• Bluteau, C. E., Jones N. L. , and Ivey G. N. , 2011a: Dynamics of a tidally-forced stratified shear flow on the continental slope. J. Geophys. Res., 116, C11017, doi:10.1029/2011JC007214.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bluteau, C. E., Jones N. L. , and Ivey G. N. , 2011b: Estimating turbulent kinetic energy dissipation using the inertial subrange method in environmental flows. Limnol. Oceanogr.: Methods, 9, 302321, doi:10:4319/lom.2011.9.302.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bluteau, C. E., Jones N. L. , and Ivey G. N. , 2016: Estimating turbulent dissipation from microstructure shear measurements using maximum likelihood spectral fitting over the inertial and viscous subranges. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 33, 713722, doi:10.1175/JTECH-D-15-0218.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Edson, J. B., Hinton A. A. , Prada K. E. , Hare J. E. , and Fairall C. W. , 1998: Direct covariance flux estimates from mobile platforms at sea. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 15, 547562, doi:10.1175/1520-0426(1998)015<0547:DCFEFM>2.0.CO;2.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Emery, W. J., and Thomson R. E. , 2001: Data Analysis Methods in Physical Oceanography. 2nd ed. Elsevier Science, 638 pp.

  • Feddersen, F., Trowbridge J. H. , and Williams A. J. III, 2007: Vertical structure of dissipation in the nearshore. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 37, 17641777, doi:10.1175/JPO3098.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Fer, I., and Paskyabi M. B. , 2014: Autonomous ocean turbulence measurements using shear probes on a moored instrument. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 31, 474490, doi:10.1175/JTECH-D-13-00096.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Goodman, L., Levine E. R. , and Lueck R. G. , 2006: On measuring the terms of the turbulent kinetic energy budget from an AUV. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 23, 977990, doi:10.1175/JTECH1889.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Levine, E. R., and Lueck R. G. , 1999: Turbulence measurement from an autonomous underwater vehicle. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 16, 15331544, doi:10.1175/1520-0426(1999)016<1533:TMFAAU>2.0.CO;2.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lumley, J. L., 1965: Interpretation of time spectra measured in high-intensity shear flows. Phys. Fluids, 8, 10561062, doi:10.1063/1.1761355.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lumley, J. L., and Terray E. , 1983: Kinematics of turbulence convected by a random wave field. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 13, 20002007, doi:10.1175/1520-0485(1983)013<2000:KOTCBA>2.0.CO;2.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Macoun, P., and Lueck R. , 2004: Modeling the spatial response of the airfoil shear probe using different sized probes. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 21, 284297, doi:10.1175/1520-0426(2004)021<0284:MTSROT>2.0.CO;2.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Moum, J. N., and Nash J. D. , 2009: Mixing measurements on an equatorial ocean mooring. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 26, 317336, doi:10.1175/2008JTECHO617.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Oakey, N. S., 1982: Determination of the rate of dissipation of turbulent energy from simultaneous temperature and velocity shear microstructure measurements. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 12, 256271, doi:10.1175/1520-0485(1982)012<0256:DOTROD>2.0.CO;2.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Osborn, T. R., 1980: Estimates of the local rate of vertical diffusion from dissipation measurements. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 10, 8389, doi:10.1175/1520-0485(1980)010<0083:EOTLRO>2.0.CO;2.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Osborn, T. R., and Cox C. S. , 1972: Oceanic fine structure. Geophys. Fluid Dyn., 3, 321345, doi:10.1080/03091927208236085.

  • Perlin, A., and Moum J. N. , 2012: Comparison of thermal variance dissipation rates from moored and profiling instruments at the equator. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 29, 13471362, doi:10.1175/JTECH-D-12-00019.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Pope, S. B., 2000: Turbulent Flows. 1st ed. Cambridge University Press, 770 pp.

