SlideServe
Menu
Préférences
© SlideServe · v2026

The relationship between MVT & MHT of AMOC:

beasleyr avatar
10 diapositives · 131 Views · Jan 03, 2020

The relationship between MVT & MHT of AMOC: a comparison between observations & ocean state estimation products Tong Lee, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Bill Johns, University of Miami. Picture from http://www.noc.soton.ac.uk. MVT: Meridional Volume Transport MHT: Meridional Heat Transport.

The relationship between MVT & MHT of AMOC: - slide 1
01 / 10The relationship between MVT & MHT of AMOC:
1 / 17

Télécharger la présentation

The relationship between MVT & MHT of AMOC:
Une image / un lien ci-dessous est fourni (tel quel) pour télécharger la présentation

Politique de téléchargement : le contenu du site vous est fourni TEL QUEL pour votre information et votre usage personnel ; il ne peut être vendu, concédé sous licence ni partagé sur d’autres sites sans l’accord de son auteur.Le contenu vous est fourni TEL QUEL, pour votre information et votre usage personnel uniquement. Téléchargez la présentation en cliquant sur ce lien. Lors du téléchargement, si vous ne parvenez pas à télécharger une présentation, l’éditeur a peut-être supprimé le fichier de son serveur.Pendant le téléchargement, si vous ne parvenez pas à obtenir une présentation, le fichier a peut-être été supprimé par l’éditeur.

F I N

Plus de contenu associé

Transcription de la présentation
  1. The relationship between MVT & MHT of AMOC: a comparison between observations & ocean state estimation products Tong Lee, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Bill Johns, University of Miami Picture from http://www.noc.soton.ac.uk MVT: Meridional Volume Transport MHT: Meridional Heat Transport

  2. Motivation • Trans-oceanic arrays such as RAPID/MOCHA are designed to monitor MVT. • MHT is more climate relevant but more difficult to measure. • MVT-MHT empirical relation (linear regression) was inferred from RAPID-MOCHA & auxiliary data (Baringer et al. 2010). • Comparison with ocean state estimation (OSE) products. Coordination with GFDL & NCAR for similar analysis. Related to Monday’s talk by Rym Msadek.

  3. OSE products used for comparison • ECCO-JPL (1993-present) • Near-global, 1°x(0.3°x1°), 46 levels, MITgcm. • Prior NCEP forcing. • Assimilates anomalies of SSH and vertical T profiles. • ECCO2 (1993-2008) • Global, 18x18 km, 50 levels, MITgcm cubed-sphere. • Prior ECMWF analysis forcing. • Assimilate observed SSH anomaly and T/S profiles. • GECCO (1950-2000) • Near global, 1°x1°, 23 levels, MITgcm • Prior NCEP forcing • Assimilate a large suite of data

  4. Time mean for Apr. 2004- Sept. 2007 at 26.5N: MVT (max MOC): RAPID (18.5 Sv), ECCO-JPL (15.8), ECCO2 (17.9) MHT: RAPID (1.3 PW), ECCO-JPL (0.9), ECCO2 (1.0) MVT anomaly

  5. Comparison of averaged seasonal MVT anomaly

  6. Comparison of MVT-MHT linear regression & correlation Slope: change of MHT per unit MVT Intercept: physical meaning problematic Larger scatter due to eddies?

  7. Little dependence of MVT-MHT relation on time period (GECCO)

  8. Relatively large dependence of MVT-MHT relation on time scale MHT MVT MHT Smaller slope for longer time scales: geostrophic shear flow advecting smaller vertical T gradient (than Ekman)

  9. Dependence of MVT-MHT relation on latitude: Relatively high regression & correlation coeff. in subtropics & 15N due to dominant overturning contribution & minor gyre contribution

  10. Summary • Time mean MVT and MHT in 3 ECCO products are some what too weak • Seasonal variation reasonably well reproduced. • MVT-MHT regression slope and correlation: • Low-resolution model closer to RAPID/MOCHA estimate; effect of eddies? • Little variation in different decades. • Relatively large dependence on time scales (monthly from interannual). • Subtropical N. & S. Alt. and near 15N have relatively large regression and correlation coefficients between MVT & MHT. • STILL NEED TO UNDERSTAND HOW MVT & MHT ARE FORCED DIFFERENTLY, ESP. ON LONGER TIME SCALES!