4.7 Article

Spin-down of a barotropic vortex by irregular small-scale topography

期刊

JOURNAL OF FLUID MECHANICS
卷 944, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/jfm.2022.488

关键词

ocean circulation; topographic effects

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [OCE 1828843]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examines the impact of small-scale irregular topographic features on the dynamics and evolution of large-scale barotropic flows in the ocean. A multiscale theory is developed to represent the large-scale effects of bottom roughness without explicitly resolving small-scale variability. The key mechanism of topographic control involves the generation of a small-scale eddy field associated with Reynolds stresses, which adversely affect mean circulation patterns. The accuracy of the multiscale model is remarkably high, even when scale separation is virtually non-existent.
This study examines the impact of small-scale irregular topographic features on the dynamics and evolution of large-scale barotropic flows in the ocean. A multiscale theory is developed, which makes it possible to represent large-scale effects of the bottom roughness without explicitly resolving small-scale variability. The analytical model reveals that the key mechanism of topographic control involves the generation of a small-scale eddy field associated with considerable Reynolds stresses. These eddy stresses are inversely proportional to the large-scale velocity and adversely affect mean circulation patterns. The multiscale model is applied to the problem of topography-induced spin-down of a large circularly symmetric vortex and is validated by corresponding topography-resolving simulations. The small-scale bathymetry chosen for this configuration conforms to the Goff-Jordan statistical spectrum. While the multiscale model formally assumes a substantial separation between the scales of interacting flow components, it is remarkably accurate even when scale separation is virtually non-existent.

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

4.7
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