Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Alfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research
Russian Federation
VAK Russia 1.6
UDC 551.468
UDC 55
UDC 550.34
UDC 550.383
CSCSTI 37.25
CSCSTI 37.01
CSCSTI 37.15
CSCSTI 37.31
CSCSTI 38.01
CSCSTI 36.00
CSCSTI 37.00
CSCSTI 38.00
CSCSTI 39.00
CSCSTI 52.00
Russian Classification of Professions by Education 05.06.01
Russian Library and Bibliographic Classification 26
Russian Trade and Bibliographic Classification 6345
Russian Trade and Bibliographic Classification 63
BISAC SCI052000 Earth Sciences / Oceanography
BISAC SCI SCIENCE
Tidal dynamics play an important role in Kara Sea circulation, influencing currents, sea ice formation, and biogeochemical processes. However, accurate numerical simulation of these processes in regional models depends on the choice of tidal forcing at open lateral boundaries. This study evaluates the performance of three tidal models – TPXO9, FES2014, and Arc2kmTM as sources of boundary forcing for a high-resolution regional Kara Sea model based on MITgcm numerical kernel. The goal is to identify the optimal tidal forcing that best aligns with observations from coastal stations. Numerical experiments have revealed significant discrepancies in tidal energy estimates among the models. The FES2014 model has shown the closest agreement to observations, while Arc2kmTM exhibits the largest errors. However, when used as boundary forcing in the regional Kara Sea model, Arc2kmTM yields the smallest errors in simulated tidal amplitude and phase. Overall, the regional model reproduces M2 tidal amplitudes well but introduces slight phase shifts in the southwestern part of the Kara Sea. Our findings emphasize that no single tidal model can be considered universally optimal. The choice depends on regional conditions and modeling objectives. For our regional model, Arc2kmTM is recommended as a source of tidal forcing at the open boundaries of the regional model, though global models like FES2014 remain viable alternatives. This work emphasizes the need for improved validation methods and highlights the challenges posed by limited observational data in the Arctic region.
Kara Sea, tide, numerical modeling, tidal forcing, open boundary
1. Cai S., Long X., Liu H., et al. Tide model evaluation under different conditions // Continental Shelf Research. — 2006. — Vol. 26, no. 1. — P. 104–112. — https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csr.2005.09.004
2. Campin J.-M., Adcroft A., Hill C., et al. Conservation of properties in a free-surface model // Ocean Modelling. — 2004. — Vol. 6, no. 3/4. — P. 221–244. — https://doi.org/10.1016/s1463-5003(03)00009-x
3. Chantsev V. Y. and Danshina A. V. A calculation of the intra-annual dynamics of the Ob Bay hydrophysical regime with high spatial resolution // Fundamental and Applied Hydrophysics. — 2019. — Vol. 12, no. 3. — P. 55–64. — https://doi.org/10.7868/s2073667319030079 — (In Russian).
4. Codiga D. UTide Unified Tidal Analysis and Prediction Functions. — 2024. — URL: https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/46523-utide-unified-tidal-analysis-and-prediction-functions
5. Egbert G. D. and Erofeeva S. Y. Efficient Inverse Modeling of Barotropic Ocean Tides // Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology. — 2002. — Vol. 19, no. 2. — P. 183–204. — https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(2002)019<0183:eimobo>2.0.co;2
6. Gaspar P., Grégoris Y. and Lefevre J. A simple eddy kinetic energy model for simulations of the oceanic vertical mixing: Tests at station Papa and long-term upper ocean study site // Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans. — 1990. — Vol. 95, no. C9. — P. 16179–16193. — https://doi.org/10.1029/jc095ic09p16179
7. Grimaldi S., Salamon P., Disperati J., et al. River discharge and related historical data from the Global Flood Awareness System, v4.0. — European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), 2022. — https://doi.org/10.24381/CDS.A4FDD6B9
8. Hallberg R. Using a resolution function to regulate parameterizations of oceanic mesoscale eddy effects // Ocean Modelling. — 2013. — Vol. 72. — P. 92–103. — https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocemod.2013.08.007
9. Harms I. H. A numerical study of the barotropic circulation in the Barents and Kara Seas // Continental Shelf Research. — 1992. — Vol. 12, no. 9. — P. 1043–1058. — https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-4343(92)90015-c
10. Hart-Davis M. G., Howard S. L., Ray R. D., et al. ArcTiCA: Arctic tidal constituents atlas // Scientific Data. — 2024. — Vol. 11, no. 1. — https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-024-03012-w
11. Howard S. L. and Padman L. Arc2kmTM: Arctic 2 kilometer Tide Model, 2021. — NSF Arctic Data Center, 2021. — https://doi.org/10.18739/A2PV6B79W
