[MITgcm-devel] Re: Large & Yeager 2004

[Chris Hill]

Hi All,

Can anyone shed some light on the relationship between

  Impenetrable and incomprehensible technical report by
  Large & Yeager 2004

  and

  > Bulk Parameterization of Air–Sea Fluxes: Updates and Verification for
> the COARE Algorithm  by
  C.W. Fairall, E.F. Bradley,.... Journal of Climate 15 Feb 2003, page 571-

  As far as I can see Fairall makes no reference to Large and Pond - and 
L&Y make no reference to Fairall.

  Jim Edson at U. Connn says Fairall is the bulk formula he and his 
observationalist chums would recommend.

  To add to my confusion the Fairall algorithm goes by the name COARE 
3.0 while L&Y 2004 is part of the CORE forcing.

  Help!

Chris

Patrick Heimbach wrote:
> 
> Martin,
> 
> and another one(?)
> Large & Yeager recommend albedo to be set to 0.066,
> whereas exf has default of 0.1
> So maybe change that one too?
> I'll test it later.
> 
> -p.
> 
> 
> 
> On Dec 18, 2006, at 3:26 PM, Martin Losch wrote:
> 
>> Patrick,
>>
>> I have just put a run with large+yeager bulk formulae into the queue. 
>> Would it make more sense to stop that job and do, what you suggest 
>> (ocean_emissivity = 1)?
>>
>> Martin
>>
>> On 18 Dec 2006, at 20:52, Patrick Heimbach wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Dimitris,
>>>
>>> an update on this.
>>> Different people seem to understand different things
>>> when they talk about "bulk formulae".
>>> I undetstood the derivation of buoyancy and momentum fluxes
>>> from atmos. state involving the parameterization of the neutral
>>> transfer coefficients, their stability corrections and the like,
>>> thus deriving, taux & tauy, sensible & latent heat fluxes, evaporation.
>>> The treatment of radiation is somewhat separate, since completely
>>> decoupled from these "bulk formulae".
>>>
>>> However, in fact it seems that this minor detail might be
>>> the only relevant part that distinguishes our current
>>> exf implementation from the Large & Yeager 2004 recommendations,
>>> i.e. they suggest ocean_emissivity to be set to 1,
>>> whereas exf has a default of 0.97
>>> (and bulkf_force a default of 0.985).
>>>
>>> So I'll conduct another run with changed emissivity
>>> (the 3% difference should in fact have a discernable impact).
>>>
>>> -Patrick
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 17, 2006, at 12:26 PM, Dimitris Menemenlis wrote:
>>>
>>>> Patrick, thank you for info re bulk formulae.
>>>> This is indeed very useful information.
>>>> Dimitris
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Dr Patrick Heimbach | heimbach at mit.edu | http://www.mit.edu/~heimbach
>>> MIT | EAPS, 54-1518 | 77 Massachusetts Ave | Cambridge, MA 02139, USA
>>> FON: +1-617-253-5259 | FAX: +1-617-253-4464 | SKYPE: patrick.heimbach
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> MITgcm-devel mailing list
>>> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
>>> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> MITgcm-devel mailing list
>> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
>> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel
> 
> ---
> Dr Patrick Heimbach | heimbach at mit.edu | http://www.mit.edu/~heimbach
> MIT | EAPS, 54-1518 | 77 Massachusetts Ave | Cambridge, MA 02139, USA
> FON: +1-617-253-5259 | FAX: +1-617-253-4464 | SKYPE: patrick.heimbach
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MITgcm-devel mailing list
> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel
>