Sea-surface roughness and drag coefficient as function of neutral wind speed

Similar documents
Assimilation of scatterometer data as equivalent-neutral wind

Parametrization of convective gusts

Evaluation of revised parameterizations of sub-grid orographic drag

Atm S 547 Boundary Layer Meteorology

Atmospheric stability parameters and sea storm severity

Effects of observation errors on the statistics for ensemble spread and reliability

1 The Richardson Number 1 1a Flux Richardson Number b Gradient Richardson Number c Bulk Richardson Number The Obukhov Length 3

The parametrization of the planetary boundary layer May 1992

2.1 OBSERVATIONS AND THE PARAMETERISATION OF AIR-SEA FLUXES DURING DIAMET

Diagnostics of linear and incremental approximations in 4D-Var

Logarithmic velocity profile in the atmospheric (rough wall) boundary layer

Surface layer parameterization in WRF

BOUNDARY LAYER STRUCTURE SPECIFICATION

ECMWF global reanalyses: Resources for the wind energy community

Effects of transfer processes on marine atmospheric boundary layer or Effects of boundary layer processes on air-sea exchange

Spring Semester 2011 March 1, 2011

COMPARISON OF AMV HEIGHT ASSIGNMENT BIAS ESTIMATES FROM MODEL BEST-FIT PRESSURE AND LIDAR CORRECTIONS

Effect of ocean waves on ocean circulation

Air-sea interaction through waves

Sergej S. Zilitinkevich 1,2,3. Division of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Helsinki, Finland

EXAMPLE SHEET FOR TOPIC 3 AUTUMN 2013

Large eddy simulation studies on convective atmospheric boundary layer

Laminar Flow. Chapter ZERO PRESSURE GRADIENT

Do Differences between NWP Model and EO Winds Matter?

OBSERVING SYSTEM EXPERIMENTS ON ATOVS ORBIT CONSTELLATIONS

Effect of solar zenith angle specification on mean shortwave fluxes and stratospheric temperatures

Calibration of ECMWF forecasts

Error estimation of Buoy, Satellite and Model Wave height Data

Teaching with OpenIFS at Stockholm University: leading the learning experience

Stable Boundary Layer Parameterization

On flow separation under stable conditions: results from flow visualization in MATERHORN-X

Fall Colloquium on the Physics of Weather and Climate: Regional Weather Predictability and Modelling. 29 September - 10 October, 2008

John Steffen and Mark A. Bourassa

ERA report series. 1 The ERA-Interim archive. ERA-Interim ERA-40. Version 1.0 ERA-15

On the validation study devoted to stratified atmospheric flow over an isolated hill

EXPERIMENTAL ASSIMILATION OF SPACE-BORNE CLOUD RADAR AND LIDAR OBSERVATIONS AT ECMWF

The impact of rain on ocean wave evolution and its feedback to the atmosphere

AIRCRAFT MEASUREMENTS OF ROUGHNESS LENGTHS FOR SENSIBLE AND LATENT HEAT OVER BROKEN SEA ICE

SMAST Technical Report The Performance of a Coupled 1-D Circulation and Bottom Boundary Layer Model with Surface Wave Forcing

Rosemary Munro*, Graeme Kelly, Michael Rohn* and Roger Saunders

Air-Sea Interaction in Extreme Weather Conditions

Notes on the exact solution of moist updraught equations

centrifugal acceleration, whose magnitude is r cos, is zero at the poles and maximum at the equator. This distribution of the centrifugal acceleration

Masters in Mechanical Engineering. Problems of incompressible viscous flow. 2µ dx y(y h)+ U h y 0 < y < h,

Calibrating forecasts of heavy precipitation in river catchments

15. Physics of Sediment Transport William Wilcock

The extreme forecast index applied to seasonal forecasts

ACCOUNTING FOR THE SITUATION-DEPENDENCE OF THE AMV OBSERVATION ERROR IN THE ECMWF SYSTEM

Recent improvements on the wave forecasting system of Meteo-France: modeling and assimilation aspects

Contents. Parti Fundamentals. 1. Introduction. 2. The Coriolis Force. Preface Preface of the First Edition

The value of targeted observations Part II: The value of observations taken in singular vectors-based target areas

EXAMPLES (SEDIMENT TRANSPORT) AUTUMN 2018

NONLINEAR FEATURES IN EXPLICIT ALGEBRAIC MODELS FOR TURBULENT FLOWS WITH ACTIVE SCALARS

Part I: Overview of modeling concepts and techniques Part II: Modeling neutrally stratified boundary layer flows

