Next Article in Journal
Fish Beta Diversity Patterns across Environmental Gradients in 63 European Shallow Lakes: Effects of Turbidity, Nutrient Enrichment, and Exotic Species
Next Article in Special Issue
Wave Buoy Measurements at Short Fetches in the Black Sea Nearshore: Mixed Sea and Energy Fluxes
Previous Article in Journal
Microbial Community Structure and Co-Occurrence Patterns in Closed and Open Subsidence Lake Ecosystems
Previous Article in Special Issue
On ST6 Source Terms Model Assessment and Alternative
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Drag Coefficient Parameterization under Hurricane Wind Conditions

Water 2023, 15(10), 1830; https://doi.org/10.3390/w15101830
by Alexandra Kuznetsova *, Georgy Baydakov, Alexander Dosaev and Yuliya Troitskaya
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Water 2023, 15(10), 1830; https://doi.org/10.3390/w15101830
Submission received: 24 March 2023 / Revised: 7 May 2023 / Accepted: 9 May 2023 / Published: 11 May 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Numerical Modelling of Ocean Waves and Analysis of Wave Energy)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Review on "Drag coefficient parameterization under hurricane wind conditions."

The authors have tested the ST4 and ST6 parameterization with and without the presence of foam and spray in drag coefficient parameterization at the ocean-atmosphere interface in hurricane conditions. The authors are addressing an important topic,s and these efforts are very much essential to improve hurricane wind predictions by global and regional models. The authors have shown that modified drag parameterization improves hurricane winds' prediction. However, in hurricane conditions, ocean waves, momentum transfer, and heat transfer are modulated by precipitation. Therefore the moisture convergence at atmospheric surface layers, latent heat release, wave height, wavelength, wave direction, and momentum drag are affected significantly. The present parameterization does partly consider these effects. The authors may consider these effects if possible and modify the parameterization appropriately to obtain a more realistic representation or may comment on them in the manuscript. 

There are many long sentences in the manuscript which are challenging to read. The long sentences can be broken throughout the manuscript to obtain more clarity, e.g., Lines 25-31 and after that.

 

The paper is well organized with almost no typographical-grammatical errors but needs minor revision before publication.

Author Response

Thank you for the review, we agree with the comments.

the long sentences are now devided in shorter ones. In the introduction we pointed out the possible effect of precipitation. 

We also edited the typographical-grammatical errors.

Reviewer 2 Report

This manuscript analyzes the parameters of exchange processes at the boundary of the ocean and the atmosphere under hurricane wind conditions. The influence of small-scale processes at the ocean-atmosphere boundary layer such as spray and foam on the surface waves prediction is studied. The numerical simulations within WAVEWATCH III wave model are performed. The parameterizations of wind input were tested within WAVEWATCH III wave model: default ST4 and ST6 parameterizations and the ST1 and ST6 parameterizations used together with the implemented drag coefficient parameterization. The topic of the paper is in-line with the Journal of Water. It has a potential to be published, but revisions are required. My list of specific comments is provided below.

1. The introduction can be improved to clarify the importance and novelty of the study. The reviewer thinks it is of great importance to be used in performing the risk assessment of hurricane hazards, which has been examined by many pioneering studies, such as Vickery et al. 2009, 2010; Li and Hong, 2016; Hong et al., 2016; Fang et al., 2021, 2022. It could improve the clarity of the contribution and readability of the manuscript.

2. The quality of some figures should be improved: The resolution of axes text, captions and legends in some figures is too low. The symbols used in Figures should be consistent with that used in the context, such as Fig. 3(a).

 

 

References:

Vickery, P. J. , D Wadhera, Twisdale, L. A. , Lavelle, F. M. . (2009). U.S. hurricane wind speed risk and uncertainty. Journal of Structural Engineering, 135(3), 301-320.

Vickery, P. J., Wadhera, D., Galsworthy, J., Peterka, J. A., Irwin, P. A., & Griffis, L. A. (2010). Ultimate wind load design gust wind speeds in the United States for use in ASCE-7. Journal of structural engineering, 136(5), 613-625.

Li, S. H., & Hong, H. P. (2016). Typhoon wind hazard estimation for China using an empirical track model. Natural Hazards, 82(2), 1009-1029.

Hong, H. P., Li, S. H., & Duan, Z. D. (2016). Typhoon wind hazard estimation and mapping for coastal region in mainland China. Natural Hazards Review, 17(2), 04016001.

Fang G. S., Pang W., Zhao L., Rawal P., Cao S. Y., and Ge Y. J. Toward a refined estimation of typhoon wind hazards: Parametric modeling and upstream terrain effects, Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics, 2021, 209:104460.

Fang G. S., Pang W., Zhao L., Xu K., Cao S. Y. and Ge Y. J.. Tropical-Cyclone-Wind-Induced Flutter Failure Analysis of Long-Span Bridges, Engineering Failure Analysis, 2022, 132: 105933.

Author Response

Thank you for the review. We took into account your comments, we are sure that this made our work better.

  1. We included a short overview on the basis of the papers you recommended. It made the introduction more extensive.
  2.  The Fig.1, 3, 4, 7 are updated. Now it is better to understand. The symbols on the figures now correspond to the context.
Back to TopTop