scholarly journals An intercomparison between the surface heat flux feedback in five coupled models, COADS and the NCEP reanalysis

2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 373-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Frankignoul ◽  
M. Botzet ◽  
A. F. Carril ◽  
E. Kestenare ◽  
H. Drange ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heat Flux ◽  
Surface Heat Flux ◽  
Surface Heat ◽  
Ncep Reanalysis ◽  
Coupled Models ◽  
Heat Flux Feedback

Estimation of the Surface Heat Flux Response to Sea Surface Temperature Anomalies over the Global Oceans

2005 ◽  
Vol 18 (21) ◽  
pp. 4582-4599 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sungsu Park ◽  
Clara Deser ◽  
Michael A. Alexander
Keyword(s):  
Heat Flux ◽  
North Atlantic ◽  
Surface Heat Flux ◽  
Surface Wind ◽  
Surface Heat ◽  
Radiative Flux ◽  
Turbulent Heat ◽  
Global Oceans ◽  
Sst Anomalies ◽  
Heat Flux Feedback

Abstract The surface heat flux response to underlying sea surface temperature (SST) anomalies (the surface heat flux feedback) is estimated using 42 yr (1956–97) of ship-derived monthly turbulent heat fluxes and 17 yr (1984–2000) of satellite-derived monthly radiative fluxes over the global oceans for individual seasons. Net surface heat flux feedback is generally negative (i.e., a damping of the underlying SST anomalies) over the global oceans, although there is considerable geographical and seasonal variation. Over the North Pacific Ocean, net surface heat flux feedback is dominated by the turbulent flux component, with maximum values (28 W m−2 K−1) in December–February and minimum values (5 W m−2 K−1) in May–July. These seasonal variations are due to changes in the strength of the climatological mean surface wind speed and the degree to which the near-surface air temperature and humidity adjust to the underlying SST anomalies. Similar features are observed over the extratropical North Atlantic Ocean with maximum (minimum) feedback values of approximately 33 W m−2 K−1 (9 W m−2 K−1) in December–February (June–August). Although the net surface heat flux feedback may be negative, individual components of the feedback can be positive depending on season and location. For example, over the midlatitude North Pacific Ocean during late spring to midsummer, the radiative flux feedback associated with marine boundary layer clouds and fog is positive, and results in a significant enhancement of the month-to-month persistence of SST anomalies, nearly doubling the SST anomaly decay time from 2.8 to 5.3 months in May–July. Several regions are identified with net positive heat flux feedback: the tropical western North Atlantic Ocean during boreal winter, the Namibian stratocumulus deck off West Africa during boreal fall, and the Indian Ocean during boreal summer and fall. These positive feedbacks are mainly associated with the following atmospheric responses to positive SST anomalies: 1) reduced surface wind speed (positive turbulent heat flux feedback) over the tropical western North Atlantic and Indian Oceans, 2) reduced marine boundary layer stratocumulus cloud fraction (positive shortwave radiative flux feedback) over the Namibian stratocumulus deck, and 3) enhanced atmospheric water vapor (positive longwave radiative flux feedback) in the vicinity of the tropical deep convection region over the Indian Ocean that exceeds the negative shortwave radiative flux feedback associated with enhanced cloudiness.

scholarly journals Air–Sea Interactions in the Tropical Atlantic: A View Based on Lagged Rotated Maximum Covariance Analysis

2005 ◽  
Vol 18 (18) ◽  
pp. 3874-3890 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claude Frankignoul ◽  
Elodie Kestenare
Keyword(s):  
Heat Flux ◽  
Surface Heat Flux ◽  
Surface Heat ◽  
Covariance Analysis ◽  
Atmospheric Response ◽  
Tropical Atlantic ◽  
Maximum Covariance Analysis ◽  
Wind Response ◽  
Sst Anomaly ◽  
Heat Flux Feedback

