Hostname: page-component-5db58dd55d-htx7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-25T22:17:45.040Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

An idealized wave–ice interaction model without subgrid spatial or temporal discretizations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2017

Luke G. Bennetts
Affiliation:
School of Mathematical Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia E-mail: luke.bennetts@adelaide.edu.au
Siobhan O’Farrell
Affiliation:
CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, Aspendale, Victoria, Australia
Petteri Uotila
Affiliation:
CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, Aspendale, Victoria, Australia
Vernon A. Squire
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A new numerical implementation is proposed for a wave-ice interaction model. It is applied to an idealized transect geometry. Wave attenuation due to ice floes and wave-induced ice fracture are both included in the model. The new method alleviates the need for subgrid spatial or temporal discretizations, thereby facilitating future integration of wave-ice interactions into large-scale coupled models.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) [year] 2015
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Results for incident wave spectrum with 1 m significant wave height and 9.5 s peak period, and transect length L = 100 km. (a) Black curve represents half-wavelength/maximum-floe-diameter balance function at x = L. Grey curve represents abscissa axis. (b) Solid curve represents strain imposed on the ice by wave spectrum at x = L, as a function of maximum floe diameter. Broken curve represents the strain threshold Ec. (c) Incident wave spectrum and attenuated wave spectrum at x = L.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. (a, b) Same as Figure 1 but for 0.8 m incident significant wave height. (c) Corresponding strain balance equation as a function of distance, l. In (b) and (c) grey curves represent abscissa axes.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Fracture width (a) and maximum floe diameter (b), as functions of incident wave spectrum peak period. Incident wave spectrum significant wave height is 1 m. Circles and curves denote results produced by method of Williams and others (2013b) and new method, respectively.