12. Jackett D. R. and McDougall T. J. Minimal Adjustment of Hydrographic Profiles to Achieve Static Stability // Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology. — 1995. — Vol. 12, no. 2. — P. 381–389. — https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(1995)012<0381:maohpt>2.0.co;2
13. Jakobsson M., Mayer L., Coakley B., et al. The International Bathymetric Chart of the Arctic Ocean (IBCAO) Version 3.0 // Geophysical Research Letters. — 2012. — Vol. 39, no. 12. — https://doi.org/10.1029/2012gl052219
14. Janeković I. and Powell B. Analysis of imposing tidal dynamics to nested numerical models // Continental Shelf Research. — 2012. — Vol. 34. — P. 30–40. — https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csr.2011.11.017
15. Jean-Michel L., Eric G., Romain B.-B., et al. The Copernicus Global 1/12◦ Oceanic and Sea Ice GLORYS12 Reanalysis // Frontiers in Earth Science. — 2021. — Vol. 9. — https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2021.698876
16. Kagan B. A., Sofina E. V. and Timofeev A. A. The Tidal Effect on Climatic Characteristics of the Kara Sea in the IceFree Period // Izvestiya, Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics. — 2019. — Vol. 55, no. 2. — P. 188–195. — https://doi.org/10.1134/s0001433819020087
17. Kagan B. A. and Timofeev A. A. Simulation of surface and internal semidiurnal tides in the Kara Sea // Izvestiya, Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics. — 2017. — Vol. 53, no. 2. — P. 233–241. — https://doi.org/10.1134/s0001433817020050
18. Kowalik Z. and Proshutinsky A. Y. The Arctic Ocean Tides // The Polar Oceans and Their Role in Shaping the Global Environment. — Washington, D. C. : American Geophysical Union, 2013. — P. 137–158. — https://doi.org/10.1029/gm085p0137
19. Leith C. E. Stochastic models of chaotic systems // Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena. — 1996. — Vol. 98, no. 2–4. — P. 481–491. — https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2789(96)00107-8
20. Li Q., Wu H., Yang H., et al. A numerical simulation of the generation and evolution of nonlinear internal waves across the Kara Strait // Acta Oceanologica Sinica. — 2019. — Vol. 38, no. 5. — P. 1–9. — https://doi.org/10.1007/s13131-019-1437-z
21. Losch M., Menemenlis D., Campin J.-M., et al. On the formulation of sea-ice models. Part 1: Effects of different solver implementations and parameterizations // Ocean Modelling. — 2010. — Vol. 33, no. 1/2. — P. 129–144. — https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocemod.2009.12.008
22. Lyard F. H., Allain D. J., Cancet M., et al. FES2014 global ocean tide atlas: design and performance // Ocean Science. — 2021. — Vol. 17, no. 3. — P. 615–649. — https://doi.org/10.5194/os-17-615-2021
23. Marchesiello P., McWilliams J. C. and Shchepetkin A. Open boundary conditions for long-term integration of regional oceanic models // Ocean Modelling. — 2001. — Vol. 3, no. 1/2. — P. 1–20. — https://doi.org/10.1016/s1463-5003(00)00013-5
24. Marshall J., Adcroft A., Hill C., et al. A finite-volume, incompressible Navier Stokes model for studies of the ocean on parallel computers // Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans. — 1997. — Vol. 102, no. C3. — P. 5753–5766. — https://doi.org/10.1029/96jc02775
25. Martyanov S. D. High-Resolution Modeling of the Kara Sea Dynamics and Thermohaline Structure and Assessment of the Impact of Various River Runoff Forcing in the Model // Water Resources. — 2023. — Vol. 50, S3. — S323–S327. — https://doi.org/10.1134/s0097807823700525
26. Martyanov S. D., Dvornikov A. Y., Gorchakov V. A., et al. Model estimates of the ecosystem contribution in the carbon dioxide exchange between the ocean and the atmosphere in the Barents Sea // Fundamental and Applied Hydrophysics. — 2017. — Vol. 10, no. 1. — P. 11–16. — https://doi.org/10.7868/S2073667317010026
27. Martyanov S. D., Dvornikov A. Y., Ryabchenko V. A., et al. Investigation of the relationship between primary production and sea ice in the arctic seas: assessments based on a small-component model of marine ecosystem // Fundamental and Applied Hydrophysics. — 2018. — Vol. 11, no. 2. — P. 108–117. — https://doi.org/10.7868/s2073667318020107
28. Mason E., Molemaker J., Shchepetkin A. F., et al. Procedures for offline grid nesting in regional ocean models // Ocean Modelling. — 2010. — Vol. 35, no. 1/2. — P. 1–15. — https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocemod.2010.05.007
29. Morozov E. G., Kozlov I. E., Shchuka S. A., et al. Internal tide in the Kara Gates Strait // Oceanology. — 2017. — Vol. 57, no. 1. — P. 8–18. — https://doi.org/10.1134/s0001437017010106
30. Morozov E. G., Paka V. T. and Bakhanov V. V. Strong internal tides in the Kara Gates Strait // Geophysical Research Letters. — 2008. — Vol. 35, no. 16. — https://doi.org/10.1029/2008gl033804
