One-way nesting for a primitive equation ocean model

Prognostic numerical models for atmospheric and oceanic circulations require initial fields, boundary conditions, and forcing functions in addition to a consistent set of partial differential equations, including a state relation and equations expressing conservation of mass, momentum, and energy. Depending on the horizontal domain to be modeled, the horizontal boundary conditions are either physically obvious or extremely difficult to specify consistently. If the entire atmosphere is modeled, periodic horizontal boundary conditions are appropriate. On the other hand, the physical horizontal boundaries on the entire ocean are solid walls. Obviously, the normal velocity at a solid wall is zero while the specification of the tangential velocity depends on the mathematical treatment of the horizontal viscous terms. Limitations imposed by computer capacity and cost, as well as research interests, have led to the use of limited area models to study flows in the atmosphere and ocean. The limited area models do not have physical horizontal boundaries, merely numerical ones. Correctly determining these open boundary conditions for limited-area numerical models has both intrigued and frustrated numerical modelers for decades. One common approach is to use the closed or solid wall boundary conditions for a limited-area model. The argument given for this approach is that the boundary conditions affect flow near the walls but that none of these effects are propagated into the interior. Therefore, one chooses a big enough domain that the central region of interest is not corrupted by the boundary flow. Research in progress to model the North Atlantic circulation vividly illustrates the pitfalls of this approach. Two model runs are compared: (1) the southern boundary at 20S between latitudes 0 and 40W is artificially closed; and (2) the same boundary is specified as open with an inward transport of 15 Sv (determined from a global model with the same physics) uniformly spread across the boundary. A comparison of both runs is presented.