Abstract
The local wind-driven circulation off southern San Diego is addressed with two complementary statistical and dynamical frameworks based on observations and idealized numerical model simulations. The observations including surface currents from high-frequency radars, subsurface currents from a nearshore mooring, and wind records at a local wind station are analyzed with the idealized ocean model (MITgcm) simulations using realistic bottom topography and spatially uniform wind stress forcing. Statistically estimated anisotropic local wind transfer functions characterize the observed oceanic spectral response to wind stress separately in the x (east-west) and y (north-south) directions. We delineate the coastal circulation at three primary frequencies [low (σ L=0.0767 cycles per day (cpd)), diurnal (σ D=1 cpd), and inertial (σ f=1.07 cpd) frequencies] with the momentum budget equations and transfer functions. At low frequency, the magnitudes of transfer functions are enhanced near the coast, attributed to geostrophic balance between wind-driven pressure gradients and the Coriolis force on currents. The response diminishes away from the coast, returning to the balance between frictional and Coriolis terms, as in the classic Ekman model. On the contrary, transfer functions in the near-inertial frequency band show reduced magnitudes near the coast primarily due to friction, but exhibits the enhanced seaward response as a result of the inertial resonance. The idealized model simulations forced by local wind stress can identify the influences of remote wind stress and the biases in the data-derived transfer functions.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adcroft A, Campin J, Dutkiewicz S, Evangelinos C, Ferreira D, Forget G, Fox-Kemper B, Heimbach P, Hill C, Hill E (2014) MITgcm user manual. MIT Department of EAPS, Cambridge
Allen JS (1980) Models of wind-driven currents on the continental shelf. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 12:389–433. doi:10.1146/annurev.fl.12.010180.002133
Allen JS, Smith RL (1981) On the dynamics of wind-driven shelf currents. Philos Trans Roy Soc London Ser A Math Phys Sci 302(1472):617–634. doi:10.1098/rsta.1981.0187
Allen J, Newberger P, Federiuk J (1995) Upwelling circulation on the Oregon continental shelf. Part I: Response to idealized forcing. J Phys Oceanogr 25:1843–1866
Austin J, Lentz S (2002) The inner shelf response to wind-driven upwelling and downwelling. J Phys Oceanogr 32(7):2171–2193
Brink KH (1991) Coastal-trapped waves and wind-driven currents over the continental shelf. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 23:389–412. doi:10.1146/annurev.fl.23.010191.002133
Brink K, Halpern D, Smith R (1980) Circulation in the Peruvian upwelling system near 15 ∘S. J Geophys Res 85(C7):4036–4048
Castelao RM, Barth JA (2005) Coastal ocean response to summer upwelling favorable winds in a region of alongshore bottom topography variations off Oregon. J Geophys Res 110:C10S04. doi:10.1029/2004JC002409
Chen C, Reid R, Nowlin W (1996) Near-inertial oscillations over the Texas-Louisiana shelf. J Geophys Res 101(C2):3509–3524. doi:10.1029/95JC03395
Craig PD (1988) Space and time scales in shelf circulation modelling. Cont Shelf Res 8(11):1221–1246
Craig PD (1989) Constant-eddy-viscosity models of vertical structure forced by periodic winds. Cont Shelf Res 9(4):343–358
Crawford GB, Large WG (1996) A numerical investigation of resonant inertial response of the ocean to wind forcing. J Phys Oceanogr 26(6):873–891
D’Asaro EA (1985) The energy flux from the wind to the near-inertial motions in the surface mixed layer. J Phys Oceanogr 15(8):1043–1059
Davies AM (2003) On the interaction between internal tides and wind-induced near-inertial currents at the shelf edge. J Geophys Res 108(C3):3099. doi:10.1029/2002JC001375
Davies A, Xing J (2003) Processes influencing wind-induced current profiles in near coastal stratified regions. Cont Shelf Res 23(14–15):1379–1400. doi:10.1016/S0278-4343(03)00119-5
