Browse by author
Lookup NU author(s): David Gregg, Dr Nigel Penna, Dr Miguel Morales MaquedaORCiD
Full text for this publication is not currently held within this repository. Alternative links are provided below where available.
© 2024. The accuracy of global ocean tide models is assessed in coastal waters of the European North West Shelf to ascertain where higher resolution local (forecast) models are most needed for geophysical and navigational applications, and which global models are most suitable for providing boundary conditions for regional and local tide models. Five recent global ocean tide models (FES2014b, EOT20, TPXO9-atlas-v5, GOT4.10c, and DTU16) are considered, with the models first compared by interpolating them onto common grids and computing the mean absolute deviation at each grid point. Coastline tide gauge and offshore bottom pressure sensor data were collated from several sources to give a total of 279 observation sites for evaluating model accuracy, including observational values from 137 locations that have not previously been released and have therefore not been assimilated into any of the global models tested. The residual errors between each model's predicted phasor and the corresponding observed phasor were calculated at each observation location, and quantified using the root mean square (RMS) and median absolute residual (MAR) for the eight tidal constituents M2, S2, N2, O1, K1, K2, P1, and Q1. To avoid RMS values being biased by observation point density, a Voronoi-weighted RMS based on the water area of the Voronoi polygon about each observation location was also developed and used. Four zones were defined based on ocean depth to gauge model performance, and model inaccuracy is again demonstrated in near-shore regions. Seven further zones were defined based on geographical areas, which reveals inhomogeneity among the global models. The smallest overall root sum square (RSS) RMS error across all eight constituents arises with FES2014b, although TPXO9-atlas-v5 has the best performance when using the MAR and Voronoi-weighted RMS metrics. Using only the 137 observation sites that have not been assimilated by any model and therefore provide an independent accuracy assessment, FES2014b exhibits the smallest errors at the coastline, with an RSS RMS of 24.46 cm. All models exhibit larger errors with the 137 independent observation sites than with all 279 observation sites, with an average overall increase in RSS RMS error of 12%, and an increase of 30% for coastline tide gauges, highlighting the need for local model development in these areas.
Author(s): Gregg DE, Penna NT, Jones C, Morales Maqueda MA
Publication type: Article
Publication status: Published
Journal: Ocean Modelling
Year: 2024
Volume: 192
Print publication date: 01/12/2024
Online publication date: 17/10/2024
Acceptance date: 05/10/2024
ISSN (print): 1463-5003
ISSN (electronic): 1463-5011
Publisher: Elsevier Ltd
URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocemod.2024.102448
DOI: 10.1016/j.ocemod.2024.102448
Altmetrics provided by Altmetric
