2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.ocemod.2015.01.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Numerical modeling of circulation in high-energy estuaries: A Columbia River estuary benchmark

Abstract: a b s t r a c tNumerical modeling of three-dimensional estuarine circulation is often challenging due to complex flow features and strong density gradients. In this paper the skill of a specific model is assessed against a highresolution data set, obtained in a river-dominated mesotidal estuary with autonomous underwater vehicles and a shipborne winched profiler. The measurements provide a detailed view of the salt wedge dynamics of the Columbia River estuary. Model skill is examined under contrasting forcing … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
55
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 65 publications
(55 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
55
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Of these, sharp density and flow gradients are especially challenging to resolve, both numerically (e.g., Hofmeister et al 2010;Kärnä et al 2015) and observationally, yet they can be important when channel geometry does not vary smoothly. Klymak and Gregg (2001) found counterrotating eddies in the lee of a sill and narrows in Knight Inlet that caused significant biases in their along-channel estimates of volume flux.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of these, sharp density and flow gradients are especially challenging to resolve, both numerically (e.g., Hofmeister et al 2010;Kärnä et al 2015) and observationally, yet they can be important when channel geometry does not vary smoothly. Klymak and Gregg (2001) found counterrotating eddies in the lee of a sill and narrows in Knight Inlet that caused significant biases in their along-channel estimates of volume flux.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two kinds of models are typically used: numerical models and analytical models. Presently, numerical models are more popular especially two-dimensional (2-D) and 3-D models (Kärnä et al, 2015;Elias et al, 2012;Zhao et al, 2012;Li et al, 2012;Jeong et al, 2010;Wu and Zhu, 2010;Xue et al, 2009;An et al, 2009, etc. ) because they can provide more spatial and temporal detail.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…AUV data have also contributed to a stringent benchmark for the CMOP modeling system, which has resulted in novel assessments (e.g., Fig. 8) and substantial improvements of modeling skill (Kärnä et al, 2015). In turn, AUV missions are planned and interpreted with the benefit of the CMOP numerical models, by exploring in silico (not shown) alternative paths of the AUVs through forecasted fields of water velocity, density, and turbidity.…”
Section: Pioneer Arraymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Virtual Columbia River is anchored on highresolution circulation simulations Burla et al, 2010a;Kärnä et al, 2015), upon which operational products are created and complementary (sediment dynamics and biogeochemical) models are built. The infrastructure for the circulation simulations integrates models, bathymetry, grids, forcing, and skill assessment strategies.…”
Section: Saturn Modeling Systemmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation