Editorial Type:
Corrigendum
Article Type:
Correction

CORRIGENDUM

Daniel B. Whitt National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado

Search for other papers by Daniel B. Whitt in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
and
John R. Taylor Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom

Search for other papers by John R. Taylor in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
Print Publication:
01 Jan 2018
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-17-0242.1
Page(s):
221–223
Full access

© 2018 American Meteorological Society. For information regarding reuse of this content and general copyright information, consult the AMS Copyright Policy (www.ametsoc.org/PUBSReuseLicenses).

Corresponding author: Daniel B. Whitt, dwhitt@ucar.edu

© 2018 American Meteorological Society. For information regarding reuse of this content and general copyright information, consult the AMS Copyright Policy (www.ametsoc.org/PUBSReuseLicenses).

Corresponding author: Daniel B. Whitt, dwhitt@ucar.edu

A bug in the numerical model used by Whitt and Taylor (2017) has been discovered, wherein the vertical molecular viscous momentum flux was set to zero at the top boundary during the calculation of the explicit part of the viscous stress in the Crank–Nicholson time-stepping scheme.1 The molecular viscosity is everywhere negligible compared to the subgrid-scale viscosity. However, as a result of this bug, the values of the surface stress τ and mixed layer buoyancy flux ratio RML plotted in Fig. 1 of Whitt and Taylor (2017) were incorrect. A corrected version of Fig. 1 is below, where τ and RML are reduced by a factor of 2 in Fig. 1b, but Fig. 1a is the same as in Whitt and Taylor (2017).

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.

(a) Snapshots of density and (b) time series of wind stress magnitude (black) and vector components (dashed red and green) as well as the mixed layer buoyancy flux ratio RML (blue) [see (1)]. Black vectors in the snapshot at day 2.33 indicate the direction of the wind during the storm.

Citation: Journal of Physical Oceanography 48, 1; 10.1175/JPO-D-17-0242.1

In addition, a new version of the strong buoyancy flux–forced front simulation was conducted with an air–sea buoyancy flux BA(t) reduced by a factor of 2 so that the associated RML is equivalent to that associated with the wind-forced front and plotted correctly in Fig. 1b here. Revised Figs. 2 and 5 below include results from the new simulation of the strong buoyancy flux–forced front. In particular, Fig. 2c and all the red curves in Fig. 5 correspond to the new simulation where the surface buoyancy flux matches the corrected Ekman buoyancy flux. Other panels and lines are the same as in Whitt and Taylor (2017).

Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.

Time series of horizontally averaged stratification and (equivalently) the balanced Richardson number in three simulations: (a) the wind-forced front, (b) the wind-forced domain without a front, and (c) the strong buoyancy flux–forced front. Panels also include time series of mixed layer depth HML (white), mixing layer depth HXL (magenta), and the low-gradient Richardson number depth HRi (gray), above which the gradient Richardson number Rig ≤ ¼.

Citation: Journal of Physical Oceanography 48, 1; 10.1175/JPO-D-17-0242.1

Fig. 5.
Fig. 5.

Time-averaged power spectra of (a) horizontal velocity Eh and (b) vertical velocity Eυ at z = −30 m as a function of radial horizontal wavenumber |kh|. Time series of (c) horizontal kinetic energy and (d) vertical kinetic energy in the wind-forced front (blue), the strong buoyancy flux–forced front (red), the weak buoyancy flux-forced front (gray), and the wind-forced domain without a front (green). The wavenumber spectra in (a) and (b) are averaged during the storm (0.5 < t < 2.75 days, solid) and after the storm (4.5 < t < 7 days, dashed lines). The kinetic energy in (c) and (d) is integrated over small scales (dotted), that is, over wavenumbers |kh| > kc, where kc = 1/150 cycles m−1, and large scales (dashed–dotted), that is, |kh| < kc. Several lines are omitted: solid gray lines are omitted from (a) and (b), and dotted gray lines are omitted from (c) and (d) because there is no storm event in that simulation.

Citation: Journal of Physical Oceanography 48, 1; 10.1175/JPO-D-17-0242.1

Although this correction implies that the simulated wind stress was a factor of 2 weaker than the observed conditions, reported by Rumyantseva et al. (2015), the main conclusions of the paper do not change. In particular, the corrected value of the mixed layer buoyancy flux ratio RML exceeds 10 for most of the simulated storm event. The authors regret the error.

