Diurnal Cross-Shore Exchange on the Inner-Shelf in

Southern Monterey Bay, CA

OperationalOceanography&Meteorology

LCDRJohnHendrickson
9/19/2008

Abstract

Diurnal Cross-Shore Exchange on the Inner-Shelf in Southern Monterey Bay, CA
John Hendrickson, Jamie MacMahan, Ed Thornton, Mike Cook, Tim Stanton, Ad Reniers
The effects of a strong diurnal sea-breeze on the cross-shore exchange on the inner shelf is
investigated by comparing wind stress estimates and ocean currents over the vertical at three
locations in southern Monterey Bay, CA . Cross-shore exchange on the inner shelf significantly
impacts the ecosystem by transporting heat, nutrients, pollutants and phytoplankton between the
inner-shelf and surf zone. Spectral analysis of surface winds at three coastal locations within the
bay indicates a significant diurnal wind component. The observed subaqueous velocity profiles
and pressure time series are measured by bottom mounted 1200-kHz Broad-band Acoustic
Doppler Current Profilers (ADCPs) deployed at three separate alongshore locations in ~13 m
water depth. The velocity and pressure signals were collected continuously at 1 Hz for all three
locations for over 2 years. The cross-shore wind stress is significantly correlated to the cross-
shore subaqueous velocity with onshore flow near the surface and offshore flow near the bottom.
Cross-rotary spectral analysis is used to describe the rotational coherence and phase over the
vertical with respect to the wind stress. It is further hypothesized that normally-incident sea-swell
waves (0.04-0.2 Hz) will modify net cross-shore transport. Cross-shore transport is evaluated for
conditions that are dominated by either waves or cross-shore wind stress. Results indicate that
when waves are small, the cross-shore wind stress associated with the diurnal sea-breeze is the
primary forcing mechanism for cross-shore exchange on the inner-shelf.

1. Introduction and Literature Review

On continental shelves all over the world, cross-shelf circulations influence the water column
density structure and the distributions of heat, salt, phytoplankton, nutrients, and pollutants.
Cross-shelf exchange is an important mechanism for supplying nutrients to continental shelf
ecosystems, which are some of the most productive on Earth (Falkowski et al., 1998). On the
inner continental shelf in particular, cross-shelf exchange is thought to influence the ecosystem
by transporting heat, nutrients, and larvae between the surf zone and mid-shelf (Roughgarden et
al., 1988).
The inner shelf is a complex region offshore of the surf zone, where the surface and bottom
boundary layers interact (Austin et al., 2002, Lentz, 1994, 1995). The location of the boundary
between the inner shelf and the mid-shelf changes with time, depending on the thicknesses of the
surface and bottom boundary layers, which determine the water depth where the boundary layers
overlap. As a result of the overlapping boundary layers, the inner shelf exhibits a divergence in
the cross-shelf transport driven by along-shelf winds, which leads to coastal upwelling and
downwelling (Ekman, 1905; Austin et al., 2002).
The mechanisms that drive cross-shelf flow over the inner shelf are not well understood.
In the middle and outer regions of the shelf, along-shelf winds drive coastal upwelling and
downwelling circulations that transport material and heat in the cross-shelf direction (Ekman,
1905; Smith, 1981). Observations on the North Carolina (Lentz, 2001), Oregon (Kirincich et al.,
2005), and California (Cudaback et al., 2005) continental shelves and numerical model studies
(Austin et al, 2002; Tilburg, 2003) show, however, that along-shelf wind driven upwelling or
downwelling is not sufficient to provide transport to or from a coastal boundary on its own.
Other proposed mechanisms for cross-shelf exchange include vertical migration of larvae and
along-shelf variations in topography (Austin et al, 2002). Cross-shelf wind stresses have usually
been assumed ineffective at driving shelf circulations (Csanady, 1978). However, in this
investigation, we will look at the effects of a strong diurnal sea-breeze on the cross-shore
exchange on the inner shelf.
Over middle and outer continental shelves, the cross-shelf momentum balance is typically
geostrophic on subtidal time scales, meaning the cross-shelf pressure gradient force balances out
the Coriolis force as a result of the along-shelf flow (Noble and Butman, 1983; Liu and
Weisberg, 2005). Therefore, the cross-shelf wind stress is relatively unimportant in the steady
depth-average momentum balance at mid-shelf. The cross-shelf wind stress, in addition to being
important in the momentum balance, may also drive a substantial cross-shelf circulation.
Analytical theories (Ekman, 1905; Garvine, 1971) and a recent simplified 2-D numerical
modeling study (Tilburg, 2003) have suggested that cross-shelf winds could drive significant
cross-shelf circulations where the water is so shallow that the circulation through the entire water
column takes place within the overlapping top and bottom boundary layers of the inner shelf.
Numerical modeling studies (Li and Weisberg, 1999) off the West Florida Shelf reveal that the
cross-shelf wind stress plays an important role in driving along-shelf and cross-shelf currents
over that inner shelf. In the Santa Barbara channel in California, strong offshore wind
significantly correlated with a two-layer cross-shelf circulation over the inner shelf, with surface-
intensified offshore flow in the upper water column and onshore flow in the lower water column
(Cudaback et al., 2005).
It is difficult to separate the influences of waves, cross-shelf wind, and along-shelf wind in
observational studies because all three types of forcing are normally correlated. With over 2-
year-long time series of wind, wave, and velocity data, however, we are able to look at the
structure of the cross-shelf flow during times when only one of the three types of forcing was
strong. Cross-shore transport is evaluated for conditions that are dominated by either waves or
cross-shore wind stress. We present observations that demonstrate that cross-shelf winds are
more effective than along-shelf winds at driving cross-shelf exchange flow at an inner shelf site
dominated by a diurnal sea breeze.


