YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • AMS
    • Weather and Forecasting
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • AMS
    • Weather and Forecasting
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Evaluations of Global Wave Prediction at the Fleet Numerical Meteorology and Oceanography Center

    Source: Weather and Forecasting:;2005:;volume( 020 ):;issue: 005::page 745
    Author:
    Rogers, W. Erick
    ,
    Wittmann, Paul A.
    ,
    Wang, David W. C.
    ,
    Clancy, R. Michael
    ,
    Hsu, Y. Larry
    DOI: 10.1175/WAF882.1
    Publisher: American Meteorological Society
    Abstract: It is a major challenge to determine whether bias in operational global wave predictions is predominately due to the wave model itself (internal error) or due to errors in wind forcing (an external error). Another challenge is to characterize bias attributable to errors in wave model physics (e.g., input, dissipation, and nonlinear transfer). In this study, hindcasts and an evaluation methodology are constructed to address these challenges. The bias of the wave predictions is evaluated with consideration of the bias of four different wind forcing fields [two of which are supplemented with the NASA Quick Scatterometer (QuikSCAT) measurements]. It is found that the accuracy of the Fleet Numerical Meteorology and Oceanography Center?s operational global wind forcing has improved to the point where it is unlikely to be the primary source of error in the center?s global wave model (WAVEWATCH-III). The hindcast comparisons are specifically designed to minimize systematic errors from numerics and resolution. From these hindcasts, insight into the physics-related bias in the global wave model is possible: comparison to in situ wave data suggests an overall positive bias at northeast Pacific locations and an overall negative bias at northwest Atlantic locations. Comparison of frequency bands indicates a tendency by the model physics to overpredict energy at higher frequencies and underpredict energy at lower frequencies.
    • Download: (613.3Kb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Evaluations of Global Wave Prediction at the Fleet Numerical Meteorology and Oceanography Center

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4231250
    Collections
    • Weather and Forecasting

    Show full item record

    contributor authorRogers, W. Erick
    contributor authorWittmann, Paul A.
    contributor authorWang, David W. C.
    contributor authorClancy, R. Michael
    contributor authorHsu, Y. Larry
    date accessioned2017-06-09T17:35:01Z
    date available2017-06-09T17:35:01Z
    date copyright2005/10/01
    date issued2005
    identifier issn0882-8156
    identifier otherams-87567.pdf
    identifier urihttp://onlinelibrary.yabesh.ir/handle/yetl/4231250
    description abstractIt is a major challenge to determine whether bias in operational global wave predictions is predominately due to the wave model itself (internal error) or due to errors in wind forcing (an external error). Another challenge is to characterize bias attributable to errors in wave model physics (e.g., input, dissipation, and nonlinear transfer). In this study, hindcasts and an evaluation methodology are constructed to address these challenges. The bias of the wave predictions is evaluated with consideration of the bias of four different wind forcing fields [two of which are supplemented with the NASA Quick Scatterometer (QuikSCAT) measurements]. It is found that the accuracy of the Fleet Numerical Meteorology and Oceanography Center?s operational global wind forcing has improved to the point where it is unlikely to be the primary source of error in the center?s global wave model (WAVEWATCH-III). The hindcast comparisons are specifically designed to minimize systematic errors from numerics and resolution. From these hindcasts, insight into the physics-related bias in the global wave model is possible: comparison to in situ wave data suggests an overall positive bias at northeast Pacific locations and an overall negative bias at northwest Atlantic locations. Comparison of frequency bands indicates a tendency by the model physics to overpredict energy at higher frequencies and underpredict energy at lower frequencies.
    publisherAmerican Meteorological Society
    titleEvaluations of Global Wave Prediction at the Fleet Numerical Meteorology and Oceanography Center
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume20
    journal issue5
    journal titleWeather and Forecasting
    identifier doi10.1175/WAF882.1
    journal fristpage745
    journal lastpage760
    treeWeather and Forecasting:;2005:;volume( 020 ):;issue: 005
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian