of the 3 mirrors in the center of the cylinder: the 3 mirrors will be heating directly the air in the central axis. So, adding this to the convection currents, will result in a region of motionless hot air in the center axis of the cylinder. enter image description here Finally, please remember (and here comes the disclaimer) no one has ever built anything like this (well, not in our Solar System). So we really can´t be completely sure about the winds or anything weather-related inside a colony like that (we can´t even predict completely our own weather here on Earth).

Carlos Zamora
  • 4,148
  • 11
  • 28
2

Ash and boxcartenant's answers both claim that there will be a constant wind on the habitat, perceived as anti-spinward by residents, due to "resistance" against the spinning. However, after some long conversations, I am reasonably sure that this is a misunderstanding, and will add my own answer:

Thermal equilibrium

Note that this ignores thermal effects of nearby stars, so you have a universe with uniform background radiation (to keep the fluid from freezing), and you spin up a ring or cylinder or torus with fluid inside it.

The torus is easiest, so I'll start with that:

At first, the fluid touching the surface will be dragged along with it (due to "no slip" condition), and the fluid in the center of the tube will not (due to inertia). It will have the same parabolic velocity profile as fluid laminar flow in a pipe:

Parabolic flow velocity profile

From the perspective of someone standing on the inside of the tube, this would appear as a "jet stream" of wind in the center altitude above their heads.

After a sufficient period of time, however, of the tube rotating at constant speed, no longer accelerating, the momentum from the surface will be transferred from the outer layers to the inner layers, and so on, until all of the fluid is spinning at the same constant rate as the tube. The fluid is now in hydrostatic equilibrium, the entire habitat in uniform solid body rotation, and there is no wind. Any turbulence or cycles will wear themselves out and dissipate into heat. This is the state it will stay in forever, without any outside interference.

Because of the rotation, the fluid near the outer wall will be more compressed than the fluid near the inner wall, so it will have a pressure gradient like Earth's atmosphere.

In a walled cylinder habitat, the same thing will happen, except there is no inner wall to drag the fluid.

In an open cylinder or ring, like a Banks orbital, the fluid in the center will just drift away and be lost, because there are no walls and it's not adhering to the surface. Only particles that collide with the surface will become carried along with it.

Initially, the particles are not rotating, but as long as they have non-zero drift velocity, they will eventually encounter the ring, which will impart momentum on the particle and then capture it.

So there is no inherent wind just because the habitat is rotating. This will only happen at spin-up or spin-down (as described in Rendezvous with Rama).

Not equilibrium

If you add a star nearby, of course, the thermal gradients from cycles of night and day will cause new flows of fluid, relative to the surface.

I'm much more hazy on what happens in this case. The Coriolis effect acts vertically instead of horizontally, so either there won't be cyclones, or they won't have a preferred rotation direction. This effect may also cause a prevailing wind, I don't know.

endolith
  • 132
  • 6
  • 1
    I agree with you that the equilibrium system will exhibit solid or rigid body motion in the absence of thermal effects. Thank you for that insight. That's a very cool physics simulation program. I believe the vertical Coriolis effect will cause a prevailing wind with cycles of spinward wind deflected down, downward wind deflected anti-spinward, anti-spinward wind deflected upwards, and upwards wind deflected spinwards. This should create a prevailing anti-spinward wind near the outer surface of the ring assuming the effect is strong enough. – Mike Nichols Jul 09 '21 at 16:25
  • @MikeNichols I don't know that the Coriolis effect is that strong, though. I think convection from day temperature and night temperature will be much stronger? And this will happen at both sunrise and sunset in opposite directions? Can we recruit a meteorologist to answer this? – endolith Jul 12 '21 at 22:26
  • The magnitude of the Coriolis force is a function of how fast the world is spinning. An orbital ring spins much, much faster than the Earth so its Coriolis force is much stronger. As an additional consequence the faster rotation will lead to shorter days and nights (on the order of hours or even minutes) and so less temperature variance and less wind driven by convection between day and night. Hot air will still rise from the surface but more uniformly and be driven spinward by the Coriolis force. For those reasons I think Coriolis winds will be the prevailing ones. – Mike Nichols Jul 17 '21 at 01:13
  • @MikeNichols I'm thinking of a Banks orbital which spins at the same rate as the Earth and has the same day-night cycle – endolith Jul 17 '21 at 18:16
  • 1
    Ah, then yes, for a ring on the order of millions of kilometers in diameter the Coriolis force would be much less important, but for my purposes, I'm trying to represent something more on the scale of tens of thousands of kilometers in radius. Still, instructive to recognize that Coriolis forces and differential heating are both a function of ring-size, thank you. – Mike Nichols Jul 17 '21 at 21:25
1

