Hi,
Usually, we could add wave-induced mixing into our model by activating "CHARNOK+CRAIG_BANNER" or "ZOS_HSIG+TKE_WAVEDISS". And we know that wave breaking, stirring by nonbreaking waves, Stokes drift interaction with the Coriolis force and Langmuir circulation could all affect the upper-ocean mixing.
Here comes my problem, does "CHARNOK+CRAIG_BANNER" or "ZOS_HSIG+TKE_WAVEDISS" only account for wave mixing induced by wave breaking? Or they contain both the wave-breaking and non-wave-breaking effects?
Although I have read some related posts or papers, I am still not sure about it.
Looking forward to your reply!
-Peng
on the wave mixing
-
baipeng_up
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 4:54 am
- Location: Ocean University of China
Re: on the wave mixing
These features are best described in
Kumar, N., Voulgaris, G., Warner, J.C., and M., Olabarrieta (2012). Implementation of a vortex force formalism in a coupled modeling system for inner-shelf and surf-zone applications. Ocean Modelling, 47, 65-95.
and
Carniel, S., Warner, J.C., Chiggiato, J., and Sclavo, Mauro. (2009). “Investigating the impact of surface wave breaking on modeling the trajectories of drifters in the Northern Adriatic Sea during a wind-storm event” Ocean Modelling, 30, 225-239.
The gory details are in the code, specifically ROMS/Nonlinear/gls_corstep.F. You can look in there and see specifics such as:
# if defined CRAIG_BANNER
tke_fluxt(i)=dt(ng)*crgban_cw(ng)* &
& (0.50_r8* &
& SQRT((sustr(i,j)+sustr(i+1,j))**2+ &
& (svstr(i,j)+svstr(i,j+1))**2))**1.5_r8
# elif defined TKE_WAVEDISS
tke_fluxt(i)=dt(ng)*sz_alpha(ng)*(Dissip_break(i,j)+ &
& Dissip_wcap(i,j))
# else
tke_fluxt(i)=0.0_r8
# endif
......
So tke_wavediss is using both the wave breaking and the whitecapping. You can of course modify this if you need to.
There are also other threads discussing wave non-breaking mixing, here:
viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4877&p=18991&hilit=breaking#p18991
Kumar, N., Voulgaris, G., Warner, J.C., and M., Olabarrieta (2012). Implementation of a vortex force formalism in a coupled modeling system for inner-shelf and surf-zone applications. Ocean Modelling, 47, 65-95.
and
Carniel, S., Warner, J.C., Chiggiato, J., and Sclavo, Mauro. (2009). “Investigating the impact of surface wave breaking on modeling the trajectories of drifters in the Northern Adriatic Sea during a wind-storm event” Ocean Modelling, 30, 225-239.
The gory details are in the code, specifically ROMS/Nonlinear/gls_corstep.F. You can look in there and see specifics such as:
# if defined CRAIG_BANNER
tke_fluxt(i)=dt(ng)*crgban_cw(ng)* &
& (0.50_r8* &
& SQRT((sustr(i,j)+sustr(i+1,j))**2+ &
& (svstr(i,j)+svstr(i,j+1))**2))**1.5_r8
# elif defined TKE_WAVEDISS
tke_fluxt(i)=dt(ng)*sz_alpha(ng)*(Dissip_break(i,j)+ &
& Dissip_wcap(i,j))
# else
tke_fluxt(i)=0.0_r8
# endif
......
So tke_wavediss is using both the wave breaking and the whitecapping. You can of course modify this if you need to.
There are also other threads discussing wave non-breaking mixing, here:
viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4877&p=18991&hilit=breaking#p18991
-
baipeng_up
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 4:54 am
- Location: Ocean University of China
Re: on the wave mixing
Thanks John! 
So you suggest that the current "TKE_WAVEDISS" accounts for wave breaking (Dissip_break) and whitecapping (Dissip_wcap), but does not involve the nonbreaking effect. Also, since the "CRAIG_BANNER" scheme is based on Craig and Banner (1994), it should also only describe the wave breaking induced mixing. Have I understood correctly?
So you suggest that the current "TKE_WAVEDISS" accounts for wave breaking (Dissip_break) and whitecapping (Dissip_wcap), but does not involve the nonbreaking effect. Also, since the "CRAIG_BANNER" scheme is based on Craig and Banner (1994), it should also only describe the wave breaking induced mixing. Have I understood correctly?
Re: on the wave mixing
i believe you are understanding correctly.
-j
-j
-
baipeng_up
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 4:54 am
- Location: Ocean University of China
Re: on the wave mixing
Got it! Thanks!jcwarner wrote:i believe you are understanding correctly.
-j
-Peng