275 Fig Streamlines versus Trajectories Fig. 7.5

On the Velocity Gradient in Stably Stratified Sheared Flows. Part 2: Observations and Models

COMMENTS ON "FLUX-GRADIENT RELATIONSHIP, SELF-CORRELATION AND INTERMITTENCY IN THE STABLE BOUNDARY LAYER" Zbigniew Sorbjan

PART VII: ECMWF WAVE MODEL

Wind farm performance in conventionally neutral atmospheric boundary layers with varying

THE EFFECT OF STRATIFICATION ON THE ROUGHNESS LENGTH AN DISPLACEMENT HEIGHT

Abstract. 1. Introduction

Supporting Information for The origin of water-vapor rings in tropical oceanic cold pools

Probability forecasts for water levels at the coast of The Netherlands

M.Sc. in Meteorology. Physical Meteorology Prof Peter Lynch. Mathematical Computation Laboratory Dept. of Maths. Physics, UCD, Belfield.

A combined application of the integral wall model and the rough wall rescaling-recycling method

Of Chessboards and Ghosts Signatures of micro-vibrations from IASI monitoring in NWP?

Air-Sea Interaction and Surface Waves

KU-BAND RADAR ALTIMETER SURFACE WIND SPEED ALGORITHM

Arctic Boundary Layer

Monthly forecasting system

Impact of the sea state on the atmosphere and ocean

Impact of sea state on atmosphere and ocean

NOTES AND CORRESPONDENCE. On Ensemble Prediction Using Singular Vectors Started from Forecasts

Wave simulation using SWAN in nested and unnested mode applications

(Wind profile) Chapter five. 5.1 The Nature of Airflow over the surface:

Intercomparison of Bulk Aerodynamic Algorithms for the Computation of Sea Surface Fluxes Using TOGA COARE and TAO Data

L alluvione di Firenze del 1966 : an ensemble-based re-forecasting study

RELATION BETWEEN WIND AND WIND CURRENTS ON THE SYNOPTIC SCALE WITH ACCOUNT OF WAVE CONDITIONS

Fluid Mechanics III. 1. Dimensional analysis and similarity

Coupled ocean-atmosphere medium-range forecasts: the MERSEA experience

Eddy viscosity. AdOc 4060/5060 Spring 2013 Chris Jenkins. Turbulence (video 1hr):

Towards a better use of AMSU over land at ECMWF

ESCI 485 Air/sea Interaction Lesson 3 The Surface Layer

GENERALISATION OF THE TWO-SCALE MOMENTUM THEORY FOR COUPLED WIND TURBINE/FARM OPTIMISATION

Atmosphere-Ocean Interaction in Tropical Cyclones

How is balance of a forecast ensemble affected by adaptive and non-adaptive localization schemes?

The Atmospheric Boundary Layer. The Surface Energy Balance (9.2)

An Update of Non-iterative Solutions for Surface Fluxes Under Unstable Conditions

A Reexamination of the Emergy Input to a System from the Wind

Evaluation of a non-local observation operator in assimilation of. CHAMP radio occultation refractivity with WRF

Assimilation of MIPAS limb radiances at ECMWF using 1d and 2d radiative transfer models

Regional climate downscaling for the Marine and Tropical Sciences Research Facility (MTSRF) between 1971 and 2000

Implementation of the Quasi-Normal Scale Elimination (QNSE) Model of Stably Stratified Turbulence in WRF

Lateral Boundary Conditions

Dependence of the Monin Obukhov Stability Parameter on the Bulk Richardson Number over the Ocean

RTMIPAS: A fast radiative transfer model for the assimilation of infrared limb radiances from MIPAS

Impact of the Waves on the Sea Surface Roughness Length under Idealized Like-Hurricane Wind Conditions (Part II)

Use of Satellite Observations to Measure Air-Sea Coupling and to Validate Its Estimates from Numerical Atmospheric Models

Importance of air-sea interaction on the coupled typhoon-wave-ocean modeling

IMPACTS OF SPATIAL OBSERVATION ERROR CORRELATION IN ATMOSPHERIC MOTION VECTORS ON DATA ASSIMILATION

Transcription:

630 Sea-surface roughness and drag coefficient as function of neutral wind speed Hans Hersbach Research Department July 2010

Series: ECMWF Technical Memoranda A full list of ECMWF Publications can be found on our web site under: http://www.ecmwf.int/publications/ Contact: library@ecmwf.int c Copyright 2010 European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts Shinfield Park, Reading, RG2 9AX, England Literary and scientific copyrights belong to ECMWF and are reserved in all countries. This publication is not to be reprinted or translated in whole or in part without the written permission of the Director. Appropriate non-commercial use will normally be granted under the condition that reference is made to ECMWF. The information within this publication is given in good faith and considered to be true, but ECMWF accepts no liability for error, omission and for loss or damage arising from its use.