Davis RE, Bogden PS (1989) Variability on the California shelf forced by local and remote winds during the Coastal Ocean Dynamics Experiment. J Geophys Res 94(C4):4763– 4783. doi:10.1029/JC094iC04p04763
Dever E (1997) Wind-forced cross-shelf circulation on the northern California shelf. J Phys Oceanogr 27(8):1566–1580
Edwards C, Fake T, Bogden P (2004a) Spring-summer frontogenesis at the mouth of Block Island Sound: 1. A numerical investigation into tidal and buoyancy-forced motion. J Geophys Res 109:C12021. doi:10.1029/2003JC002132
Edwards C, Fake T, Codiga D, Bogden P (2004b) Spring-summer frontogenesis at the mouth of Block Island Sound: 2. Combining acoustic Doppler current profiler records with a general circulation model to investigate the impact of subtidal forcing. J Geophys Res 109:C12022. doi:10.1029/2003JC002133
Ekman VW (1905) On the influence of the Earth’s rotation on ocean-currents. Ark Mat Astron Fys 2:1–53
Elipot S, Gille ST (2009) Ekman layers in the Southern Ocean: spectral models and observations, vertical viscosity and boundary layer depth. Ocean Sci 5:115–139. http://www.ocean-sci.net/5/115/2009/
Emery WJ, Thomson RE (1997) Data analysis methods in physical oceanography. Elsevier, Boston
Fewings M, Lentz S, Fredericks J (2008) Observations of cross-shelf flow driven by cross-shelf winds on the inner continental shelf. J Phys Oceanogr 38(11):2358–2378. doi:10.1175/2008JPO3990.1
Fukumori I, Lee T, Cheng B, Menemenlis D (2004) The origin, pathway, and destination of Nino-3 water estimated by a simulated passive tracer and its adjoint. J Phys Oceanogr 34:582–604
Gill AE (1982) Atmosphere-ocean dynamics, international geophysics series, vol. 30. Academic, San Diego
Gonella J (1972) A rotary-component method for analysis in meteorological and oceanographic vector time series. Deep Sea Res 19:833–846
Gopalakrishnan G, Cornuelle BD, Hoteit I (2013a) Adjoint sensitivity studies of Loop current and eddy shedding in the Gulf of Mexico. J Geophys Res 118(7):3315–3335. doi:10.1002/jgrc.20240
Gopalakrishnan G, Cornuelle BD, Hoteit I, Rudnick DL, Owens WB (2013b) State estimates and forecasts of the Loop current in the Gulf of Mexico using the MITgcm and its adjoint. J Geophys Res 118(7):3292–3314. doi:10.1002/jgrc.20239
Hodur RM (1997) The Naval Research Laboratory’s Coupled Ocean/Atmosphere Mesoscale Prediction System (COAMPS). Mon Wea Rev 125:1414–1430
Hoteit I, Cornuelle B, Kim SY, Forget G, Kohl A, Terrill E (2009) Assessing 4D-VAR for dynamical mapping of coastal high-frequency radar in San Diego. Dyn Atmos Oceans 48:175–197. doi:10.1016/j.dynatmoce.2008.11.005
Hoteit I, Cornuelle B, Heimbach P (2010) An eddy permitting variational data assimilation system for estimating the of the tropical Pacific. J Geophys Res 115:C03001. doi:10.1029/2009JC005347
Hoteit I, Hoar T, Gopalakrishnan G , Collins N, Anderson J, Cornuelle B, Heimbach P (2013) A MITgcm/DART ensemble analysis and prediction system with application to the Gulf of Mexico. Dyn Atmos Oceans 63:1–12. doi:10.1016/j.dynatmoce.2013.03.002
Kim SY (2009) Coastal ocean studies in southern San Diego using high-frequency radar derived surface currents. Ph.D. thesis. Scripps Institution of Oceanography Technical Report. http://escholarship.org/uc/item/2z5660f4
Kim SY (2010) Observations of submesoscale eddies using high-frequency radar-derived kinematic and dynamic quantities. Cont Shelf Res 30:1639–1655. doi:10.1016/j.csr.2010.06.011
Kim SY (2014) A statistical description on the wind-coherent responses of sea surface heights off the U.S. West Coast. Ocean Dyn 64(1):29–46. doi:10.1007/s10236-013-0668-3
Kim SY, Terrill EJ, Cornuelle BD (2008) Mapping surface currents from HF radar radial velocity measurements using optimal interpolation. J Geophys Res 113:C10023. doi:10.1029/2007JC004244
Kim SY, Terrill EJ, Cornuelle BD (2009a) Assessing coastal plumes in a region of multiple discharges: The U.S.–Mexico border. Environ Sci Technol 43(19):7450–7457. doi:10.1021/es900775p