REFERENCES

  • Rumyantseva, A., N. Lucas, T. Rippeth, A. Martin, S. C. Painter, T. J. Boyd, and S. Henson, 2015: Ocean nutrient pathways associated with the passage of a storm. Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 29, 1179–1189, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GB005097.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Whitt, D. B., and J. R. Taylor, 2017: Energetic submesoscales maintain strong mixed layer stratification during an autumn storm. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 47, 2419–2427, https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-17-0130.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
1

The bug was introduced when the large-eddy simulations (LES) package was added to the newly parallelized version of DIABLO. The bug does not affect any other published results using DIABLO.

Save
Cover Journal of Physical Oceanography
Journal of Physical Oceanography

  • Rumyantseva, A., N. Lucas, T. Rippeth, A. Martin, S. C. Painter, T. J. Boyd, and S. Henson, 2015: Ocean nutrient pathways associated with the passage of a storm. Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 29, 1179–1189, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GB005097.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Whitt, D. B., and J. R. Taylor, 2017: Energetic submesoscales maintain strong mixed layer stratification during an autumn storm. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 47, 2419–2427, https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-17-0130.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • <sc>Fig</sc>. 1.
    View in gallery
    Fig. 1.

    (a) Snapshots of density and (b) time series of wind stress magnitude (black) and vector components (dashed red and green) as well as the mixed layer buoyancy flux ratio RML (blue) [see (1)]. Black vectors in the snapshot at day 2.33 indicate the direction of the wind during the storm.

  • <sc>Fig</sc>. 2.
    View in gallery
    Fig. 2.

    Time series of horizontally averaged stratification and (equivalently) the balanced Richardson number in three simulations: (a) the wind-forced front, (b) the wind-forced domain without a front, and (c) the strong buoyancy flux–forced front. Panels also include time series of mixed layer depth HML (white), mixing layer depth HXL (magenta), and the low-gradient Richardson number depth HRi (gray), above which the gradient Richardson number Rig ≤ ¼.

  • <sc>Fig</sc>. 5.
    View in gallery
    Fig. 5.

    Time-averaged power spectra of (a) horizontal velocity Eh and (b) vertical velocity Eυ at z = −30 m as a function of radial horizontal wavenumber |kh|. Time series of (c) horizontal kinetic energy and (d) vertical kinetic energy in the wind-forced front (blue), the strong buoyancy flux–forced front (red), the weak buoyancy flux-forced front (gray), and the wind-forced domain without a front (green). The wavenumber spectra in (a) and (b) are averaged during the storm (0.5 < t < 2.75 days, solid) and after the storm (4.5 < t < 7 days, dashed lines). The kinetic energy in (c) and (d) is integrated over small scales (dotted), that is, over wavenumbers |kh| > kc, where kc = 1/150 cycles m−1, and large scales (dashed–dotted), that is, |kh| < kc. Several lines are omitted: solid gray lines are omitted from (a) and (b), and dotted gray lines are omitted from (c) and (d) because there is no storm event in that simulation.

Fig. 1.

(a) Snapshots of density and (b) time series of wind stress magnitude (black) and vector components (dashed red and green) as well as the mixed layer buoyancy flux ratio RML (blue) [see (1)]. Black vectors in the snapshot at day 2.33 indicate the direction of the wind during the storm.
Fig. 2.

Time series of horizontally averaged stratification and (equivalently) the balanced Richardson number in three simulations: (a) the wind-forced front, (b) the wind-forced domain without a front, and (c) the strong buoyancy flux–forced front. Panels also include time series of mixed layer depth HML (white), mixing layer depth HXL (magenta), and the low-gradient Richardson number depth HRi (gray), above which the gradient Richardson number Rig ≤ ¼.
Fig. 5.

Time-averaged power spectra of (a) horizontal velocity Eh and (b) vertical velocity Eυ at z = −30 m as a function of radial horizontal wavenumber |kh|. Time series of (c) horizontal kinetic energy and (d) vertical kinetic energy in the wind-forced front (blue), the strong buoyancy flux–forced front (red), the weak buoyancy flux-forced front (gray), and the wind-forced domain without a front (green). The wavenumber spectra in (a) and (b) are averaged during the storm (0.5 < t < 2.75 days, solid) and after the storm (4.5 < t < 7 days, dashed lines). The kinetic energy in (c) and (d) is integrated over small scales (dotted), that is, over wavenumbers |kh| > kc, where kc = 1/150 cycles m−1, and large scales (dashed–dotted), that is, |kh| < kc. Several lines are omitted: solid gray lines are omitted from (a) and (b), and dotted gray lines are omitted from (c) and (d) because there is no storm event in that simulation.
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 669 388 200
PDF Downloads 63 23 2