  • Sreenivasan, K. R., 1996: The passive scalar spectrum and the Obukhov-Corrsin constant. Phys. Fluids, 8, 189196, doi:10.1063/1.868826.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Trowbridge, J., and Elgar S. , 2001: Turbulence measurements in the surf zone. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 31, 24032417, doi:10.1175/1520-0485(2001)031<2403:TMITSZ>2.0.CO;2.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Zhang, Y., and Moum J. N. , 2010: Inertial-convective subrange estimates of thermal variance dissipation rate from moored temperature measurements. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 27, 19501959, doi:10.1175/2010JTECHO746.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 80 32 1
PDF Downloads 54 20 1

Acquiring Long-Term Turbulence Measurements from Moored Platforms Impacted by Motion

View More View Less
  • 1 School of Civil, Environmental and Mining Engineering, and Oceans Institute, University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
Restricted access

Abstract

For measurements from either profiling or moored instruments, several processing techniques exist to estimate the dissipation rate of turbulent kinetic energy ϵ, a core quantity used to determine oceanic mixing rates. Moored velocimeters can provide long-term measurements of ϵ, but they can be plagued by motion-induced contamination. To remove this contamination, two methodologies are presented that use independent measurements of the instrument’s acceleration and rotation in space. The first is derived from the relationship between the spectra (cospectra) and the variance (covariance) of a time series. The cospectral technique recovers the environmental (or true) velocity spectrum by summing the measured spectrum, the motion-induced spectrum, and the cospectrum between the motion-induced and measured velocities. The second technique recovers the environmental spectrum by correcting the measured spectrum with the squared coherency, essentially assuming that the measured signal shares variance with either the environmental signal or the motion signal. Both techniques are applied to moored velocimeters at 7.5 and 20.5 m above the seabed in 105 m of water. By estimating the orbital velocities from their respective spectra and comparing them against those obtained from nearby wave measurements, the study shows that the surface wave signature is recovered with the cospectral technique, while it is underpredicted with the squared coherency technique. The latter technique is particularly problematic when the instrument’s motion is in phase with the orbital (environmental) velocities, as it removes variance that should have been added to the measured spectrum. The estimated ϵ from the cospectral technique compares well with estimates from nearby microstructure velocity shear vertical profiles.

Corresponding author address: Cynthia E. Bluteau, School of Civil, Environmental and Mining Engineering, University of Western Australia, MO15, 35 Stirling Highway, Perth WA 6009, Australia. E-mail: cynthia.bluteau@uwa.edu.au

Abstract

For measurements from either profiling or moored instruments, several processing techniques exist to estimate the dissipation rate of turbulent kinetic energy ϵ, a core quantity used to determine oceanic mixing rates. Moored velocimeters can provide long-term measurements of ϵ, but they can be plagued by motion-induced contamination. To remove this contamination, two methodologies are presented that use independent measurements of the instrument’s acceleration and rotation in space. The first is derived from the relationship between the spectra (cospectra) and the variance (covariance) of a time series. The cospectral technique recovers the environmental (or true) velocity spectrum by summing the measured spectrum, the motion-induced spectrum, and the cospectrum between the motion-induced and measured velocities. The second technique recovers the environmental spectrum by correcting the measured spectrum with the squared coherency, essentially assuming that the measured signal shares variance with either the environmental signal or the motion signal. Both techniques are applied to moored velocimeters at 7.5 and 20.5 m above the seabed in 105 m of water. By estimating the orbital velocities from their respective spectra and comparing them against those obtained from nearby wave measurements, the study shows that the surface wave signature is recovered with the cospectral technique, while it is underpredicted with the squared coherency technique. The latter technique is particularly problematic when the instrument’s motion is in phase with the orbital (environmental) velocities, as it removes variance that should have been added to the measured spectrum. The estimated ϵ from the cospectral technique compares well with estimates from nearby microstructure velocity shear vertical profiles.

Corresponding author address: Cynthia E. Bluteau, School of Civil, Environmental and Mining Engineering, University of Western Australia, MO15, 35 Stirling Highway, Perth WA 6009, Australia. E-mail: cynthia.bluteau@uwa.edu.au
Save