Characterizing ERA-Interim and ERA5 surface wind biases using ASCAT

<p>This paper analyzes the differences between ERA-Interim and ERA5 surface winds fields relative to Advanced Scatterometer (ASCAT) ocean vector wind observations, after adjustment for the effects of atmospheric stability and density, using stress-equivalent winds (U10S) and air–sea relative m...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: M. Belmonte Rivas, A. Stoffelen
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Copernicus Publications 2019-06-01
Series:Ocean Science
Online Access:https://www.ocean-sci.net/15/831/2019/os-15-831-2019.pdf
id doaj-273be03677a449d0903c4e7d8d8a5562
record_format Article
spelling doaj-273be03677a449d0903c4e7d8d8a55622020-11-25T01:55:05ZengCopernicus PublicationsOcean Science1812-07841812-07922019-06-011583185210.5194/os-15-831-2019Characterizing ERA-Interim and ERA5 surface wind biases using ASCATM. Belmonte Rivas0M. Belmonte Rivas1A. Stoffelen2Royal Netherlands Meteorology Institute (KNMI), De Bilt, the NetherlandsInstituto de Ciencias del Mar (ICM), Consejo General de Investigaciones Cientificas (CSIC), Barcelona, SpainRoyal Netherlands Meteorology Institute (KNMI), De Bilt, the Netherlands<p>This paper analyzes the differences between ERA-Interim and ERA5 surface winds fields relative to Advanced Scatterometer (ASCAT) ocean vector wind observations, after adjustment for the effects of atmospheric stability and density, using stress-equivalent winds (U10S) and air–sea relative motion using ocean current velocities. In terms of instantaneous root mean square (rms) wind speed agreement, ERA5 winds show a 20&thinsp;% improvement relative to ERA-Interim and a performance similar to that of currently operational ECMWF forecasts. ERA5 also performs better than ERA-Interim in terms of mean and transient wind errors, wind divergence and wind stress curl biases. Yet, both ERA products show systematic errors in the partition of the wind kinetic energy into zonal and meridional, mean and transient components. ERA winds are characterized by excessive mean zonal winds (westerlies) with too-weak mean poleward flows in the midlatitudes and too-weak mean meridional winds (trades) in the tropics. ERA stress curl is too cyclonic in midlatitudes and high latitudes, with implications for Ekman upwelling estimates, and lacks detail in the representation of sea surface temperature (SST) gradient effects (along the equatorial cold tongues and Western Boundary Current (WBC) jets) and mesoscale convective airflows (along the Intertropical Convergence Zone and the warm flanks for the WBC jets). It is conjectured that large-scale mean wind biases in ERA are related to their lack of high-frequency (transient wind) variability, which should be promoting residual meridional circulations in the Ferrel and Hadley cells.</p>https://www.ocean-sci.net/15/831/2019/os-15-831-2019.pdf
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author M. Belmonte Rivas
M. Belmonte Rivas
A. Stoffelen
spellingShingle M. Belmonte Rivas
M. Belmonte Rivas
A. Stoffelen
Characterizing ERA-Interim and ERA5 surface wind biases using ASCAT
Ocean Science
author_facet M. Belmonte Rivas
M. Belmonte Rivas
A. Stoffelen
author_sort M. Belmonte Rivas
title Characterizing ERA-Interim and ERA5 surface wind biases using ASCAT
title_short Characterizing ERA-Interim and ERA5 surface wind biases using ASCAT
title_full Characterizing ERA-Interim and ERA5 surface wind biases using ASCAT
title_fullStr Characterizing ERA-Interim and ERA5 surface wind biases using ASCAT
title_full_unstemmed Characterizing ERA-Interim and ERA5 surface wind biases using ASCAT
title_sort characterizing era-interim and era5 surface wind biases using ascat
publisher Copernicus Publications
series Ocean Science
issn 1812-0784
1812-0792
publishDate 2019-06-01
description <p>This paper analyzes the differences between ERA-Interim and ERA5 surface winds fields relative to Advanced Scatterometer (ASCAT) ocean vector wind observations, after adjustment for the effects of atmospheric stability and density, using stress-equivalent winds (U10S) and air–sea relative motion using ocean current velocities. In terms of instantaneous root mean square (rms) wind speed agreement, ERA5 winds show a 20&thinsp;% improvement relative to ERA-Interim and a performance similar to that of currently operational ECMWF forecasts. ERA5 also performs better than ERA-Interim in terms of mean and transient wind errors, wind divergence and wind stress curl biases. Yet, both ERA products show systematic errors in the partition of the wind kinetic energy into zonal and meridional, mean and transient components. ERA winds are characterized by excessive mean zonal winds (westerlies) with too-weak mean poleward flows in the midlatitudes and too-weak mean meridional winds (trades) in the tropics. ERA stress curl is too cyclonic in midlatitudes and high latitudes, with implications for Ekman upwelling estimates, and lacks detail in the representation of sea surface temperature (SST) gradient effects (along the equatorial cold tongues and Western Boundary Current (WBC) jets) and mesoscale convective airflows (along the Intertropical Convergence Zone and the warm flanks for the WBC jets). It is conjectured that large-scale mean wind biases in ERA are related to their lack of high-frequency (transient wind) variability, which should be promoting residual meridional circulations in the Ferrel and Hadley cells.</p>
url https://www.ocean-sci.net/15/831/2019/os-15-831-2019.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT mbelmonterivas characterizingerainterimandera5surfacewindbiasesusingascat
AT mbelmonterivas characterizingerainterimandera5surfacewindbiasesusingascat
AT astoffelen characterizingerainterimandera5surfacewindbiasesusingascat
_version_ 1724985188283318272