Abstract
While moderate wind and wave conditions prevail in the eastern equatorial Pacific, modeling waves in this area remains challenging due to the presence of multiple wave systems converging from different parts of the ocean. This area is covered by swells originated far away including the storm belts of both hemispheres, coexisting with local generation due to the regular action of both the southern trade winds and the wind jets from Central America. In this context, our ability to predict waves in the area depends on the overall quality (i.e., at Pacific scale) of the meteorological input, and also on the skills of the wave model itself. Clearly any error at the remote generation areas translates into larger errors the further waves go, especially if attention is focused on coastal areas. A relevant aspect is that the traditional integral parameters do not offer the possibility to properly assess the errors associated with the different parts of the spectrum (e.g., wind sea and swell). To gain insight in this direction, we make use of partitioning techniques, which enables us to neatly cross-assign and evaluate three spectral components. Not surprisingly, the performance for the swell part is lower than that of the corresponding wind sea. This is further explored with a couple of tests modifying both the wind input and the wave model physics. We find that although at first sight the initial scheme (i.e., ST4) seems to provide the better estimate, the spectral analysis reveals a substantial underestimation of wind sea, compensated with a substantial overestimation of swell. This suggests a problem with too high winds and wave generation in the storm belts together with a likely lack of dissipation or dispersion of swell. In turn, local waves are generally underestimated due to a corresponding underestimation of the local winds. This insight emphasizes the need and advantages of evaluation methods able to look at the different sectors of the wave spectrum.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ardhuin F, Rogers E, Babanin AV, Filipot J, Magne R, Roland A, van der Westhuysen A, Queffeulou P, Lefevre J, Aouf L, Collard F (2010) Semiempirical dissipation source functions for ocean waves. Part I: definition, calibration, and validation. J Phys Oceanogr 40:1917–1941. https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JPO4324.1
Ardhuin F, Stopa JE, Chapron B, Collard F, Jensen RE, Johannessen J et al (2019) Observing sea states. Front Mar Sci 6:124. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2019.00124
Cavaleri L, Abdalla S, Benetazzo A, Bertotti L, Bidlot J-R, Breivik Ø, Carniel S, Jensen RE, Portilla-Yandun J, Rogers WE, Roland A, Sanchez-Arcilla A, Smith JM, Staneva J, Toledo Y, van Vledder GP, van der Westhuysen AJ (2018) Wave modelling in coastal and inner seas. Prog Oceanogr V167:164–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2018.03.010
Chakraborty A, Kumar R, Stoffelen A (2013) Validation of ocean surface winds from the OCEANSAT-2 scatterometer using triple collocation. Remote Sens Lett 4(1):84–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/2150704X.2012.693967
Chawla A, Tolman H (2008) Obstruction grids for spectral wave models, J. Ocean Model V22(I1–2):12–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocemod.2008.01.003
Chelton DB, Freilich M, Esbensen S (2000) Satellite observations of the wind jets off the Pacific coast of Central America, part II: regional relationships and dynamical considerations. Mon Weather Rev 128:2019–2043. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(2000)128%3C1993:SOOTWJ%3E2.0.CO;2
Donelan MA, Hamilton J, Hui WH (1985) Directional spectra of wind-generated waves. Philos Trans R Soc Lond A 315:509–562
Donelan M, Babanin A, Sanina E, Chalikov D (2015) A comparison of methods for estimating directional spectra of surface waves. J Geophys Res Oceans 120:5040–5053. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JC010808
ECMWF, 2018. https://www.ecmwf.int/en/newsletter/154/news/forecast-performance-2017 , Forecast performance 2017, Newsletter 154, (on-line). Last accessed 2019-09-02
EUMESAT-OSISAF, (2018). ScatSat-1 wind Product User Manual Version: 1.3. http://projects.knmi.nl/scatterometer/publications/pdf/osisaf_cdop2_ss3_pum_scatsat1_winds.pdf
Hasselmann S, Hasselmann K (1985) Computation and parameterizations of the nonlinear energy transfer in a gravity-wave spectrum. Part I: a new method for efficient computations of the exact nonlinear transfer. J Phys Oceanogr 15:1369–1377
Holthuijsen L, Powell M, Pietrzak J (2012) Wind and waves in extreme hurricanes. J Geophys Res 117:C09003. https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JC007983
Janssen PAEM (1991) Quasi-linear theory of wind wave generation applied to wave forecasting. J Phys Oceanogr 21:1631–1642
Kalnay E, Kanamitsu M, Baker W (1990) Global numerical weather prediction at the National Meteorological Center. Bull Amer Meteor Soc 71:1410–1428
Kerns B, Chen S (2014) ECMWF and GFS model forecast verification during DYNAMO: multiscale variability in MJO initiation over the equatorial Indian Ocean. J Geophys Res Atmos 119:3736–3755. https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD020833
Martin S (2014) An introduction to ocean remote sensing. Cambridge University Press ISBN 9781107019386, 496 pp