Kim SY, Cornuelle BD, Terrill EJ (2009b) Anisotropic response of surface currents to the wind in a coastal region. J Phys Oceanogr 39(6):1512–1533. doi:10.1175/2009JPO4013.1
Kim SY, Terrill EJ, Cornuelle BD, Jones B, Washburn L, Moline MA, Paduan JD, Garfield N, Largier JL, Crawford G, Kosro PM (2011) Mapping the U.S. West Coast surface circulation: A multiyear analysis of high-frequency radar observations. J Geophys Res 116:C03011. doi:10.1029/2010JC006669
Kim SY, Cornuelle BD, Terrill EJ (2010a) Decomposing observations of high-frequency radar derived surface currents by their forcing mechanisms: Decomposition techniques and spatial structures of decomposed surface currents. J Geophys Res 115:C12007. doi:10.1029/2010JC006222
Kim SY, Cornuelle BD, Terrill EJ (2010b) Decomposing observations of high-frequency radar derived surface currents by their forcing mechanisms: Locally wind-driven surface currents. J Geophys Res 115:C12046. doi:10.1029/2010JC006223
Kim SY, Cornuelle BD, Terrill EJ, Jones B, Washburn L, Moline MA, Paduan JD, Garfield N, Largier JL, Crawford G, Kosro PM (2013) Poleward propagating subinertial alongshore surface currents off the U.S. West Coast. J Geophys Res 118(12):6791– 6806. doi:10.1002/jgrc.20400
Kim SY, Kosro PM, Kurapov AL (2014) Evaluation of directly wind-coherent near-inertial surface currents off Oregon using a statistical parameterization and analytical models. J Geophys Res 119. doi:10.1002/2014JC010115
Kirincich AR, Barth JA, Grantham BA, Menge BA, Lubchenco J (2005) Wind-driven inner-shelf circulation off central Oregon during summer. J Geophys Res 110:C10S03. doi:10.1029/2004JC002611
Kohl ADS, Cornuelle B (2007) Interannual to decadal changes in the ECCO global synthesis. J Phys Oceanogr 37:313– 337. doi:10.1175/JPO3014.1
Large W, McWilliams J, Doney S (1994) Oceanic vertical mixing: A review and a model with a non-local boundary layer parameterization. Rev Geophys 32(4):363–403. doi:10.1029/94RG01872
Lee T, Williams E, Wang J, Evans R, Atkinson L (1989) Response of South Carolina continental shelf waters to wind and Gulf Stream forcing during winter of 1986. J Geophys Res 94(C8):10,715–10,754. doi:10.1029/JC094iC08p10715
Legg S, Hallberg R, Girton J (2006) Comparison of entrainment in overflows simulated by z-coordinate, isopycnal and non-hydrostatic models. Ocean Model 11(1–2):69–97. doi:10.1016/j.ocemod.2004.11.006
Lentz SJ (1995) Sensitivity of the inner-shelf circulation to the form of the eddy viscosity profile. J Phys Oceanogr 25(1):19– 28
Lentz SJ (2001) The influence of stratification on the wind-driven cross-shelf circulation over the North Carolina shelf. J Phys Oceanogr 31:2749–2760
Lentz SJ, Winant CD (1986) Subinertial currents on the southern California shelf. J Phys Oceanogr 16:1737– 1750
Lentz SJ, Trowbridge J (2001) A dynamical description of fall and winter mean current profiles over the northern California shelf. J Phys Oceanogr 31:914–931
Lentz SJ, Chapman DC (2004) The importance of nonlinear cross-shelf momentum flux during wind-driven coastal upwelling. J Phys Oceanogr 34:2444–2457 . doi:10.1175/JPO2644.1
Lentz S, Fewings M (2012) The wind-and wave-driven inner-shelf circulation. Annu Rev Mar Sci:317–343. doi:10.1146/annurevmarine-120709-142745
Lentz SJ, Guza R, Elgar S, Feddersen F, Herbers T (1999) Momentum balances on the North Carolina inner shelf. J Geophys Res 104:18,205–18,226. doi:10.1029/1999JC900101
Lentz SJ, Trowbridge J (2001) A dynamical description of fall and winter mean current profiles over the northern California shelf. J Phys Oceanogr 31:914–931
Lerczak JA, Hendershott MC, Winant CD (2001) Observations and modeling of coastal internal waves driven by a diurnal sea breeze. J. Geophys. Res. 106(C9):19,715–19,729
Lewis DM, Belcher SE (2004) Time-dependent, coupled, Ekman boundary layer solutions incorporating Stokes drift. Dyn Atmos Oceans 37:313–351. doi:10.1016/j.dynatmoce.2003.11.001