Abstract The dominant air–sea feedbacks that are at play in the tropical Atlantic are revisited, using the 1958–2002 NCEP reanalysis. To separate between different modes of variability and distinguish between cause and effect, a lagged rotated maximum covariance analysis (MCA) of monthly sea surface temperature (SST), wind, and surface heat flux anomalies is performed. The dominant mode is the ENSO-like zonal equatorial SST mode, which has its maximum amplitude in boreal summer and is a strongly coupled ocean–atmosphere mode sustained by a positive feedback between wind and SST. The turbulent heat flux feedback is negative, except west of 25°W where it is positive, but countered by a negative radiative feedback associated with the meridional displacement of the ITCZ. As the maximum covariance patterns change little between lead and lag conditions, the in-phase covariability between SST and the atmosphere can be used to infer the atmospheric response to the SST anomaly. The second climate mode involves an SST anomaly in the tropical North Atlantic, which is primarily generated by the surface heat flux and, in boreal winter, wind changes off the coast of Africa. After it has been generated, the SST anomaly is sustained in the deep Tropics by the positive wind–evaporation–SST feedback linked to the wind response to the SST. However, north of about 10°N where the SST anomaly is largest, the wind response is weak and the heat flux feedback is negative, thus damping the SST anomaly. As the in-phase maximum covariance patterns primarily reflect the atmospheric forcing of the SST, simultaneous correlations cannot be used to describe the atmospheric response to the SST anomaly, except in the deep Tropics. Using instead the maximum covariance patterns when SST leads the atmosphere reconciles the results of recent atmospheric general circulation model experiments with the observations.

Wind-Speed—Surface-Heat-Flux Feedback in Dust Devils

2016 ◽  
Vol 161 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-235
Author(s):  
Junshi Ito ◽  
Hiroshi Niino
Keyword(s):  
Heat Flux ◽  
Wind Speed ◽  
Surface Heat Flux ◽  
Surface Heat ◽  
Dust Devils ◽  
Heat Flux Feedback

scholarly journals Coupled air-sea interaction patterns and surface heat-flux feedback in the Bay of Biscay

2012 ◽  
Vol 117 (C6) ◽  
pp. n/a-n/a ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Esnaola ◽  
J. Sáenz ◽  
E. Zorita ◽  
P. Lazure ◽  
U. Ganzedo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heat Flux ◽  
Surface Heat Flux ◽  
Surface Heat ◽  
Bay Of Biscay ◽  
Interaction Patterns ◽  
Heat Flux Feedback

The surface heat flux feedback. Part II: direct and indirect estimates in the ECHAM4/OPA8 coupled GCM

2002 ◽  
Vol 19 (8) ◽  
pp. 649-655 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frankignoul C. ◽  
Kestenare E. ◽  
Mignot J.
Keyword(s):  
Heat Flux ◽  
Surface Heat Flux ◽  
Surface Heat ◽  
Coupled Gcm ◽  
Heat Flux Feedback

Analysis of significant measures for thermal conductivity

2020 ◽  
pp. 35-42
Author(s):  
Yuri P. Zarichnyak ◽  
Vyacheslav P. Khodunkov
Keyword(s):  
Thermal Conductivity ◽  
Heat Flux ◽  
Surface Heat Flux ◽  
Heat Flux Density ◽  
Measurement Method ◽  
Conductivity Measurement ◽  
Surface Heat ◽  
Measuring Instrument ◽  
New Class ◽  
Achievable Accuracy

The analysis of a new class of measuring instrument for heat quantities based on the use of multi-valued measures of heat conductivity of solids. For example, measuring thermal conductivity of solids shown the fallacy of the proposed approach and the illegality of the use of the principle of ambiguity to intensive thermal quantities. As a proof of the error of the approach, the relations for the thermal conductivities of the component elements of a heat pump that implements a multi-valued measure of thermal conductivity are given, and the limiting cases are considered. In two ways, it is established that the thermal conductivity of the specified measure does not depend on the value of the supplied heat flow. It is shown that the declared accuracy of the thermal conductivity measurement method does not correspond to the actual achievable accuracy values and the standard for the unit of surface heat flux density GET 172-2016. The estimation of the currently achievable accuracy of measuring the thermal conductivity of solids is given. The directions of further research and possible solutions to the problem are given.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document