the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 13 Nov 2024
Parameter Sensitivity Study of Energy Transfer Between Mesoscale Eddies and Wind-Induced Near-Inertial Oscillations
Abstract. Analyses of current observations and numerical simulations at two moorings in the northern South China Sea reveal the transfer of near-inertial energy between the background currents associated with mesoscale eddies and near-inertial currents (NICs). A series of numerical experiments are conducted to determine important parameters affecting the energy transfer between idealized mesoscale eddies and NICs generated by rotating winds. Speeds of NICs transferred by both cyclonic and anticyclonic mesoscale eddies increase linearly with the wind stress and eddy strength. The transferred NICs in anticyclonic eddies have current amplitudes of about six times larger than in cyclonic eddies. The translation speed of the mesoscale eddy and the wind rotation frequency also affect the conversion of NICs. The energy transfer rate is elevated with the increase of the positive Okubo-Weiss parameter. A simple theoretical analysis is conducted to verify our findings based on numerical results. Analytical solutions confirm the evident asymmetry of the energy transfer between anticyclonic and cyclonic eddies, and demonstrate quantitatively the relationship between the wind stress and the near-inertial energy transferred by mesoscale eddies.
-
Notice on discussion status
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
-
Preprint
(1463 KB)
-
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(1463 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-3457', Anonymous Referee #1, 06 Jan 2025
This manuscript presents a parameter sensitivity study of energy transfer between mesoscale eddies and wind-induced near-inertial currents using slab models. A large number of numerical experiments were conducted. The manuscript is well written. The results shown are generally interesting and consistent with expectations. The interpretation of these results requires some further elaboration and strengthening.
- The better performance of the modified slab model against observations. How robust is this result? The selection of the damping coefficient is kind of arbitrary. If a larger damping coefficient were used, the original slab model might perform better while the modified slab model could under-predict the magnitude of near-inertial currents.
- The difference in NIC speed between the modified and original models is attributed to energy transfer between eddies and NICs. However, this difference could also result from the difference in the generation of wind-induced NICs in cyclonic eddies and anticyclonic eddies, rather than energy transfer between eddies and NICs.
- The direction of energy transfer between eddies and NICs appears to depend on the wind rotation frequency. Please explain why, for some rotation frequencies, the energy transfer occurs from eddies to NICs, while for others, it shifts from NICs to eddies.
- Can you explain why alpha has a maximum value at the eddy translational speed of 11 cm/s? What is special about this translational speed?
- You talked quite a bit about the importance of strain and OW parameter, but your theoretical analysis seems to say that only the relative vorticity matters?
- It feels that your theoretical analysis is not really on energy transfer between eddies and NICs, but on the impact of relative vorticity on the generation of NICs.
Some minor comments:
- Any validation of ERA5 winds at mooring locations?
- Line 166. Why is smoothing required?
- Line 209-211. I don’t see two separate weak cyclonic eddies to the east and south in the SLA map.
- Section 5.1. The eddy vertical structure is irrelevant here, since only the eddy surface geostrophic velocity is used in the numerical experiments.
- Line 590. “Consider steady wind forcing...” There is still wind forcing with frequency omega on RHS of (27).
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3457-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Yu Zhang, 23 Feb 2025
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-3457/egusphere-2024-3457-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-3457', Anonymous Referee #2, 27 Jan 2025
In this paper entitled «Parameter Sensitivity Study of Energy Transfer Between Mesoscale Eddies and Wind-Induced Near-Inertial Oscillations», Zhang et al. analyse data from mooring lines and a numerical slab model to characterize energy transfers between winds and the surface mixed layer around the inertial frequency. Serval Sensitivity cases are described in order to take into account different aspect impacting these transfers of energy (intensity and frequency of osciallating winds, intensity of ocean currents, …). Finally with an analytical approach the authors confirmed the relationships they found with the numerical simulations.
The topic of the paper is very relevant, as the interaction between winds and the surface currents at mesoscale is important for the ocean energy budget. In my opinion, the paper deserves publication in Ocean Science, but it first needs some revisions to clarify the results and the way they are presented.
See attachement for more details.
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Yu Zhang, 23 Feb 2025
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-3457/egusphere-2024-3457-AC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Yu Zhang, 23 Feb 2025
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-3457', Anonymous Referee #1, 06 Jan 2025
This manuscript presents a parameter sensitivity study of energy transfer between mesoscale eddies and wind-induced near-inertial currents using slab models. A large number of numerical experiments were conducted. The manuscript is well written. The results shown are generally interesting and consistent with expectations. The interpretation of these results requires some further elaboration and strengthening.
- The better performance of the modified slab model against observations. How robust is this result? The selection of the damping coefficient is kind of arbitrary. If a larger damping coefficient were used, the original slab model might perform better while the modified slab model could under-predict the magnitude of near-inertial currents.
- The difference in NIC speed between the modified and original models is attributed to energy transfer between eddies and NICs. However, this difference could also result from the difference in the generation of wind-induced NICs in cyclonic eddies and anticyclonic eddies, rather than energy transfer between eddies and NICs.
- The direction of energy transfer between eddies and NICs appears to depend on the wind rotation frequency. Please explain why, for some rotation frequencies, the energy transfer occurs from eddies to NICs, while for others, it shifts from NICs to eddies.
- Can you explain why alpha has a maximum value at the eddy translational speed of 11 cm/s? What is special about this translational speed?
- You talked quite a bit about the importance of strain and OW parameter, but your theoretical analysis seems to say that only the relative vorticity matters?
- It feels that your theoretical analysis is not really on energy transfer between eddies and NICs, but on the impact of relative vorticity on the generation of NICs.
Some minor comments:
- Any validation of ERA5 winds at mooring locations?
- Line 166. Why is smoothing required?
- Line 209-211. I don’t see two separate weak cyclonic eddies to the east and south in the SLA map.
- Section 5.1. The eddy vertical structure is irrelevant here, since only the eddy surface geostrophic velocity is used in the numerical experiments.
- Line 590. “Consider steady wind forcing...” There is still wind forcing with frequency omega on RHS of (27).
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3457-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Yu Zhang, 23 Feb 2025
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-3457/egusphere-2024-3457-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-3457', Anonymous Referee #2, 27 Jan 2025
In this paper entitled «Parameter Sensitivity Study of Energy Transfer Between Mesoscale Eddies and Wind-Induced Near-Inertial Oscillations», Zhang et al. analyse data from mooring lines and a numerical slab model to characterize energy transfers between winds and the surface mixed layer around the inertial frequency. Serval Sensitivity cases are described in order to take into account different aspect impacting these transfers of energy (intensity and frequency of osciallating winds, intensity of ocean currents, …). Finally with an analytical approach the authors confirmed the relationships they found with the numerical simulations.
The topic of the paper is very relevant, as the interaction between winds and the surface currents at mesoscale is important for the ocean energy budget. In my opinion, the paper deserves publication in Ocean Science, but it first needs some revisions to clarify the results and the way they are presented.
See attachement for more details.
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Yu Zhang, 23 Feb 2025
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2024-3457/egusphere-2024-3457-AC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Yu Zhang, 23 Feb 2025
Peer review completion
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 165 | 40 | 23 | 228 | 17 | 21 |
- HTML: 165
- PDF: 40
- XML: 23
- Total: 228
- BibTeX: 17
- EndNote: 21
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
Yu Zhang
Jintao Gu
Shengli Chen
Jianyu Hu
Jinyu Sheng
Jiuxing Xing
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(1463 KB) - Metadata XML