the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 06 Dec 2023
An analytical model investigating the impact of current shear and topographic fluctuations on surface waves
Abstract. There are interactions between surface waves and currents, the latter includes wind-driven current and tidal current. Currents influence surface waves though advection transport and shear instability generation processes. While the horizontal gradient of current is commonly considered to calculate wave-current interaction source term in most wave models, the vertical gradient of current (current shear) has been simplified. In coastal waters, strong background currents with topographic fluctuations at the scale of surface waves have a resonance effect on surface waves. However, this resonance process is currently ignored in existing wave models. To evaluate the effects of current shear and topographic fluctuations on surface waves more accurately, an analytical model is proposed to describe the modification of the amplitude of orbital velocities for surface waves. The amplitude of orbital velocities exhibits significant variations when considering both current shear and topographic fluctuation effects. Wave particle trajectory equations that incorporate current shear and topographic fluctuations are derived based on this analytical model. In deep waters, current shear can increase or decrease the horizontal radius of wave particle trajectory by approximately 0.3 m, while the modification of horizontal amplitude of orbital velocities is about 0.3 m/s. In shallow waters, with both topographic fluctuations and background current present, both horizontal and vertical radii of wave particle trajectory change by approximately ±0.1 m respectively, and the modification of both horizontal and vertical amplitudes of orbital velocities is about 0.2–0.3 m/s. Moreover, in some cases, there are reversals in the direction of wave particle trajectories.
This preprint has been withdrawn.
-
Withdrawal notice
This preprint has been withdrawn.
-
Preprint
(3353 KB)
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2905', Anonymous Referee #1, 05 Jan 2024
This work completely disregards the large international literature on the topic of waves interacting with (vertically) sheared currents, heavily researched especially in the last decade. Glancing at the bibliography, I count 14 self-references to papers with Yongzeng Yang as co-author, and a further 6 include frequent collaborators Yeli Yuan and/or Fangli Qiao. There is not a single reference from the last 15 years not co-authored by any of these three. Do not misunderstand: Yuan, Yang and Qiao are all exceptional researchers, foremost in their field, yet they are not alone. This is reason enough in itself that the paper cannot be accepted.
The model developed could be of use although, one suspects, mainly to the authors themselves. It is not dissimilar in scope to e.g. Belibassakis & Touboul (Fluids, 2019), Yang & Liu (JFM 2020 and 2022), M. Beyer (PhD thesis, 2018), but being linear, is more limited. (The authors would do well to go through the references in these sources as a start). No Stokes drift appears here for instance; the particle paths shown are all closed, and therefore in my view not all that interesting.
From a theory point of view, yes, the model is analytical, but there are far more transparent and instructive treatments of linear waves in these environments (providing references seems redundant). Excepting for the simplest cases I find the equations in this paper enormous and physically opaque.
There is a large amount of work here, which probably ought to be published somewhere. I am sorry to say, though, I find this work to be out of touch with the ongoing research of recent decades, and I cannot see that it contributes anything new or necessary enough to warrant publication in Ocean Sciences.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2905-RC1 - RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2905', Anonymous Referee #2, 18 Feb 2024
-
EC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2905', Meric Srokosz, 27 Feb 2024
In light of the reviews, this manuscript is not acceptable for publication in Ocean Science and it is very unlikely that any revised version would be acceptable for publication either.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2905-EC1
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2905', Anonymous Referee #1, 05 Jan 2024
This work completely disregards the large international literature on the topic of waves interacting with (vertically) sheared currents, heavily researched especially in the last decade. Glancing at the bibliography, I count 14 self-references to papers with Yongzeng Yang as co-author, and a further 6 include frequent collaborators Yeli Yuan and/or Fangli Qiao. There is not a single reference from the last 15 years not co-authored by any of these three. Do not misunderstand: Yuan, Yang and Qiao are all exceptional researchers, foremost in their field, yet they are not alone. This is reason enough in itself that the paper cannot be accepted.
The model developed could be of use although, one suspects, mainly to the authors themselves. It is not dissimilar in scope to e.g. Belibassakis & Touboul (Fluids, 2019), Yang & Liu (JFM 2020 and 2022), M. Beyer (PhD thesis, 2018), but being linear, is more limited. (The authors would do well to go through the references in these sources as a start). No Stokes drift appears here for instance; the particle paths shown are all closed, and therefore in my view not all that interesting.
From a theory point of view, yes, the model is analytical, but there are far more transparent and instructive treatments of linear waves in these environments (providing references seems redundant). Excepting for the simplest cases I find the equations in this paper enormous and physically opaque.
There is a large amount of work here, which probably ought to be published somewhere. I am sorry to say, though, I find this work to be out of touch with the ongoing research of recent decades, and I cannot see that it contributes anything new or necessary enough to warrant publication in Ocean Sciences.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2905-RC1 - RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2905', Anonymous Referee #2, 18 Feb 2024
-
EC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-2905', Meric Srokosz, 27 Feb 2024
In light of the reviews, this manuscript is not acceptable for publication in Ocean Science and it is very unlikely that any revised version would be acceptable for publication either.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2905-EC1
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 286 | 100 | 43 | 429 | 37 | 34 |
- HTML: 286
- PDF: 100
- XML: 43
- Total: 429
- BibTeX: 37
- EndNote: 34
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| United States of America | 1 | 153 | 37 |
| China | 2 | 67 | 16 |
| Germany | 3 | 37 | 8 |
| France | 4 | 18 | 4 |
| Brazil | 5 | 11 | 2 |
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
- 153