![ocean waves realflow ocean waves realflow](https://loozap.com/storage/files/gh/j_18-08-2019/thumb-816x460-listings360_125785_15617528107029300_620x388.jpg)
Unresolved LES subgrid-scale (SGS) motions are simulated with the LSM to be energetically consistent with the SGS model of the LES.
![ocean waves realflow ocean waves realflow](https://cdn.80.lv/api/upload/content/37/5d274b95de079.jpg)
Breaking wave (BW) effects are modeled by a surface turbulent kinetic energy flux that is constrained by wind energy input to surface waves. Langmuir turbulence (LT) is captured by Craik–Leibovich wave forcing that generates LT through the Craik–Leibovich type 2 (CL2) mechanism. This study explores a Lagrangian analysis of wave-driven OSBL turbulence, based on a large-eddy simulation (LES) model coupled to a Lagrangian stochastic model (LSM). Turbulent processes in the ocean surface boundary layer (OSBL) play a key role in weather and climate systems. Default study domain size (black) and enlarged domain (gray).
![ocean waves realflow ocean waves realflow](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/xQuMTFg9Osc/maxresdefault.jpg)
Normalized velocity autocorrelation (a)–(c) without and (d)–(f) with Langmuir turbulence. Normalized (a),(e) along-wind velocity and (b)–(d),(f)–(h) velocity variance profiles (top) without and (bottom) with Langmuir turbulence. Compare to smaller-domain-size results shown in Fig. Horizontal cross section of normalized vertical velocity at middepth (a) without and (b) with LT for the extended horizontal domain. Instantaneous snapshots of normalized ε cross sections where particles have been released initially see Fig. Solutions of and converge to the theoretical asymptotic limits for long times (dashed line) and short times (dotted line). For, the dashed line shows the expected value for vertically well-mixed particles. 1): S (thick black line), L (gray line), and LB (thin solid black line) cases. Solutions of and converge to the theoretical asymptotic limits for long times (dashed line) and short times (dotted line).Įvolution of normalized mean squared particle-pair distance initially located at four different crosswind locations and at middepth (cf.
![ocean waves realflow ocean waves realflow](https://www.fxphd.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/image-featured-rfl205.jpg)
Particle locations after the release of point sources at 12 locations after (a),(c) ( t = 100 s) and (b),(d) ( t = 400 s) (a),(b) in 3D and (c),(d) projected into a plane orthogonal to the x direction.Įvolution of normalized mean squared particle-pair distance initially located at, coinciding with downwelling locations (cf. Normalized autocorrelation (thick black line) for the (a) L and (b) S cases with its envelope (thin black line) and (gray line) see (16). Dashed lines show only for LES-resolved scales without SGS model (11) for the S (black) and L (gray) cases. Normalized velocity autocorrelation for the S (thick black line), L (gray line), and LB (thin black line) cases. 4.Ĭloseup of the Z trajectory for the LB case shown in Fig. The box in the top-left corner of (a) is enlarged in Fig. Normalized velocities are offset by −10 and 10 for the S and L cases, respectively. The normalized Stokes drift profile is shown in the top panels of (b) and (c) as a thick dashed line.Įxamples of (a)–(c) turbulent trajectories and (d)–(f) velocities for the S (thick black line), L (gray line), and LB (thin black line) cases. Particle release locations for point source dispersion experiments are indicated by crosses ( section 3e).Ĭomparison of horizontally averaged along-wind velocity and velocity variances obtained from Lagrangian particle trajectories (thick line) and Eulerian fields (thin lines) with SGS (gray) and without SGS (black) contributions for the (a) S, (b) L, and (c) LB cases. Horizontal cross section of (a) near-surface υ, (b) middepth w, and (c) near-bottom υ, and (d) depth–crosswind cross section of w. Normalized velocity fields (top) without and (bottom) with LT.