4.6 Article

Numerical Investigation of Spectral Evolution of Wind Waves. Part II: Dissipation Term and Evolution Tests

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL OCEANOGRAPHY
卷 40, 期 4, 页码 667-683

出版社

AMER METEOROLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1175/2009JPO4370.1

关键词

-

资金

  1. ONR [N00014-101-0418]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Numerical simulations of the wind-wave spectrum evolution are conducted by means of new observation-based wind-input and wave dissipation functions obtained in the Lake George field experiment. This experiment allowed simultaneous measurements of the source functions in a broad range of;conditions, including extreme wind-wave circumstances. Results of the experiment revealed new physical mechanisms in the processes of spectral input/dissipation of wave energy, which are presently not accounted for in wave forecast models. These features had been parameterized as source terms in a form suitable for spectral wave models; in the present study, they were tested, calibrated, and validated on the basis of such a model. Physical constraints were imposed on the source functions in terms of the known experimental dependences for the total wind-wave momentum flux and for the ratio between the total input and total dissipation. Enforcing the constraints in the course of wave-spectrum evolution allowed calibration of the free experimental parameters of the new input (Part I of the study) and dissipation functions; the latter is the topic of the present paper. The approach allows separate calibration of the source functions before they are employed in the evolution tests. The evolution simulations were conducted by means of the one-dimensional research WAVETIME model with an exact solution for the nonlinear term. The resulting time-limited evolution of integral, spectral, and directional wave properties, based on implementation of the new physically justified source/sink terms and constraints, is then analyzed. Good agreement of the simulated evolution with known experimental dependences is demonstrated.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据