Mori N, Kato M, Kim S, Mase H, Shibutani Y, Takemi T, Tsuboki K, Yasuda T (2014) Local amplification of storm surge by Super Typhoon Haiyan in Leyte Gulf. Geophys Res Lett 41:5106–5113. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL060689
NCEP, 2019. https://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/gmb/STATS_vsdb/. NCEP/EMC global model experimental forecast performance statistics (on-line). Last accessed 2019-09-02
Nwogu O (1989) Maximum entropy estimation of directional wave spectra from an array of wave probes. Appl Ocean Res 11:176–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/0141-1187(89)90016-3
Portilla J, Caicedo A, Padilla-Hernández R (2013) Observations of directional wave spectra in the Colombian Pacific. Rev Avances USFQ. https://doi.org/10.18272/aci.v5i2.137. https://www.usfq.edu.ec/publicaciones/avances/archivo_de_contenidos/Documents/volumen_5_numero_2/c5_5_2_2013.pdf
Portilla J, Caicedo-Laurido A, Padilla-Hernández R, Cavaleri L (2015) Spectral wave conditions in the Colombian Pacific. Ocean Model 92:149–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocemod.2015.06.005
Portilla-Yandún J, Cavaleri L, van Vledder GP (2015) Wave spectra partitioning and long term statistical distribution. Ocean Model 96:148–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocemod.2015.06.008
Portilla-Yandún J (2018) The global signature of ocean wave spectra. Geophys Res Lett 45:267–276. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL076431
Powell, M., , S. Murillo, P. Dodge, E. Uhlhorn, J. Gamache, V. Cardone, A. Cox, S. Otero, N. Carrasco, B. Annane, R. Fleur, (2010). Reconstruction of hurricane Katrina's wind fields for storm surge and wave hindcasting, Ocean Eng, 37, 26–36, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2009.08.014
Shih H., 2003. Triaxys directional wave buoy for nearshore wave measurements – test and evaluation plan, NOAA Technical Report NOS CO-OPS 38 Silver Spring https://repository.library.noaa.gov/view/noaa/14670
Skey, S., Miles, M., 1999. Advances in buoy technology for wind/wave data collection and analysis, OCEANS’99MTS/IEEE.RidingtheCrestintothe21stCentury 1,113–118.doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/OCEANS.1999.799716, http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=799716&abstractAccess=no&userType=inst
Smith W, Sandwell D (1997) Global seafloor topography from satellite altimetry and ship depth soundings. Science 277:1956–1962. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.277.5334.1956
Stopa J, Ardhuin F, Babanin A, Zieger S (2015) Comparison and validation of physical wave parameterizations in spectral wave models. Ocean Model V103:2–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocemod.2015.09.003
Tolman H, Chalikov D (1996) Source terms in a third-generation wind-wave model. J Phys Oceanogr 26:2497–2518. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0485(1996)026%3C2497:STIATG%3E2.0.CO;2
Tolman H, Banner M, Kaihatu J (2013) The NOPP operational wave model improvement project. Ocean Model 70:2–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocemod.2012.11.011
Tolman H., (2014). User manual and system documentation of WAVEWATCH III, technical note, Environmental Modeling Center Marine Modeling and Analysis Branch MMAB Contribution No 316
Van Vledder GP (1993) Evaluation of model performance (methodology, examples, subroutines). Delft Hydraulics, Delft
Wallace J, Hobbs P (2006) Atmospheric science, second edition: an introductory survey (international geophysics), 2nd edn. Academic Press, p 504 ISBN: 978-0127329512
Acknowledgments
Forecast GFS winds and polar ice concentrations were downloaded from the NOAA Operational Model Archive and Distribution System (NOMADS). OSCAT winds were downloaded from the OSI-SAF, KNMI archive. GLOSWAC information was obtained from its web site (https://modemat.epn.edu.ec/nereo/). ERA-I data and forecast statistics were obtained from the ECMWF web site. Buoy data was provided by the Dirección General Marítima de Colombia (DIMAR). Global bathymetry was downloaded from the National Centers for Environmental Information. J. Portilla acknowledges funding from project EPN-PIJ-1503. We acknowledge the insight of the anonymous reviewers for helping improve the final quality of the manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Responsible Editor: Andrés Osorio
This article is part of the Topical Collection on the International Conference of Marine Science ICMS2018, the 3rd Latin American Symposium on Water Waves (LatWaves 2018), Medellin, Colombia, 19-23 November 2018 and the XVIII National Seminar on Marine Sciences and Technologies (SENALMAR), Barranquilla, Colombia 22-25 October 2019
Appendix. Statistical parameters
Appendix. Statistical parameters
The statistical parameters for comparisons between model results and observations are root mean square error (RMSE), bias, scatter index (SI), and the coefficient of determination (R2). The corresponding formulations as given by Van Vledder (1993) are:
where x is the measured and y the modeled variable.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Portilla-Yandún, J., Salazar, A., Sosa, J. et al. Modeling multiple wave systems in the eastern equatorial Pacific. Ocean Dynamics 70, 977–990 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10236-020-01370-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10236-020-01370-8