31. Nekrasov A. V. Energy of ocean tides. — Leningrad : Gidrometeoizdat, 1990. — 288 p. — (In Russian).
32. Nguyen V. T. and Lee M. Effect of Open Boundary Conditions and Bottom Roughness on Tidal Modeling around the West Coast of Korea // Water. — 2020. — Vol. 12, no. 6. — P. 1706. — https://doi.org/10.3390/w12061706
33. Nurser A. J. G. and Bacon S. The Rossby radius in the Arctic Ocean // Ocean Science. — 2014. — Vol. 10, no. 6. — P. 967–975. — https://doi.org/10.5194/os-10-967-2014
34. Padman L. and Erofeeva S. A barotropic inverse tidal model for the Arctic Ocean // Geophysical Research Letters. — 2004. — Vol. 31, no. 2. — https://doi.org/10.1029/2003gl019003
35. Parkinson C. L. and Washington W. M. A large-scale numerical model of sea ice // Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans. — 1979. — Vol. 84, no. C1. — P. 311–337. — https://doi.org/10.1029/jc084ic01p00311
36. Postlethwaite C. F., Morales Maqueda M. A., Fouest V. le, et al. The effect of tides on dense water formation in Arctic shelf seas // Ocean Science. — 2011. — Vol. 7, no. 2. — P. 203–217. — https://doi.org/10.5194/os-7-203-2011
37. Romanenkov D. A., Sofina E. V. and Rodikova A. E. Modeling of Barotropic Tide off the Southeastern Coast of the Kamchatka Peninsula in View of the Accuracy of Global Tidal Models in the Northwest Pacific Ocean //Fundamental and Applied Hydrophysics. — 2023. — Vol.16, no. 4. — P. 45–62. — https://doi.org/10.59887/2073-6673.2023.16(4)-4
38. Solano M., Canals M. and Leonardi S. Barotropic boundary conditions and tide forcing in split-explicit high resolution coastal ocean models // Journal of Ocean Engineering and Science. — 2020. — Vol. 5, no. 3. — P. 249–260. — https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joes.2019.12.002
39. Voinov G. N. Tidal phenomena in the Kara Sea. — Saint-Petersburg : Russian Geographical Society Publ., 1999. — 109 p. — (In Russian).
40. Voinov G. N., Golovin N. V., Kubyshkin N. V., et al. Approach to solving the problem of sea level forecasting off Cape Kamenny in the Ob’ Bay // Arctic and Antarctic Research. — 2023. — Vol. 69, no. 1. — P. 29–43. — https://doi.org/10.30758/0555-2648-2023-69-1-29-43 — (In Russian).
41. Voinov G. N., Morozova O. A., Nesterov A. V., et al. Tides in the southern area of the Kara Sea in the vicinity of the Belyi island // Arctic and Antarctic Research. — 2020. — Vol. 66, no. 1. — P. 6–19. — https://doi.org/10.30758/0555- 2648-2020-66-1-6-19. — (In Russian).
42. Voinov G. N. and Naumov A. K. The tides in the south-western Kara sea. Tides calibration method effects // Arctic and Antarctic Research. — 2017. — No. 4. — P. 98–115. — https://doi.org/10.30758/0555-2648-2017-0-4-98-115 — (In Russian).
43. Voinov G. N. and Piskun A. A. Tidal and storm surges levels variation at the Cape Kamenny (Gulf of the Ob) // Arctic and Antarctic Research. — 2019. — Vol. 65, no. 1. — P. 15–33. — https://doi.org/10.30758/0555-2648-2019-65-1-15-33 — (In Russian).
44. Voinov G. N. and Piskun A. A. Tidal and nontidal variations in the water level in the middle part of the Ob’ Bay // Arctic and Antarctic Research. — 2023. — Vol. 69, no. 3. — P. 272–289. — https://doi.org/10.30758/0555-2648-2023-69-3-272-289 — (In Russian).