Madsen OS (1977) A realistic model of the wind-induced Ekman boundary layer. J Phys Oceanogr 7:248– 255
Marshall J, Adcroft A, Hill C, Perelman L, Heisey C (1997) A finite-volume, incompressible Navier Stokes model for studies of the ocean on parallel computers. J Geophys Res 102(C3):5753–5766. doi:10.1029/96JC02775
Menemenlis D, Fukumori I, Lee T (2005) Using Green’s functions to calibrate an ocean general circulation model. Mon Wea Rev 133(5):1224–1240. doi:10.1175/MWR2912.1
Millero FJ, Poisson A (1981) International one-atmosphere equation of state of seawater. Deep Sea Res 28A(6):625– 629
Millot C, Crepon M (1981) Inertial oscillations on the continental shelf of the Gulf of Lions: Observations and theory. J Phys Oceanogr 11:639–657
Oppenheim AV, Schafter RW, Buck JR (1998) Discrete-time signal processing, 2nd edn. Prentice Hall Signal Processing Series. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ
Pettigrew NR (1981) The dynamics and kinematics of the coastal boundary layer off Long Island. Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Meteorology and Physical Oceanography. http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/27913
Pollard RT, Millard RC (1970) Comparison between observed and simulated wind-generated inertial oscillations. Deep Sea Res 17:813–821
Ponte ALS (2010) Periodic wind-driven circulation in an elongated and rotating basin. J Phys Oceanogr 40:2043–2058 . doi:10.1175/2010JPO4235.1
Price JF, Weller RA, Pinkel R (1986) Diurnal cycling: Observations and models of the upper ocean response to diurnal heating, cooling, and wind mixing. J Geophys Res 91(C7):8411– 8427. doi:10.1029/JC091iC07p08411
Pringle JM (2002) Enhancement of wind-driven upwelling and downwelling by alongshore bathymetric variability. J Phys Oceanogr 32:3101–3112
Rio MH, Hernandez F (2003) High-frequency response of wind-driven currents measured by drifting buoy and altimetry over the World Ocean. J Geophys Res 108(C8):3238 . doi:10.1029/2002JC001655
Rykaczewski R, Checkley D (2008) Influence of ocean winds on the pelagic ecosystem in upwelling regions. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105(6):1965–1970. doi:10.1073/pnas.0711777105
Shay LK, Lee TN, Williams EJ, Graber HC, Rooth CGH (1998) Effects of low-frequency current variability on near-inertial submesoscale vorticies. J. Geophys. Res. 103(C9):18,691–18,714. doi:10.1029/98JC01007
Shearman RK (2005) Observations of near-inertial current variability on the New England shelf. J Geophys Res 110:C02012. doi:10.1029/2004JC002341
Shen CY, Evans TE (2001) Surface-to-subsurface velocity projection for shallow water currents. J Geophys Res 106(C4):6973–6984. doi:10.1029/2000JC000267
Stammer D, Wunsch C, Giering R, Eckert C, Heimbach P, Marotzke J, Adcroft A, Hill C, Marshall J (2002) Global ocean circulation during 1992–1997, estimated from ocean observations and a general circulation model. J Geophys Res 107(C9):3118. doi:10.1029/2001JC000888
von Storch H, Zwiers F (1999) Statistical analysis in climate research. Cambridge University Press
Todd R, Rudnick D, Mazloff M, Davis R, Cornuelle B (2011) Poleward flows in the southern California Current System: Glider observations and numerical simulation. J Geophys Res 116:C02026. doi:10.1029/2010JC006536
Verdy A, Mazloff M, Cornuelle BD, Kim SY (2013) Wind-driven sea level variability on the california coast: An adjoint sensitivity analysis. J Phys Oceanogr 44(1):297–318. doi:10.1175/JPO-D-13-018.1
Weisberg RH, Li Z, Muller-Karger R (2001) West Florida shelf response to local wind forcing: April 1998. J Geophys Res 106(C12):31,239–31,262. doi:10.1029/2000JC000529
Weller RA (1981) Observations of the velocity response to wind forcing in the upper ocean. J Geophys Res 86(C3):1969–1977. doi:10.1029/JC086iC03p01969
Winant CD (2004) Three-dimensional wind-driven flow in an elongated rotating basin. J Phys Oceanogr 34:462–476
