Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98)Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39.18Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)
SPONSOR / MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S) 9. SPONSORING / MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)
SPONSOR / MONITOR'S REPORT NUMBER(S)This report describes an investigation to determine the relative importance of various sources of error in the two global-scale models of windgenerated surface waves used operationally by the U.S. Navy. The investigation is limited to low-frequency wave energy (e.g., less than 0.08 Hz). Sources of error are grouped into three broad categories: (1) wave model propagation numerics and resolution, (2) wave model physical formulations, and (3) wind forcing (provided to the wave model by an atmospheric model and/or data assimulation system). Each of the three is described and studied independently using tests and hindcasts of varying complexity. Based on these studies, it appears that in both of the Navy models, numerics and resolution are not first-order sourcess of error, and further suggests that, at present, more error is due to model forcing than due to physical formulation. The importance of accuately capturing the intensity of high-speed wind events is shown to be paramount. Also, it appears that the practical effect of physical formulations on swell in the two operational models is considerably different, whereas differences associated with the generation (low-frequency wave growth) stage are relatively modest between the two models.
UnclassifiedUnclassified Unclassified UL 67