Replies: 3 comments
-
Hi @Chaminu the era5 reader was written by @JohnCHarrington, perhaps he could have some ideas on whether there could be something special about the way the ERA5 spectra are stored or SWH is calculated. For example, perhaps not the entire frequency range could be saved in the spectra. It is interesting as the relative offset looks relatively constant but during some periods the two values are nearly the same. I think ERA5 provides bulk significant wave height values from the raw model output but also satellite-corrected values so this could be another thing to pay attention to. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Hi @rafa-guedes |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I check on the Satellite issue, No problem there:
"Altimeter corrected wave height" ShortName: acwh, or parameter: 247.140
I am downloading:" Significant height of combined wind waves and swell" Shortname: swh. or parameter: 229.140 For the 2D spectral I extract:'param': '251.140',
Regards
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I have downloaded the ERA5 2D-spectral data in netcdf format and read it using [wavespectra.io],
![ERA5_wave_Hmo_swh](https://private-user-images.githubusercontent.com/153249329/289317797-a922ffa0-c8bb-4e4c-b924-5b99c8a85ad9.png?jwt=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpc3MiOiJnaXRodWIuY29tIiwiYXVkIjoicmF3LmdpdGh1YnVzZXJjb250ZW50LmNvbSIsImtleSI6ImtleTUiLCJleHAiOjE3MjU3NDYyNDIsIm5iZiI6MTcyNTc0NTk0MiwicGF0aCI6Ii8xNTMyNDkzMjkvMjg5MzE3Nzk3LWE5MjJmZmEwLWM4YmItNGU0Yy1iOTI0LTViOTljOGE4NWFkOS5wbmc_WC1BbXotQWxnb3JpdGhtPUFXUzQtSE1BQy1TSEEyNTYmWC1BbXotQ3JlZGVudGlhbD1BS0lBVkNPRFlMU0E1M1BRSzRaQSUyRjIwMjQwOTA3JTJGdXMtZWFzdC0xJTJGczMlMkZhd3M0X3JlcXVlc3QmWC1BbXotRGF0ZT0yMDI0MDkwN1QyMTUyMjJaJlgtQW16LUV4cGlyZXM9MzAwJlgtQW16LVNpZ25hdHVyZT1jOTI0MTI5NjBhMTQ3ZjQxOGRkN2YyNWEzZGRjMjY0YmIwZTU0Y2Q5MWIzODBjNjVmNDIzYjkyNGE0YjMxY2IzJlgtQW16LVNpZ25lZEhlYWRlcnM9aG9zdCZhY3Rvcl9pZD0wJmtleV9pZD0wJnJlcG9faWQ9MCJ9.S6LhFC3o668EWadEzQ_I5ETceNab2-Fdo7WdvUsVEBg)
The 1D and 2D spectra look good. However when I calculate Hs (Hmo) and compare it to the bulk parameters (SWH) obtained from the ERA5 meteorological download, I end up with a 10% difference. I have attached a comparison during June 2023. Any help would be appreciated.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions