Tidal Sensitivities in AMM15 CO9 NEMO4.0.4 experiments 2004 2014 - JMMP-Group/CO_AMM15 GitHub Wiki
Table of contents
A record of tidal harmonics in AMM15 P0.x experiments
Comparison of P0 with old equilibrium tide values and TPXO forcing against P0 with FES2014 forcing and updated equilibrium values.
NOTE we had a first run P0.1a that had problems with the equilibrium tidal values and was missing the Love number in the namelist. These are now corrected for and use a Love number of 0.69 in P0.1b
Note the full set of plots for P.0.1b V P.0.0 can be found under:
The older plots with the bug are still available under
The Year labelling is the analysis done since the start of 2004 to the end of the year label, which gives an idea
of how extra years of data effects the overall analysis.
The equivalent for CO7 3.6 V P0.0.0 can be found at http://gws-access.jasmin.ac.uk/public/jmmp_collab/AMM7/outputs/AMM15TIDES/CO7_3.6_V_4.0.4_p0.0_PLOTS/
| Constituent | P0.1 (FES2014) | P0.0 (TPXO) | CO7 3.6 | FES V P0 PLOT(Clickable) | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 Amp | 0.74 cm | 0.75 cm | 0.76 cm | similar | |
| O1 Amp | 0.877 cm | 0.978 cm | 0.95 cm | slight improvement | |
| P1 Amp | 0.59 cm | 0.62 cm | 0.63 cm | Slight Improvement | |
| S1 Amp | 0.76 cm | 0.78 cm | 0.73 cm | At least some sort of correlation in FES case | |
| K1 Amp | 1.23 cm | 1.36 cm | 1.36 cm | Slight improvement | |
| 2N2 Amp | 1.16 cm | 4.10 cm | 4.1 cm | Not present in TPX case | |
| MU2 Amp | 2.10 cm | 4.69 cm | 4.61 cm | FES2014 significantly better | |
| N2 Amp | 2.52 cm | 2.34 cm | 2.59 cm | Not much in it TPX slightly better | |
| NU2 Amp | 0.89 cm | 5.46 cm | 5.48 cm | FES much better | |
| M2 Amp | 9.72 cm | 10.8 cm | 11.42 cm | FES Much better in North Sea | |
| L2 Amp | 1.98 cm | 4.38 cm | 4.39 cm | FES clearly better | |
| T2 Amp | 1.01 cm | 2.55 cm | 2.56 cm | FES actually has this consitutent | |
| S2 Amp | 4.15 cm | 3.90 cm | 4.30 cm | Not much in it FES slightly worse, particularly North Sea coast | |
| K2 Amp | 1.15 cm | 0.94 cm | 0.96 cm | Fes Slightly worse North Sea Coast | |
| M4 Amp | 4.96 cm | 5.10 cm | 5.07 cm | Not much in it, FES slightly better |
| Constituent | P0.1 (FES2014) | P0.0 (TPXO) | CO7 3.6 | FES V P0 PLOT(Clickable) | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 Phase | 29.5° | 29.8° | 30.0° | ||
| O1 Phase | 12.2° | 12.1° | 12.2° | ||
| P1 Phase | 18.2° | 18.4° | 18.4° | Very similar | |
| S1 Phase | 48.7° | 138.5° | 142.4° | FES actually has some correlation with OBS | |
| K1 Phase | 14.2° | 13.8° | 13.8° | Very similar | |
| 2N2 Phase | 28.6° | 152.6° | 155.7° | TPX clearly hasn't got this constituent | |
| MU2 Phase | 37.0° | 73.8° | 72.9° | FES much better | |
| N2 Phase | 20.9° | 21.0° | 21.1° | Like P1 K1 again slight offset in phase in N2 | |
| NU2 Phase | 10.40° | 58.0° | 57.3° | TPX run looks like it hasn't got this constituent | |
| M2 Phase | 11.0° | 10.6° | 10.5° | Phase offset in North Sea and North of Scotland | |
| L2 Phase | 38.7° | 45.9° | 45.2° | Much better in FES case | |
| T2 Phase | 27.3° | 151.3° | 152.9° | Looks like TPX run does not have this constituent | |
| S2 Phase | 13.0° | 12.9° | 12.7° | Very similar | |
| K2 Phase | 13.7° | 13.9° | 12.9° | Very similar | |
| M4 Phase | 56.9° | 54.7° | 52.7° | Not much in it |
Comparison of TPXO with old equilibrium tides versus TPXO with new equilibrium tides.
The FES run included not only extra constituents required by the FES tides, but updates to the equilibrium tidal values.
To get an idea of how much just the update tidal code effected the solution independent of the FES tidal forcing data set the newer code is run with the existing TPX tidal constituents and compared to P.0.0
Full plots are here( this only goes up to 2009):
picking out some constituents where FES had problems
For P1 Amplitude for FES struggled, but we also see the same degradation with TPXo used with the new code:
| FES Comparison | TPXO with newer NEMO tidal code comparison |
|---|---|
Likewise for M2 Phase (and other constituents) for FES struggled, but we also see similar be it less, degradation with TPXO Phase used with the new code:
| FES Comparison | TPXO with newer NEMO tidal code comparison |
|---|---|
K1 Phase for FES particularly struggled, ans there is very similar degradation with TPXO Phase used with the new code:
| FES Comparison | TPXO with newer NEMO tidal code comparison |
|---|---|
| More plots on this to follow |