A kinetic energy budget and internal instabilities in the Fine Resolution Antarctic Model

An energy analysis of the Fine Resolution Antarctic Model (FRAM) reveals the instability processes in the model. The main source of time-mean kinetic energy is the wind stress and the main sink is transfer to mean potential energy. The wind forcing thus helps maintain the density structure. Transient motions result from internal instabilities of the Bow rather than seasonal variations of the forcing. Baroclinic instability is found to be an important mechanism in FRAM. The highest values of available potential energy are found in the western boundary regions as well as in the Antarctic Circumpolar Current (ACC) region. All subregions with predominantly zonal flow are found to be baroclinically unstable. The observed deficit of eddy kinetic energy in FRAM occurs as a result of the high lateral friction, which decreases the growth rates of the most unstable waves. This high friction is required for the numerical stability of the model and can only be made smaller by using a finer horizontal resolution. A grid spacing of at least 10-15 km would be required to resolve the most unstable waves in the southern part of the domain. Barotropic instability is also found to be important for the total domain balance. The inverse transfer (that is, transfer from eddy to mean kinetic energy) does not occur anywhere, except in very localized tight jets in the ACC. The open boundary condition at the northern edge of the model domain does not represent a significant source or sink of eddy variability. However, a large exchange between internal and external mode energies is found to occur. It is still unclear how these boundary conditions affect the dynamics of adjacent regions.

Experimental and diagnostic protocol for the physical component of the CMIP6 Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (OMIP)

The Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (OMIP) aims to provide a framework for evaluating, understanding, and improving the ocean and sea-ice components of global climate and earth system models contributing to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). OMIP addresses these aims in two complementary manners: (A) by providing an experimental protocol for global ocean/sea-ice models run with a prescribed atmospheric forcing, (B) by providing a protocol for ocean diagnostics to be saved as part of CMIP6. We focus here on the physical component of OMIP, with a companion paper (Orr et al., 2016) offering details for the inert chemistry and interactive biogeochemistry. The physical portion of the OMIP experimental protocol follows that of the interannual Coordinated Ocean-ice Reference Experiments (CORE-II). Since 2009, CORE-I (Normal Year Forcing) and CORE-II have become the standard method to evaluate global ocean/sea-ice simulations and to examine mechanisms for forced ocean climate variability. The OMIP diagnostic protocol is relevant for any ocean model component of CMIP6, including the DECK (Diagnostic, Evaluation and Characterization of Klima experiments), historical simulations, FAFMIP (Flux Anomaly Forced MIP), C4MIP (Coupled Carbon Cycle Climate MIP), DAMIP (Detection and Attribution MIP), DCPP (Decadal Climate Prediction Project), ScenarioMIP (Scenario MIP), as well as the ocean-sea ice OMIP simulations. The bulk of this paper offers scientific rationale for saving these diagnostics.

OMIP contribution to CMIP6: experimental and diagnostic protocol for the physical component of the Ocean Model Intercomparison Project

The Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (OMIP) is an endorsed project in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). OMIP addresses CMIP6 science questions, investigating the origins and consequences of systematic model biases. It does so by providing a framework for evaluating (including assessment of systematic biases), understanding, and improving ocean, sea-ice, tracer, and biogeochemical components of climate and earth system models contributing to CMIP6. Among the WCRP Grand Challenges in climate science (GCs), OMIP primarily contributes to the regional sea level change and near-term (climate/decadal) prediction GCs. OMIP provides (a) an experimental protocol for global ocean/sea-ice models run with a prescribed atmospheric forcing; and (b) a protocol for ocean diagnostics to be saved as part of CMIP6. We focus here on the physical component of OMIP, with a companion paper (Orr et al., 2016) detailing methods for the inert chemistry and interactive biogeochemistry. The physical portion of the OMIP experimental protocol follows the interannual Coordinated Ocean-ice Reference Experiments (CORE-II). Since 2009, CORE-I (Normal Year Forcing) and CORE-II (Interannual Forcing) have become the standard methods to evaluate global ocean/sea-ice simulations and to examine mechanisms for forced ocean climate variability. The OMIP diagnostic protocol is relevant for any ocean model component of CMIP6, including the DECK (Diagnostic, Evaluation and Characterization of Klima experiments), historical simulations, FAFMIP (Flux Anomaly Forced MIP), C4MIP (Coupled Carbon Cycle Climate MIP), DAMIP (Detection and Attribution MIP), DCPP (Decadal Climate Prediction Project), ScenarioMIP, HighResMIP (High Resolution MIP), as well as the ocean/sea-ice OMIP simulations.