8.0. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was completed as part of the Wave
Information Studies as authorized by headquarters, US
Army Corps of Engineers, as part of the Coastal Field
Data Collection Program at the Engineer Research and
Development Center, Waterways Experiment Station,
Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory, Vicksburg, MS.
Permission was granted by the Office of the Chief of
Engineers, US Army Corps of Engineers, to publish
this information.
9.0. REFERENCES
Bowers, J.A., I.D. Morton and G.I. Mould, 2000.
Directional statistics of the wind and waves. Applied
Ocean Research, 22, No. 1, 13-30.
Figure 7. WW3 results compared to NDBC 42036
for February 1995. Plots from top to bottom
Cox, A.T. and V.J. Cardone. 2002. 20 Years of
Operational Forecasting at Oceanweather. 7th
include significant wave height, wave period, and
wave direction.
International Workshop on Wave Hindcasting and
Forecasting, October 21-25, Banff, Alberta, Canada.
well. WW3 is low but also captures the event's shape.
WAM is a little low on the growth of the event. All
Cox, A.T. and V.J. Cardone. 2000. Operational
the plots and statistics for the February comparisons at
system for the prediction of tropical cyclone generated
NDBC 42036 show excellent hindcast results for all
winds and waves. International Workshop on Wave
models.
Hindcasting and Forecasting November 6-10, 2000,
Monterey, California.
7.0. SUMMARY
Gnther, H., S. Hasselmann, P.A.E.M. Janssen. 1992.
All the statistics and line plots presented in this paper
The WAM Model Cycle 4.0. User Manual. Technical
show that all three models are excellent hindcasting
Report No. 4, Deutsches Klimarechenzentrum,
tools and produce results that agree with
Hamburg, Germany. 102 pages.
measurements. The 2G WIS results are consistent
with results from the more complex calculations done
Hasselmann, S. and K. Hasselmann. 1985.
in the 3G models. No one model is the clear winner in
Computations and parameterizations of the nonlinear
these comparisons. The 3G models tend to have
energy transfer in a gravity-wave spectrum, Part I: A
slightly better directional results. WIS tends to
new method for efficient computations of the exact
slightly over-predict wave height and the 3G models
nonlinear transfer integral. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 15,
tend to under-predict. WIS captures storms and
1369-1377.
hurricane events quite well and is a good tool for the
quick frontal changes in the Gulf of Mexico. All the
Hasselmann, S., K. Hasselmann, J.H.Allender and T.P.
models, 2G and 3G, need work in the area of wave
Barnett. 1985. Computations and parameterizations
period. Future WIS model comparison work includes
of the nonlinear energy transfer in a gravity-wave
a similar study for the Atlantic. WIS is doing the
spectrum, Part II: parameterizations of the nonlinear
initial model testing for the Pacific basin using a new
energy transfer for application in wave models. J.
technique that utilizes wave system diagnostics.
Phys. Oceanogr., 15, 1378-1391.
Results from these Pacific studies will also be
presented at the workshop.
Hersbach, H. and P.A.E.M. Janssen. 1999.
Improvements of the short fetch behavior in the Wam
model. J. Atmos. Oceanic Techn., 16, 884-892.
Hubertz, J.M., 1992 (June). User's guide to the Wave
Information Studies (WIS) wave model, version 2.0.
WIS Report 27 (AD A254 313), U.S. Army Engineer
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
Previous Page