Winant CD, Beardsley RC, Davis RE (1987) Moored wind, temperature, and current observations made during Coastal Ocean Dynamics Experiments 1 and 2 over the Northern California continental shelf and upper slope. J Geophys Res 92(C2):1569–1604. doi:10.1029/JC092iC02p01569
Wunsch C (1996) The ocean circulation inverse problem. Cambridge University Press, NY
Xing J, Davies A (2004) On the influence of a surface coastal front on near-inertial wind-induced internal wave generation. J Geophys Res 109(C1):C01023 . doi:10.1029/2003JC001794
Yelland M, Taylor PK (1996) Wind stress measurements from the open ocean. J Phys Oceanogr 26:541–558
Young IR (1999) Wind generated ocean waves, vol. 2. Elsevier, London
Zhang X, Cornuelle B, Roemmich D (2011) Adjoint sensitivity of the Nino-3 surface temperature to wind forcing~. J Clim 24:4480– 4493. doi:10.1175/2011JCLI3917.1
Acknowledgments
Sung Yong Kim is supported by the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation (NRF), Ministry of Education (no. 2013R1A1A2057849), the Human Resources Development of the Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP), Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy (no. 20134030200300), and the program on Management of Marine Organisms Causing Ecological Disturbance and Harmful Effects through Korea Integrated Marine Science Technology (KIMST) and Ministry of Fishery (MOF), Republic of Korea. Ganesh Gopalakrishnan and Aurelien Ponte are sponsored by NOAA (NOAA Award NA10OAR4320156). Surface current data are provided from the Southern California Coastal Ocean Observing System (SCCOOS, Available online at http://www.sccoos.org) at Scripps Institution of Oceanography. Wind data at the Tijuana River (Tidal Linkage) are maintained by the System-Wide Monitoring Program at the Tijuana River National Estuarine Research Reserve, Estuarine Reserves Division (TRNERR), NOAA, Centralized Data Management Office (CDMO), Baruch Marine Field Lab, and University of South Carolina. The bathymetry is provided by National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC). The authors thank B. D. Cornuelle for providing ideas and a chance to generate synergy among coauthors and E. Terrill for providing the data.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Responsible Editor: Pierre Lermusiaux
Appendices
Appendix A: Spatial scales of the surface wind field
The decorrelation length scales of the surface wind field off southern San Diego are examined with the COAMPS nowcast data with two spatial resolutions of 1.7 and 5.1 km (Hodur 1997). An example of spatial correlations of the hourly model wind at W in Fig. 1 for one year (2006) is shown in Fig 13. The length scales are asymmetric, i.e., relatively long seaward and short shoreward, in the range of 25 to 120 km.
Appendix B: Equilibrium of the model solutions
An example of model currents forced by low-frequency cross-shore wind stress (τ x ) is presented with the hourly time series of u- and v-components at the center of a cross-shore line a in Fig. 1 and the surface layer (z=−0.5 m) over 30 days (Fig. 14a and b). The data for the first three days are excluded (a black box), and the rest of model solutions is used for the transfer function analysis and momentum budget analysis. Although the weak near-inertial oscillations are still imposed in the time series after three days, the model solutions at low frequency reach the equilibrium quickly.
Appendix C: Isotropic subsurface transfer function
From the isotropic relationship (4), the wind-coherent currents are as follows:
where E r and E i indicate the real and imaginary parts of the isotropic transfer function (E). The corresponding magnitude and argument are referred to as E and ΘE, respectively, i.e.,
The data-derived isotropic transfer function (E) is computed from the TJR wind stress and the detided HFR surface and ADCP subsurface currents (Fig. 15a and c). The model-derived isotropic transfer function (F) is based on the Ekman model (Fig. 15b and d) (e.g., Kim et al. 2009).
