Numerical modelling of relative contribution of planetary waves to the atmospheric circulation

Koval, Andrey V.; Toptunova, Olga N.; Motsakov, Maxim A.; Didenko, Ksenia A.; Ermakova, Tatiana S.; Gavrilov, Nikolai M.; Rozanov, Eugene V.

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-4105-2023

Articles | Volume 23, issue 7

https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-4105-2023

© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-4105-2023

© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 23, issue 7

Research article

|

05 Apr 2023

Research article |

| 05 Apr 2023

Numerical modelling of relative contribution of planetary waves to the atmospheric circulation

Andrey V. Koval, Olga N. Toptunova, Maxim A. Motsakov, Ksenia A. Didenko, Tatiana S. Ermakova, Nikolai M. Gavrilov, and Eugene V. Rozanov

Download

Final revised paper (published on 05 Apr 2023)
Supplement to the final revised paper
Preprint (discussion started on 04 Jan 2023)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

RC1:
'Comment on acp-2022-816', Anonymous Referee #1, 27 Jan 2023

This paper demonstrates that the contributions of individual UFKWs and PWs to changes in zonal-mean temperatures and zonal winds throughout the atmosphere are insignificant, i.e., a negative result. All other aspects of the paper in terms of approach and interpretation are very good, and I suppose it is useful to know that these waves have insignificant impacts on the mean state of the atmosphere; hence my "fair" instead" of "low" rating under "Scientific significance" above. However, I do not see the justification for a whole paper appearing in the open literature to report this result. Based on my knowledge of their other works, these authors have a great model, great ideas and great scientific insights, and I am sure that they will find a way to introduce a few sentences in one of their forthcoming papers to report this result, as an aside to the main theme of that paper.

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2022-816-RC1
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Andrey Koval, 27 Jan 2023
  
  First of all, on behalf of the co-authors, I would like to thank the reviewer for the positive feedback about our scientific team, as well as about the structure of the manuscript. Indeed, we still have many new ideas and we are always open for cooperation!
  As for the reviewer's main remark, we do not quite agree with the assessment of "insignificant" and "negative".
  Even if we look at the two-month average wind and RMC distributions, we can see that the statistically confirmed contribution of some waves to circulation changes can reach several percent. At the same time, at certain moments, this effect is much stronger, as shown in Figs. 4 and 5. In addition, the waves can be superimposed on one another, and their effect can be summarized. I.e., the cumulative effect of the considered waves can significantly increase at certain moments of time. This conclusion, although it looks quite obvious, is documented by us for the first time. We can articulate this thought more clearly in the final version of the manuscript.
  We believe that it would be interesting to present such a study to a wide scientific community as separate paper: the most simplified statement of the problem, with clear focus only on the contribution of the PWs.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2022-816-AC1
CC1: 'Comment on acp-2022-816', Elena N. Savenkova, 30 Jan 2023

Dear colleagues, I would like to add that, according to Pogoreltsev et al., (2014), the direct effect of the atmospheric normal modes (NM) we have considered, can be enhanced also due to their nonlinear interactions with the mean flow. This occurs buy the interference of NMs and stationary PWs, when their phases coincide. Finally, this causes deceleration of the mean flow, creating better conditions for the SSW onset.

Pogoreltsev, A. I., Savenkova, E. N., Pertsev, N. N. (2014), Sudden stratopheric warmings: the role of normal atmospheric modes. Geomagnetism and Aeronomy 54(2), 1–15. doi 10.1134/S0016793214020169

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2022-816-CC1
RC2:
'Comment on acp-2022-816', Anonymous Referee #2, 28 Feb 2023

The paper by Koval et al. aims to quantify the effect of various normal modes on the zonal wind and on the general mean circulation. For this it uses a composition of a few selected and idealized normal modes. With this the model reproduces a realistic state of the mean wind and the circulation. Essentially all Rossby modes (except 16 day) cause the same pattern. While the exercise is intellectually interesting, it remains unclear to me what its value is for the real atmosphere. The model resolution is relative coarse, the effects of GWs not well described and the waves very idealized. There should be also quite a few modes missing. Accordingly, do you want to claim that you have determinded a realistic relative measure of different modes taking into account all important effects. Then I would have my doubts. Or that you can exchange wave modes? That there is kind of a universal action for all the Rossby modes? That would be indeed something you can better show with the highly idealized setup you are using here than with something that includes all processes at once but with little control. The 16day wave is interesting and could be discussed in more detail. Overall, I think the motivation and focus of the paper needs to be sharpened before its acceptance for ACP.
Specific comments:
L62 Please substantiate this claim: What makes the model "modern and promising"? The spatial resolution is coarse. Please compare to early work by Kevin Hamilton (resolution needed for tropics/extratropics) to check whether it is sufficient.
L74 GWs are one of the most important drivers of the atmosphere. Hence there needs to be a description/reference to the actual state of the pramaterization. For this the paper refers to Koval et al., JGR 2022, but there is nothing either! Please include some description of the parametrizations in this paper. Could be also in an appendix.
L88 In this way you have very idealized waves matching perfectly the Eigenmode shape. Which consequences does that have for the breaking of the waves and the altitude and location where they depsosit their momentum. Also, limiting yourself to zonal wavenumbers 1 and 2 is very idealized.
Technical corrections:
L27 gramitically which refers to circle: please restructure senetence
L122 uneven -> different for different panels
L147 MLS ? Please be precise

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2022-816-RC2
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Andrey Koval, 28 Feb 2023
  
  Dear Anonymous Referee #2!
  Thank you so much for your deep dive into the thesis of our article!
  In order to conduct a detailed analysis, we would like to ask you to send us a link to the article by Kevin Hamilton you mentioned.
  Sincerelly, Andrey Koval and co-authors.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2022-816-AC2

Peer review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision | EF: Editorial file upload

AR by Andrey Koval on behalf of the Authors (13 Mar 2023) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (13 Mar 2023) by John Plane

AR by Andrey Koval on behalf of the Authors (13 Mar 2023) Manuscript

Download

Article (6118 KB)
Full-text XML

Short summary

Periodic changes in all hydrodynamic parameters are constantly observed in the atmosphere. The amplitude of these fluctuations increases with height due to a decrease in the atmospheric density. In the upper layers of the atmosphere, waves are the dominant form of motion. We use a model of the general circulation of the atmosphere to study the contribution to the formation of the dynamic and temperature regimes of the middle and upper atmosphere made by different global-scale atmospheric waves.