Assuming this is an open ring (i.e. no ceiling), in order for the atmosphere to be dense at the edge of the ring, the gasses in the atmosphere would have to be affected by the same centrifugal forces which are simulating the gravity, so they have to be spinning with the ring. Also, as long as there is any friction or obstruction at all on the surface of the ring, it will drag the gas along with it. So in general, it will feel like there is no wind at the surface

Now, the air closer to the center of the ring will be less affected by the friction and obstructions on the surface (in addition to having a slower linear speed). If the ring is open, then the upper atmosphere will not be as motivated to keep pace with the angular speed at the surface, so when people go up on a high mountain, they will feel some wind in the anti-spinward direction. (It will feel like wind to observers, but the air really just has a slower angular speed).

Like Carlos Zamora said, though, the more variables you add, the more realistic your model will be. If you have some other body in near orbit to the ring, its gravity will affect tides and wind; if you have a night/day cycle, the temperature will affect wind; if you have mountains, they will affect the shape of the wind by obstructing it, and their gravity will affect the barometric pressure there; etc..

boxcartenant
  • 4,014
  • 6
  • 22
  • 1
    I’m not following fully your argument for anti-spinward winds at high altitude. I agree with you that there will be very little force acting on the air at high altitude to have it keep pace with the surface of the ring. However, in order for it to have an anti-spinward velocity, there must be some force acting against the wind, slowing it down, to counteract the small amount of friction acting to speed the wind up. Otherwise, eventually, the system reaches an equilibrium where there won’t be net wind. What is that "drag" force? – Mike Nichols Aug 07 '18 at 14:34
  • The force acting against the wind is the fact that it wants to move in a straight line, but it has to keep changing direction to rotate with the ring. This means it can't keep its own momentum, and will always tend to slow down a little. – boxcartenant Aug 07 '18 at 15:34
  • "then the upper atmosphere will not be as motivated to keep pace with the angular speed at the surface" Why wouldn't it be? It has friction rotating it, and nothing stopping it from rotating – endolith Oct 05 '20 at 14:32
  • @endolith since it has to keep changing direction (rotating), it will have a tendency to slow down. – boxcartenant Oct 22 '20 at 23:11
  • @boxcartenant That's the centrifugal force pulling it down towards the surface. It wouldn't change it's speed relative to the surface – endolith Oct 23 '20 at 00:18
  • @endolith Right, but whenever it contacts the surface, it will rebound, there will be a transfer of momentum between the surface and the air. This transfer of momentum is what (I'm suggesting) causes a change in velocity. – boxcartenant Nov 02 '20 at 18:59
  • But that's what carries the air along with the surface, no? The air will just sit on the surface, rotating along with it, like it sits on the surface of a planet and rotates along with that. To someone sitting on the surface, there would be no wind, just atmospheric pressure. – endolith Nov 02 '20 at 22:03
  • @endolith watch this video starting at about 0:48 where the bucket is spinning with the dyed water. The water in the middle of the bucket doesn't spin as fast as the water on the edge of the bucket, so if a person were standing on the interior surface of the bucket and looking up, the high air would appear to be moving in the antispinward direction https://youtu.be/EQCzO4RfZAM?t=48 – boxcartenant Jul 07 '21 at 14:35
  • @boxcartenant Yes, if a stationary bucket of water is spun up, that will happen, but then after a sufficient period of time spinning at constant rotation, the entire bucket of water will be rotating at the same rate, as a "solid body". It might help to think of a torus filled with fluid which is stationary at first and then spun up. At first the edges will spin and the center won't, with a parabolic velocity profile, due to the "no slip" condition, but after a while of rotating at constant speed, the center will catch up too. – endolith Jul 07 '21 at 16:26
  • @endolith Wouldn't it only, at best, asymptotically approach that state? And only if there were no other bodies in the bucket which moved in any other way and disrupted the flow (e.g. residents of the station)? And, being an extremely large container of gas, wouldn't it take an extremely long time to reach that state from rest, even if the conditions were perfect for it? If we built a ringworld today, and left it uninhabited (no variable obstructions), the earth's core would stop spinning first. – boxcartenant Jul 08 '21 at 16:14
  • @boxcartenant If it's asymptotic, when the "wind" becomes smaller than the thermal motion of the particles, I think there is no difference. Disrupting the flow should be irrelevant, it will eventually settle into solid-body rotation regardless of turbulence. I don't know about the time requirements; I haven't done fluid calculations since college. :) However, for an open ringworld or orbital, the fluid has to already be accelerated to move along with the surface or it will just drift sideways and escape into space. – endolith Jul 08 '21 at 18:53