www.ecco-group.org/abstracts/woce_losch.txt

Assessing the importance of non-Boussinesq effects in a coarse
resolution global ocean model.

M. Losch, A. Adcroft, and J.-M. Campin

The advent of the GRACE mission presents the opportunity to accurately
measure variations in bottom pressure. Such a data source will prove  
valuable in state estimation and constraining general circulation
models (GCMs) in general. However, conventional GCMs make the
Boussinesq approximation as a consequence of which mass is not
conserved. Thus Boussinesq models have an implicit drift in bottom
pressure. By use of the height-pressure coordinate isomorphism
implemented in the MIT GCM, we can evaluate the impact of
non-Boussinesq effects.  We find that although implementing a
non-Boussinesq model in pressure coordinates is relatively
straight-forward, making a direct comparison between height and
pressure coordinate (i.e., Boussinesq and non-Boussinesq) models is
not simple. Here we present a careful comparison of the Boussinesq and
non-Boussinesq solutions ensuring that only non-Boussinesq effects can
be responsible for the observed differences. As a yard-stick, we also 
compare differences between the Boussinesq hydrostatic and
non-hydrostatic models, another approximation commonly made in
GCMs. We find that model errors (differences) due to the Boussinesq
approximation are apparently smaller than the errors due to the
hydrostatic approximation. We also compare these model errors with
uncertainties associated with model parameterizations and find that
non-Boussinesq and non-hydrostatic effects are much smaller than these
uncertainties. We conclude that non-Boussinesq effects are negligible 
with respect to other model errors. However, since there is no
additional cost incurred in using a pressure coordinate model,
non-Boussinesq modeling is preferable simply for puristic reasons.

1	heimbach	1.1	Assessing the importance of non-Boussinesq effects in a coarse
2			resolution global ocean model.
3
4			M. Losch, A. Adcroft, and J.-M. Campin
5
6			The advent of the GRACE mission presents the opportunity to accurately
7			measure variations in bottom pressure. Such a data source will prove
8			valuable in state estimation and constraining general circulation
9			models (GCMs) in general. However, conventional GCMs make the
10			Boussinesq approximation as a consequence of which mass is not
11			conserved. Thus Boussinesq models have an implicit drift in bottom
12			pressure. By use of the height-pressure coordinate isomorphism
13			implemented in the MIT GCM, we can evaluate the impact of
14			non-Boussinesq effects. We find that although implementing a
15			non-Boussinesq model in pressure coordinates is relatively
16			straight-forward, making a direct comparison between height and
17			pressure coordinate (i.e., Boussinesq and non-Boussinesq) models is
18			not simple. Here we present a careful comparison of the Boussinesq and
19			non-Boussinesq solutions ensuring that only non-Boussinesq effects can
20			be responsible for the observed differences. As a yard-stick, we also
21			compare differences between the Boussinesq hydrostatic and
22			non-hydrostatic models, another approximation commonly made in
23			GCMs. We find that model errors (differences) due to the Boussinesq
24			approximation are apparently smaller than the errors due to the
25			hydrostatic approximation. We also compare these model errors with
26			uncertainties associated with model parameterizations and find that
27			non-Boussinesq and non-hydrostatic effects are much smaller than these
28			uncertainties. We conclude that non-Boussinesq effects are negligible
29			with respect to other model errors. However, since there is no
30			additional cost incurred in using a pressure coordinate model,
31			non-Boussinesq modeling is preferable simply for puristic reasons.
32