esc

Type at least two characters to start searching.

select openesc close

Share

Export Citation

APA
MLA
Chicago
Harvard
Vancouver
BIBTEX
RIS
Universitas Hasanuddin
Research output:Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Global Wave Hindcasts Using the Observation-Based Source Terms: Description and Validation

Liu Q.

Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems

Q1
Published: 2021Citations: 75

Abstract

Abstract Global wave hindcasts are developed using the third generation spectral wave model WAVEWATCH III with the observation‐based source terms (ST6) and a hybrid rectilinear‐curvilinear, irregular‐regular‐irregular grid system (approximately at ). Three distinct global hindcasts are produced: (a) a long‐term hindcast (1979–2019) forced by the ERA5 conventional winds and (b) two short‐term hindcasts (2011–2019) driven by the NCEP climate forecast system (CFS)v2 and the ERA5 neutral winds , respectively. The input field for ice is sourced from the Ocean and Sea Ice Satellite Application Facility (OSI SAF) sea‐ice concentration climate data records. These wave simulations, together with the driving wind forcing, are validated against extensive in‐situ observations and satellite altimeter records. The performance of the ST6 wave hindcasts shows promising results across multiple wave parameters, including the conventional wave characteristics (e.g., wave height and wave period) and high‐order spectral moments (e.g., the surface Stokes drift and mean square slope). The ERA5‐based simulations generally present lower random errors, but the CFS‐based run represents extreme sea states (e.g., m) considerably better. Novel wave parameters available in our hindcasts, namely the dominant wave breaking probability, wave‐induced mixed layer depth, freak wave indexes and wave‐spreading factor, are further described and briefly discussed. Inter‐comparisons of from the long‐term (41 years) wave hindcast, buoy measurements and two different calibrated altimeter data sets highlight the inconsistency in these altimeter records arising from different calibration methodology. Significant errors in the low‐frequency bins (period s) for both wave energy and directionality call for further model development.

Access to Document

10.1029/2021MS002493

Other files and links

Fingerprint

HindcastSciences
AltimeterSciences
Significant wave heightSciences
Environmental scienceSciences
Wave heightSciences
Rogue waveSciences
BuoySciences
MeteorologySciences
ClimatologySciences
Wave modelSciences
Wind waveSciences
Term (time)Sciences
GeologySciences
Remote sensingSciences
GeographySciences
PhysicsSciences
OceanographySciences
Quantum mechanicsSciences
Nonlinear systemSciences