Abstract Near the surface, it is commonly believed that the behaviour of the (turbulent) atmospheric flow can be well described by a constant stress layer. In the case of a neutrally stratified surface layer, this leads to the wellknow logarithmic wind profile that determines the relation between near-surface wind speed and magnitude of stress. The profile is set by a surface roughness length, which, over the ocean surface, is not constant, but depends on the underlying (ocean-wave) sea state. At ECMWF, this relation is parametrized in terms of surface stress itself, where the scale is set by kinematic viscosity for light wind and a Charnock parameter for strong wind. For given wind speed at a given height, the determination of the relation between surface wind and stress (expressed by a drag coefficient), leads to an implicit equation that is to be solved in an iterative way. In this document a fit is presented that directly expresses the neutral drag coefficient and surface roughness in terms of wind speed, without the need for iteration. Since the fit is formulated in purely dimensionless quantities, it is able to produce accurate results over a wide range for wind speed, level height and values for the Charnock parameter. 1 Introduction In the ECMWF operational integrated forecast system (IFS), the lowest model level is currently designed to be close to a height of 10m. It is assumed that between this layer and the surface the constant (turbulent) stress assumption is valid, including a form of Monin-Obukhov stability theory. For a certain value of stress τ = ρ a u u, where ρ a is the air density, u the friction velocity and u its magnitude, the following vertical equation is to be satisfied: u z = u κ(z+z 0 ) Φ M ( z+z0 L ), u(0) = 0. (1) Here κ = 0.4 is the Von Kármán constant, Φ M is a stability-dependent gradient function and L is the Obukhov length. Detailed definitions on these quantities may be found in Part IV.3 of the IFS-documentation (2009). The strength of surface stress follows from integration of (1) and the details of the flow higher up in the atmosphere. The formal solution is given by: where Φ M (η) = 1 ηψ M (η). u(z) = u { log κ ( z+z0 z 0 ) Ψ M ( z+z 0 L )+Ψ M( z } 0 L ), (2) Roughness length z 0 in this wind profile depends for light wind on the kinematic viscosity ν (1.5x10 5 m 2 s 1 ) and on a Charnock relation (Charnock, 1955) for strong wind as: z 0 = α M ν u + α ch u 2 g. (3) Here α M = 0.11, g = 9.81ms 2 is the gravitational acceleration, and α ch depends on the (ocean-wave) sea state (Janssen, 1991). The common range of the latter parameter is from 0.01 for swell up to 0.04 for steep young ocean waves; although values up to 0.1 do sporadically occur. A typical value is 0.018. The Obukhov length L depends on the stratification of the surface layer, and its evaluation requires the simultaneous solution for similar equations for heat and moisture, as well as the knowledge of the sea-surface temperature. Over the global oceans its contribution to (2) is usually modest, and adds on average 0.2ms 1 to the 10m wind speed (see e.g.brown et al. (2006)). Technical Memorandum No. 630 1

