Model runs

On this page I archive runs of Dr. Audrey Rogerson's transcritical shallow-water model which is described in Rogerson (1999a), and results of which are presented in Rogerson (1999b), Edwards et al (submitted), Rogerson and Samelson (1995) , and Samelson and Rogerson (1996) . All simulations use a uniform initial height and speed field, and the imposed pressure gradients just balance this initial field in the strait upstream region as in Rogerson (1999a).
The runs use a single bend representing Cape Mendocino in a California-scale coastline. These results are written up in a manuscript that will be available soon that compares the results to winds from SSM/I.

The following is a guide to the table results:

Vary bend angle : Subcritical flow can be made supercritical with a sufficiently large coastline bend. However, the supercritical region won't extend to infinity; it is limited by friction and rotation to a scale greater than the Rossby radiius, as is suggested by the limited available observations.
Vary extent to south, vary initial Froude number : Outside the domain, the flow is held at initial conditions, so that waves propagating in to the domain through its north and south boundaries contain (u,v,h) at t=0. If the flow is subcritical in the southern part of the domain, it adjusts upstream of the boundary to this "downstream reservoir".

Vary resolution / domain width : No perceptible differences in the ranges considered here.
Eliminate rotation : This has not been adequately tested, since eddies formed when rotation was eliminated. We expect results similar to Samelson (1992).
Vary radius of curvature : Little effect outside of ~ 100 km. Nearer, we see broader, less extreme adjustment to the bend.

Future runs:

Impose synoptic scale pressure gradient (derive from 850 mb analyses)
Allow cross-shore slope to MABL for better guess at cross-shore length scale. Note: this will make the supercritical region smaller with deeper offshore heights.
Remove friction

Run name, goal	Bend angle, location	# points clipped in south	(L,M), non dim (XL,YL) , (M,N)	V, h, Fr at t=0 (dim)	(Px,Py) non dim	Comments
Extent in south						Flow held at inital conditions on south/north boundary, affecting solution! Increasing initial Froude number has same effect as in (). dp/dy slightly wrong for 13,26,17
Domain goes further south
fl12_15_pts (V,h,Fr)	28, Y = 317	15	(83,115) (332,392) (83,100)	-8.658, 201.85, 1.1126	(-.08658,. 018018)	Super, so effect of south boundary is swept out of domain.
fl13_15_pts (V,h,Fr)	"	"	"	-1.732,1000, .1	(0.01732, -0.0005849)
fl17_15_pts (V,h,Fr)	"	"	"	-7.697,624, .56256	(-0.07697, .0043561)	Minimal effect of south boundary (super)
fl26_15_pts (V,h,Fr)	"	"	"	-3.447,645.5, .2477	(-0.03447, .00063008)	South boundary effects sub flow.
Domain less far south
fl13_30_pts (V,h,Fr)	"	"	" " (83,85)	Same as other 13	Same as other 13	Eddies form in shorter domain!
fl17_30_pts (V,h,Fr)	"	"	"	""" 17	""" 17
fl26_30_pts (V,h,Fr)	"	"	"	""" 26	""" 26
Bend angle, Domain shortened in y direction						Seems to be little change once angle > 28, but affected by south boundary dp/dy slight wrong for 26
fl26_45 (V,h,Fr)	45, Y ~ 245	adequate	(88,?), (250?,317), (88,68)	""" 26	""" 26
fl26_28 (V,h,Fr)	28, Y ~ 148	fair	(100,?), (200,265), (100,125)	"	"
fl26_15 (V,h,Fr)	15, Y ~ 148	"	(100,?), (""), (100,125)	"	"	Small super region
Bend angle, Domain goes further south, 26						Increasing the bend angle > 10 for fl=26 upstream conditons causes flow to go super. Extent of super region is limited (ang=28 looks like ang=45) dp/dy slightly wrong
fl26_45_lg (V,h,Fr)	45, Y=317	15	(108,115) (432,392) (108,100)	"	"
fl26_40_lg	40,:	"	"
fl26_35_lg (V,h,Fr)	35,:	"	"	"	"
28 degrees, fl26_15_pts (V,h,Fr)	28 (~30),"	"	(83,115) (332,392) (83,100)"	"	"
fl26_25_lg (V,h,Fr)	25,"	"	"	"	"
fl26_20_lg (V,h,Fr)	20, "	"	"	"	"
fl26_15_lg (V,h,Fr)	15, "	"	"	"	"
fl26_10 (V,h,Fr)	10, "	"	"	"	"
fl26_5_lg (V,h,Fr)	5,"	"	"	"	"	Flow stays sub
17						For moderate initial Fr, even small bend creates super region whose cross-shore extent is limited
fl17_45_lg	45, Y=317	15	(108,115) (432,392) (108,100)	-7.697 624,.5625	-0.07697 0.0049404	Correct dy_dy
fl17_40_lg	40,"		"
fl17_35_lg (V,h,Fr)	35,"		"
fl17_30_lg (V,h,Fr)	30,:		(83,115) (332,392) (83,100)"
fl17_25_lg (V,h,Fr)	25,		"
fl17_20_lg (V,h,Fr)	20,:		"
fl17_15_lg (V,h,Fr)	15,:		"
fl17_10_lg (V,h,Fr)	10,:		"
fl17_5_lg (V,h,Fr)	5,:		"			Small super region
13						Growth of super region as angle increase
fl13_45_lg (V,h,Fr)			(108,115) (432,392) (108,100)	-1.732 1000, .1	-0.01732 0.00035311	Correct dp/dy
fl13_40_lg
fl13_35_lg (V,h,Fr)
fl13_30_lg (V,h,Fr)			(83,115) (332,392) (83,100)"
fl13_25_lg (V,h,Fr)
fl13_20_lg (V,h,Fr)
fl13_15_lg (V,h,Fr)
fl13_10_lg (V,h,Fr)
fl13_5_lg (V,h,Fr)
12
fl12_45_lg
fl12_35_lg
fl12_25_lg
fl12_15_lg (V,h,Fr)
fl2_5_lg (V,h,Fr)

Greater resolution						dp/dy slightly wrong
fl26_45_pts _hires (V,h,Fr)	28, Y = 317	475	(125,173) (332,392) (125,128)	"	"	No difference
No rotation						We expect same reults as in Samelson (1992) dp/dy slightly wrong
fl13_norot (V,h,Fr)	28, Y = 317	15	(83,115) (332,392) (83,100)	Same as other 13	Same as other 13	This case produced eddies, even at t=50. Try again on large domain, for fl=26.
Increase radius of curvature
fl26_rc (V,h,Fr)	28, Y = 317, rc=50	15	(83,115) (332,392) (83,100)	Same as other 26	Same as other 26	Less acceleration, broader. Closeup for smaller, larger radius of curvature. Only seems to matter within 100 km of coast. dp/dy slightly wrong
fl17_rc (V,h,Fr)	"	"	"	""" 17	""" 17
Use correct dP/dy						The one I used wasn't too far off-differences are barely perceptible
fl26_py (V,h,Fr)	Same as other 26			Same as other 26
fl17_py (V,h,Fr)	Same as other 17			Same as other 17
fl13_py (V,h,Fr)	""" 13			""" 13

Bibliography

The data on this page is unpublished. If it is used please cite the author Kathleen Edwards, the Center for Coastal Studies, and the Coastal Waves group at Scripps Insitution of Oceanography.

Please send comments or questions to me at kate@coast.ucsd.edu