Search

Abstract: This paper presents a refined description of the wave climate observed in a Portuguese location for marine energy projects. The data used in this case study were derived from 3-month in situ measurements carried out using three directional buoys that have been deployed simultaneously – yet independently (various buoy types and water depths) – on the Atlantic coast in the neighbourhood of Figueira da Foz. Two ways of reporting the statistics were adopted. In the first one, each recorded sea state was summarized as a set of global parameters accounting for energy, mean frequency and direction, spectral bandwidth and directional spreading related to the main ongoing wave field considered as unimodal. In the second one, each sea state has been decomposed into its own wave components – swells and wind-sea – which are characterised separately and individually by the same set of parameters as previously. Besides the adopted data processing techniques and the illustration of such thorough wave climate description modes, the paper also addresses the advantages and limits of each adopted parameterization in the frame of simultaneous and independent in situ wave measurements. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Unprecedented numbers of tropical cyclones occurred in the North Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico in 2005. This provides a unique opportunity to evaluate the performance of two operational regional wave forecasting models at the National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP). This study validates model predictions of the tropical cyclone-generated maximum significant wave height, simultaneous spectral peak wave period, and the time of occurrence against available buoy measurements from the National Data Buoy Center (NDBC). The models used are third-generation operational wave models: the Western North Atlantic wave model (WNA) and the North Atlantic Hurricane wave model (NAH). These two models have identical model physics, spatial resolutions, and domains, with the latter model using specialized hurricane wind forcing. Both models provided consistent estimates of the maximum wave height and period, with random errors of typically less than 25%, and timing errors of typically less than 5 h. Compared to these random errors, systematic model biases are negligible, with a typical negative model bias of 5%. It appears that higher wave model resolutions are needed to fully utilize the specialized hurricane wind forcing, and it is shown that present routine wave observations are inadequate to accurately validate hurricane wave models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]