The concept of equivalent neutral wind u n is a popular quantity that expresses the relation between surface stress and wind, where stability effects are excluded: Here quantity b n is directly related to the neutral drag coefficient C n D : u n = u κ b n, with (4) b n = log(1+z/z 0 ). (5) C n D = ( u u n ) 2 = ( κ b n ) 2. (6) In case of a neutrally stratified surface layer, u n equals the actual wind, while for stable/unstable situations u n is weaker/stronger. For given neutral wind at a level z and given Charnock parameter, drag coefficient C n D and roughness length z 0 can be found by inversion of (3-5). Usually, this solution is evaluated by iteration. Starting from some first guess value of u (for z 10, u = u 10 /25 is a popular choice), an update of u is provided in (3-5), which is re-substituted into (3) until convergence is reached. In case for an observation operator in data assimilation, where stress, roughness length or drag coefficient is to be estimated from an available (neutral) wind at lowest model level u n, the necessity of fast and stable adjoint and tangent-linear code inhibits the usage of iteration. One example is the interpolation of lowest-level model wind ( 10m) to buoy wind at observation height (typically 4 or 5m). Another application would be the calculation of model surface stress for comparison with observed scatterometer stress. Currently, in IFS, such calculations are based on the assumption of a constant roughness length of z 0 = 1mm, which is typically one order of magnitude too high over the ocean. For these applications, a direct, approximate relation between drag and neutral wind is highly desirable. This is the objective of this document. In Section (2) such a relation is presented. Section (3) summarizes results, and demonstrates the quality of the obtained expression for a typical situation. 2 Approximate solution For a large domain in wind speed, (3) is dominated by either kinematic viscosity or Charnock. For this reason, first separate fits will be established for each regime. These two fits will then be combined into a proper fit for the entire wind domain. Fits will be provided for b n, from which z 0 and CD n can be found analytically. 2.1 Kinematic viscosity For sufficiently light wind, the first term in (3) will dominate. Combination of (3-5) implies the following implicit dimensionless equation for b n : b n (e b n 1) = R, where R = z α M ν (κu n). (7) Typically, b n 1, so (7) suggests that b n is proportional to log R. The following fit appears appropriate: b v n = 1.47+0.93log R. (8) Evidence for this is provided in the left panel of Figure (1), which shows a very good match between the exact relation (7) (solid curve) and fit (8) (red dashed curve) over the typically encountered domain of R. This is illustrated by the three vertical grey lines, which indicate an extremely low (z = 4m, u n = 0.1ms 1 ), typical (z = 10m, u n = 8ms 1 ), and extremely high value (z = 30m, u n = 50ms 1 ) for R. 2 Technical Memorandum No. 630

Figure 1: The relation between b n = log(1+z/z 0 ) and neutral wind at height z in case the effect of kinematic viscosity (left panel) or Charnock (right panel) is dominant. R and A are defined in (7) and (9), respectively. Solid curves represent the exact relation, dashed red curves the fits (8) and (10), and the blue dotted curve relation (11) from Guan and Xie (2004). 2.2 Charnock For sufficiently strong wind, the second term in (3) will dominate. Combination of (3-5) implies the following implicit dimensionless equation for b n : b 2 n /(eb n 1) = A, where A = α ch gz (κu n) 2, (9) which is proportional to the square of the Froude number ũ = u n / gz. Note that the function for b n has a maximum A max = 0.648.. for b n = 1.593... Below this maximum, there are two solutions b n for each A. This is illustrated by the black solid curve in the right panel of Figure (1). The smaller solution (where b n A) is valid when z is extremely close to the surface. The larger solution is valid for the more usual case when z z 0. For that branch b n seems proportional to loga. A proper fit, though, requires the inclusion of a higher order term as well: b α n = 2.65 1.44log A 0.015(log A)2. (10) The accuracy of this fit can be judged from the dashed red curve in the right panel of Figure (1). The agreement with the exact curve is good over the in practise encountered range. This, again, is marked by vertical grey dashed lines that indicate extremely low (z = 30m, u n = 0.1ms 1, α ch = 0.01), typical (z = 10m, u n = 8ms 1, α ch = 0.018), and extremely high (z = 4m, u n = 50ms 1, α ch = 0.1) values for A. Note that this latter extreme value is slightly above A max. So, formally no exact solution exists, and the usual iteration of (3-5) will not converge. Although such situations should not occur, (10) will return a value for b n. Hence, it is numerically more robust. Previously, for CD n a dimensionless fit based on a Charnock relation had been established by Guan and Xie (2004): CD Guan = (0.78+4.7Y) 10 3, where Y = α ch ũ = A/κ. (11) For α ch = 0.0185 it was shown to be consistent with a linear relation proposed by Wu (1980). Relation (11) is, Technical Memorandum No. 630 3