The peak near the inertial frequency decreases with depth, consistent with the model, penetrating up to about 8 m. However, the significant variance at low frequency does not appear in the model, which indicates the influence of pressure gradients near the coast because the Ekman model does not include pressure gradient terms (Fig. 15a and b) (e.g., Kim et al. 2009). The arguments of data- and model-derived transfer functions are very similar except for the sign shift at the zero frequency (Fig. 15c and d).
Appendix D: Time lag and veering angle
As the argument (ΘE) of the isotropic transfer function (E in Eq. 24) contains the time lag (α) and veering angle (β), i.e., ΘE=α+β (see Kim et al. (2009)),
we can separate them with the relationship between individual components of wind stress and currents, i.e., anisotropic transfer functions.
As a simple case when ISCs are dominant over ASCs (e.g., offshore region), the anisotropic transfer functions can be paired (H x x =H y y and H x y = −H y x ) (e.g., Kim et al. 2009). The Fourier coefficients of currents are expressed with the isotropic convention:
where H x x has the zero veering angle and the time lag of \({\Theta }_{xx}^{H}\) (\(\alpha = {\Theta }_{xx}^{H}\) and β=0∘), and H x y has the veering angle of −90∘ and the time lag of \({\Theta }_{xy}^{H}\) (\(\alpha = {\Theta }_{xy}^{H}\) and β=−90∘). Thus, this comparison enables us to differentiate the veering angle and time lag when the argument is ambiguously computed under the isotropic assumption such as complex coherence and correlation.
At \(\sigma = \sigma _{\mathrm {L}}, {\Theta }_{xx}^{H}\) is in the range of −2∘ to −5∘, and \({\Theta }_{xy}^{H}\) is in the range of −7∘ to −8∘ (Fig. 2m–p; Eq. 31). The estimated time lag (α) and veering angle (β) for three cases of the argument (ΘE) at low frequency (ΘE=−30∘,−45∘, and −60∘) (e.g., Kim et al. 2010b) are shown in Table 1. For the case of σ=0 cpd (Ekman model), the time lang and veering angle are zero and −45∘, respectively.
At σ=σ D, \({\Theta }_{xx}^{H}\) is in the range of 2∘ to 6∘, and \({\Theta }_{xy}^{H}\) is in the range of −61∘ to −67∘ (Fig. 7m–p). The estimated time lag (α) and veering angle (β) for four cases of the argument (ΘE) at the diurnal frequency (ΘE=−30∘, −45∘,−60∘, and −75∘) (e.g., Kim et al. 2010b) are shown in Table 2.
Appendix E: Estimates of ISCs and ASCs
Equations 14 and 15 are solved together frequency by frequency (e.g., Wunsch 1996; Kim 2009):
where \(\hat {u}, \hat {u}, \hat {\uptau }_{x}\), and \(\hat {\uptau }_{y}\) are column vectors consisting of N sub-sampled Fourier coefficients at a single frequency (‡ is the vector transpose), presented as follows:
Equation 1 is formulated as
where d,Z, and m correspond to the currents, wind stress, and isotropy and anisotropy components. The estimated model coefficients (\(\mathbf {\widehat {m}}\)) are
where P and R are the model and error covariance matrices (‡ is the matrix transpose).
When the error covariance matrix (R) is replaced with an identity matrix (I), the model covariance matrix (P) will become a unique factor to adjust the inverse of snr (R P −1; β k , k= 1, 2, 3, and 4), whose diagonal components reflect the contribution of each basis function:
The inverse of snr for the estimates of ISCs and ASCs is assumed as 0.1, 0.1, 0.5, and 0.5 of the mean eigenvalues of the covariance matrix Fourier coefficients of wind stress, respectively, for I d, I c, A d, and A c at the given three frequencies (σ = σ L, σ D, and σ f). The chosen ratios are less sensitive to the overall results.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kim, S.Y., Gopalakrishnan, G. & Ponte, A. Interpretation of coastal wind transfer functions with momentum balances derived from idealized numerical model simulations. Ocean Dynamics 65, 115–141 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10236-014-0766-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10236-014-0766-x