the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Understanding influence of ocean waves on Arctic sea ice simulation: A modeling study with an atmosphere-ocean-wave-sea ice coupled model
Chao-Yuan Yang
Jiping Liu
Dake Chen
Abstract. Rapid decline of Arctic sea ice has created more open water for ocean wave development and highlighted the importance of wave-ice interactions in the Arctic. Some studies have made contributions to our understanding of the potential role of the prognostic floe size distribution (FSD) on sea ice changes. However, these efforts do not represent the full interactions across atmosphere, ocean, wave, and sea-ice. In this study, we implement a modified joint floe size and thickness distribution (FSTD) in a newly-developed regional atmosphere-ocean-wave-sea ice coupled model and conduct a series of pan-Arctic simulation with different physical configurations related to FSD changes, including FSD-fixed, FSD-varied, lateral melting rate, wave-fracturing formulation, and wave attenuation rate. Firstly, our atmosphere-ocean-wave-sea ice coupled simulations show that the prognostic FSD leads to reduced ice area due to enhanced ice-ocean heat fluxes, but the feedbacks from the atmosphere and the ocean partially offset the reduced ice area induced by the prognostic FSD. Secondly, lateral melting rate formulations do not change the simulated FSD significantly but they influence the flux exchanges across atmosphere, ocean, and sea-ice and thus sea ice responses. Thirdly, the changes of FSD are sensitive to the simulated wave height, wavelength, and wave period associated with different wave-fracturing formulations and wave attenuation rates, and the limited oceanic energy imposes a strong constraint for the response of sea ice to FSD changes. Finally, our results also demonstrate that wave-related physical processes can have impacts on sea ice changes with the constant FSD, suggesting the indirect influences of ocean waves on sea-ice through the atmosphere and the ocean.
- Preprint
(3832 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(2672 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Chao-Yuan Yang et al.
Status: open (until 21 Oct 2023)
-
RC1: 'Comment on tc-2023-79', Anonymous Referee #1, 20 Jun 2023
reply
With the reduction of Arctic sea ice, the expansion of summer sea ice marginal ice zone, and the enhanced moveability of sea ice, understanding influence of ocean waves on Arctic sea ice simulation and the role of floe size on the wave-ice interactions and ice-ocean heat exchange is becoming more important for both research communities from the Arctic sea ice numerical simulation and other related disciplines. This manuscript by Yang et al. investigates the impacts of ocean waves on Arctic sea ice simulation based on a newly-developed atmosphere-ocean-wave-sea ice coupled model. Especially, the contrasting behaviors of floe size, the responses of sea ice to different lateral melting rate formulations, and the sensitivity of sea ice to the simulated wave parameters have been investigated in detail. This is a work worth publishing. However, there are still some confusions that need further revision and clarification. Therefore, I recommend that this paper be considered for publication after minor revisions.
The major point of concern is the simulation effect of oceanic mixed layer. This paper discusses the reshaping process of sea waves on the size of floating ice, as well as the impact of the latter on ice-ocean heat exchange. Then I think the simulation effect of the ocean mixed layer must be discussed, so I suggest adding 1-2 illustrations to compare the simulation results of the depth and heat content of the mixed layer under different mode settings, and discuss on their influence on ice-ocean heat flux.
Other special comments:
- Line 56 “the ice-floe melting rate is a result of the interaction between floe size and ocean circulation”: Why the floe size interacts with the ocean circulation is not clear here, what scale of ocean circulation is, and why it affects the ice-ocean heat flux and ice melt rate?
- Line 62 “Previous studies showed that intense storms like “Great Arctic Cyclone” of 2012 (Simmonds and Rudeva, 2012) and strong summer cyclone in 2016 contribute to the anomalously low sea ice extent in 2012 and 2016”: This can only be said to be a partial contribution, as even without great cyclones, there will be an extremely low Arctic sea ice extent in the summer of 2012.
- Line 96 “a full representation of sea ice responses under the interactions across atmosphere, ocean, wave, and sea ice”: Actually, waves are a part of the ocean.
- frazil ice formation: the frazil ice is very discrete, how does it affect the air-ocean heat flux?
- The floe welding parameter: How to consider the seasonal changes in the welding coefficient of sea ice, especially during the freeze-thaw transition season, whether it will be affected by ice temperature and thickness? If the seasonal variation of welding coefficient is considered, how will it affect the simulation results？
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-2023-79-RC1 -
RC2: 'Comment on tc-2023-79', Anonymous Referee #2, 29 Aug 2023
reply
Reviewer’s comment of the manuscript “Understanding influence of ocean waves on Arctic sea ice simulation: A modeling study with an atmosphere-ocean-wave-sea ice coupled mode” (tc-2023-79)
This study quantifies the effect of ocean waves on sea ice simulation in the arctic based on a coupled model framework built by the authors. Authors focus on the floe size and thickness distribution (FSTD) with the effect of the ocean waves embedded. This study demonstrates that involving wave-related process can have an impact on sea ice, proving the importance of oceanic wave on sea ice modeling in the coupled model.
Overall, the model development work in this study has a significant value on the coupled modeling system. The result in this study offers more insights on the interaction between the atmosphere, ocean, and sea ice in the arctic. The whole manuscript is well-written in general, and I recommend an acceptance after some minor revisions.
Major points:
- In this study, the authors divide the model domain into 3 sub-regions, while it lacks conclusions that related to geographically-specified features. I understand that the model development in this study has a good application for all these three regions, and it can distinguish the different wave-sea ice interactions in these regions. But authors should elaborate more on how the regional features derives the conclusion that are widely-applicable for the pan-arctic.
Minor points
Line 238: Please specify that if the atmosphere, ocean, and sea ice model are using the same model grid.
Line 248: The model configuration of a higher model top is kind of confusing to me. Does it only matter on the atmospheric circulation modeling? Or it has some effect on the better coupling between the atmosphere and ocean/sea ice?
Figure 9 make sure the naming of sub-figures correctly follows the rule of TC.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-2023-79-RC2
Chao-Yuan Yang et al.
Chao-Yuan Yang et al.
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 260 | 78 | 17 | 355 | 32 | 6 | 6 |
- HTML: 260
- PDF: 78
- XML: 17
- Total: 355
- Supplement: 32
- BibTeX: 6
- EndNote: 6
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1