Figure 2: The relation between b n and neutral wind at a height of 4m (left), 10m (middle) and 30m (right panel) and for a Charnock constant of 0.01 (right), 0.018 (middle) and 0.1 (left curves) The solid black curves represent the iterative solution; the red dashed the fit, and the grey curves the branches for which either kinematic viscosity (left) or Charnock (right) would play a dominant role. after conversion to b n, displayed in the right panel of Figure (1) as well (blue dotted curve). For a fair region, the agreement with exact implicit relation (9) is excellent as well. 2.3 Combination of both regimes For cases of moderate wind speed, both terms in (3) will contribute. It appears that the following mix gives quite satisfactory results over the entire wind domain: b fit n = [(bν n )p +(b α n )p ] 1 p where p = 12. (12) The quality of this fit is demonstrated in Figure (2), which represents the situation for z = 4m (left), 10m (middle) and 30m (right panel), for α ch = 0.01, 0.018 and 0.1. In this Figure, the exact relation is indicated by the black solid lines, fit (12) by the red dashed curves, while the branches (8) and (10) are represented by the grey solid curves. In the regime where either kinematic viscosity or Charnock dominates, the value of b n for the other branch is so much larger that it does not contribute to the weighted average (12). Only where both effects contribute to z 0, a smooth, though rather fast transition between both branches occurs. The choice of value p = 12 appears to represent this transition well. As can be seen from Figure (2), fit (12) is able to describe the exact solution extremely well over a large range for level height, neutral wind speed, and Charnock parameter. Only for extreme values of α ch and wind speed, a noticeable deviation occurs. However, this is in the region where no formal solution exists, and which should in practise not occur. 4 Technical Memorandum No. 630

Figure 3: Roughness length z 0 (left) and neutral drag coefficient CD n (right) as function of 10m neutral wind speed for α ch = 0.018. Solid black curve is the solution obtained from iteration of (3-5), while the red dashed curves represent fit (13) and the blue dotted curve relation (11) from Guan and Xie (2004). 3 Summary The following relations provide an accurate fit for the behaviour of roughness length z 0 and drag coefficient C n D as function of neutral wind speed u n at level height z, and Charnock parameter α ch : where z fit 0 = z/(exp(b fit n ) 1), CD nfit = ( κ ) 2, (13) b fit n = [(b ν n )p +(b α n )p ] 1 p, p = 12, (14) b v n = 1.47+0.93log R, R = z α M ν (κu n), (15) b α n = +2.65 1.44log A 0.015(log A) 2, A = α ch gz (κu n) 2,. (16) No iteration is required. The fit is entirely formulated in terms of the dimensionless quantities R and A, which besides physical quantities include the value of constants. For this reason the fit is not only valid over a wide range of level heights, wind speed and Charnock parameter, but also for alternative choices of constants (like κ and α M ). In Figure (3) the quality of (16-16) for z 0 (left panel) and CD n (right panel) is demonstrated for 10m neutral wind at a Charnock parameter of 0.018. For the entire wind domain from 0.1 50ms 1, there is no noticeable difference from the implicit solution for (3-5). In the right panel, the drag coefficient as formulated by Guan and Xie b fit n Technical Memorandum No. 630 5

(2004) is displayed as well. From 3ms 1 and higher, the fit is very accurate as well. For low wind, this drag saturates, mainly because it does not take account of kinematic viscosity. For the determination of z 0 (16-16) has been coded in a IFS (CY35R2) routine Z0SEA.F90 (where very low wind speed is capped to 0.1ms 1 ). Its adjoint and tangent-linear versions are coded in Z0SEATL.F90 and Z0SEAAD.F90, respectively. Although these routines involve the derivative of roots and powers up to p = 12, the functional behaviour is very smooth, as can be seen from Figure (2). Currently, these routines are only used when scatterometer data is assimilated as equivalent neutral wind (which is not the default for CY36R2 and before). Acknowledgements I would like to thank Peter Janssen and Anton Beljaars for useful discussions and suggestions. presented in this document was partly funded by ESRIN (Project Ref. 22025/08/I-EC). The work References Brown, A. R., Beljaars, A. C. M. and Hersbach, H. (2006). Errors in parametrizations of convective boundary layer turbulent moment mixing. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 132, 1,859 1,876. Charnock, H. (1955). Wind stress on a water surface. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 81, 639 640. Guan, C. and Xie, L. (2004). On the linear parametrization of drag coefficient over sea surface. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 34, 2,847 2,851. IFS-documentation (2009). edited by Bob Riddaway. available from www.ecmwf.int/research/ifsdocs/. Janssen, P. A. E. M. (1991). Quasi-linear theory of wind wave generation applied to wave forecasting. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 21, 1,631 1,642. Wu, J. (1980). Wind-stress coefficients over sea surface near neutral conditions -a revisit. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 10, 727 740. 6 Technical Memorandum No. 630