Reply to “Comments on ‘Diathermal Heat Transport in a Global Ocean Model’”
Reply to “Comments on ‘Diathermal Heat Transport in a Global Ocean Model’”
复制标题
回复“关于‘全球海洋模型中的地热传热’的评论”
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2019
影响因子：
3.5
通讯作者：
M. England
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Holmes;J. Zika;M. England
Hochet和Tailleux(2019)，在对Holmes等人的评论中。(2019)，认为在不可压缩的Boussinesq近似下，“通过任何类型的控制体积的体积流量的总和必须在任何时候都积分为零。”因此，他们认为福尔摩斯等人的表达。(2019)对于温度高于给定温度的海水体积的变化是不准确的。在这里，我们阐明了Holmes等人所使用的术语“体积通量”的含义。(2019)，也更普遍地出现在水团转化文献中。具体地说，通过表面的体积流量可能是由于流体通过固定表面，也可能是由于表面通过流体移动。以这种方式解释，我们使用几个例子表明，上面引用的Hochet和Tailleux(2019)的声明不适用于Holmes等人考虑的控制量。(2019年)。Hochet和Tailleux(2019)随后导出了一般可压缩情况下等温线上的水质量转换或体积通量的一系列表达式。在不可压缩的Boussinesq极限中，这些表达式简化为一种形式(类似于Holmes等人提供的形式)。2019年)，这涉及到非绝热热通量的温度导数。由于这种导数，很难从海洋模型的输出中稳健地估计。这强调了Holmes等人方法的优势之一。(2019)，即不出现在内部热含量预算中，也不需要用来描述内部热含量流入海洋和海洋周围的情况。
Hochet and Tailleux (2019), in a comment on Holmes et al. (2019), argue that under the incompressible Boussinesq approximation the “sum of the volume fluxes through any kind of control volume must integrate to zero at all times.” They hence argue that the expression in Holmes et al. (2019) for the change in the volume of seawater warmer than a given temperature is inaccurate. Here we clarify what is meant by the term “volume flux” as used in Holmes et al. (2019) and also more generally in the water-mass transformation literature. Specifically, a volume flux across a surface can occur either due to fluid moving through a fixed surface, or due to the surface moving through the fluid. Interpreted in this way, we show using several examples that the statement from Hochet and Tailleux (2019) quoted above does not apply to the control volume considered in Holmes et al. (2019). Hochet and Tailleux (2019) then derive a series of expressions for the water-mass transformation or volume flux across an isotherm in the general, compressible case. In the incompressible Boussinesq limit these expressions reduce to a form (similar to that provided in Holmes et al. 2019) that involves the temperature derivative of the diabatic heat fluxes. Due to this derivative, can be difficult to robustly estimate from ocean model output. This emphasizes one of the advantages of the approach of Holmes et al. (2019), namely, does not appear in the internal heat content budget and is not needed to describe the flow of internal heat content into and around the ocean.