Correlations between Ambient Noise and the Ocean Surface Wave Field

Felizardo, Francis C.; Melville, W. Kendall

doi:10.1175/1520-0485(1995)025<0513:cbanat>2.0.co;2

Cited by 56 publications

(65 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The wind dependence of the buoys' R dis agrees with that of the JONSWAP spectrum with the lower bound. Both of them are generally consistent with that of Hanson and Phillips (1999), while the R dis of the JONSWAP spectrum with the upper bound agrees well with the observational data of Felizardo and Melville (1995). A quasi-linear relationship between R dis and R B was illustrated with the CC (R 00.88) slightly higher than that for winds (R00.86).…”

Section: Turbulent Dissipation Rate In Wave-breaking Layersupporting

confidence: 85%

“…Phillips (1985) argued that in the equilibrium range, the wind input, nonlinear waveÁwave interactions and dissipation are all important and derived the cubic dependence of the dissipation on the spectral density. The Phillips model is consistent with the field observations by Toba et al (1988) and performs better in the acoustic study of windÁwave breaking (Kennedy, 1992;Felizardo and Melville, 1995) than the Hasselmann model. The breaking wave-energy dissipation rate has been related to wind and wave parameters based on the Phillips model (Hanson and Phillips, 1999;Zhao and Toba, 2001;Guan et al, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 86%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Gas transfer velocity in the presence of wave breaking

Zhao

2016

Tellus B: Chemical and Physical Meteorology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C T Wave breaking is known to cause air entrainment and enhancement of the near-surface turbulence. Thus, it intensifies the gas exchange across the airÁsea interface. Based on the combination of the vertical distribution of the turbulence in the wave-affected layer and the breaking wave-energy dissipation rate in the wave-breaking layer, we proposed a composite model for the gas transfer velocity in the presence of wave breaking. The gas transfer velocity was calculated as a function of the air frictional velocity, wave age, and whitecap coverage. The model was validated by the dependences on winds and wave ages by field and laboratory measurements. The results supported the hypothesis that the large uncertainties in the traditional gas transfer velocities based on wind speed alone at moderate-to-high wind speeds can be ascribed to the neglect of the windÁwave effect, which is mainly attributed to the whitecap coverage as a function of the windÁsea Reynolds number.

show abstract

Section: Turbulent Dissipation Rate In Wave-breaking Layersupporting

confidence: 85%

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Gas transfer velocity in the presence of wave breaking

Zhao

2016

Tellus B: Chemical and Physical Meteorology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Their method was effectively developed for a single-wave environment, and determination of the scales and energy losses of breaking waves in complex spectral environment was beyond the scope of their paper. Felizardo and Melville (1995) further applied passive acoustics in the field, where breaking waves of all scales and various dissipation rates can be present at the same time. They argued that the dependence of ambient noise on the wind is indirect.…”

Section: B Passive Acoustic Studies Of Wave Breakingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is the hydrodynamic evolution of the wave spectrum that determines whether breaking occurs (Banner et al 2000;BYB). Once breaking occurs, it is the primary source of the ambient noise in the ocean (Kerman 1988(Kerman , 1992Farmer and Vagle 1988;Felizardo and Melville 1995).…”

Section: Ambient Sound In the Ocean And Its Relation To Bubble Formentioning

confidence: 99%

Passive Acoustic Determination of Wave-Breaking Events and Their Severity across the Spectrum

Manasseh

Babanin

Forbes

et al. 2006

Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A passive acoustic method of detecting breaking waves of different scales has been developed. The method also showed promise for measuring breaking severity.Sounds were measured by a subsurface hydrophone in various wind and wave states. A video record of the surface was made simultaneously. Individual sound pulses corresponding to the many individual bubble formations during wave-breaking events typically last only a few tens of milliseconds. Each time a soundlevel threshold was exceeded, the acoustic signal was captured over a brief window typical of a bubble formation pulse, registering one count. Each pulse was also analyzed to determine the likely bubble size generating the pulse.Using the time series of counts and visual observations of the video record, the sound-level threshold that detected bubble formations at a rate optimally discriminating between breaking and nonbreaking waves was determined by a classification-accuracy analysis. This diagnosis of breaking waves was found to be approximately 70%-75% accurate once the optimum threshold had been determined.The method was then used for detailed analysis of wave-breaking properties across the spectrum. When applied to real field data, a breaking probability distribution could be obtained. This is the rate of occurrence of wave-breaking events at different wave scales. With support from a separate, laboratory experiment, the estimated bubble size is argued to be dependent on the severity of wave breaking and thus to provide information on the energy loss due to the breaking at the measured spectral frequencies. A combination of the breaking probability distribution and the bubble size could lead to direct estimates of spectral distribution of wave dissipation.Corresponding author address: Richard Manasseh, Fluid Dynamics Cluster, CSIRO Manufacturing and Infrastructure Technology,

show abstract

“…In majority of the literature, the wind-generated noise is classified to be due to two processes [6][7][8][9]. One is due to the wave breaking events, which occurs at higher wind speeds and the other due to collective oscillation of bubbles at their resonant frequency.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%