2. Methodology
2.1 Monterey Bay
Strong land-sea breeze circulation often dominates the surface wind field over Monterey Bay,
especially during the summer. Typically sunlight warms the land surface in the Salinas Valley
(east of Monterey Bay) beginning at sunrise. The warm ground heats the cooler surface layer of
the atmosphere and convection proceeds with rising air over the Salinas Valley. This action in
turn causes cool air over Monterey Bay to flow from the sea toward the land. By noon a
circulation is established with air flowing from sea to land near the surface and from land to sea
at about a kilometer altitude. This process often produces westerly surface: winds of 8 to 12 m/s
by about 4 pm local time. After sunset the air over the ocean cools rapidly and the process
reverses due to the relatively warm sea surface at night, but is significantly weaker.

2.2 Raw Data
We use time series of water velocity profiles, wave, and meteorological data that extend over 2
years from 3 separate locations in southern Monterey Bay (Figure 1). Each time series are from
a bottom-mounted acoustic Doppler current profiler (ADCP) located at 12-m water depth (just
outside the surf zone) and connected to a shore laboratory by underwater power and fiber-optic
data transmission cables. Meteorological data are from two masts, one located at Marina Airport
and the other at Del Monte Beach.

Figure 1 Map of Monterey Bay and locations of the 3 ADCP's

The first step in analyzing the raw data sets is to remove bad data. Each time series was first run
thru a 3- standard deviation filter three times to remove any spikes. Then, a visual inspection of
each column of data was done ensuring all bad data points have been resolved.

2.3 Normalizing the Data
The ADCP data was then put into a depth-relative framework. Instead of using velocities for a
corresponding depth or ADCP bin, velocities were interpolated to a ratio scale giving the height
in the water column (z) versus the depth of water (H) at the location. The scale was ordered 0 to
1.5, with 0 at the bottom and 1.5 at the top of a high wave crest. The scale was set with a 0.05
increment. To account for tidal action and low-frequency infra-gravity waves on the water depth
of the location, H was calculated by taking the low-frequency oscillation ( < .04 Hz) of the
instantaneous depth of water. This technique allowed for direct comparison of results between
instruments and between different times using the same instrument, as the data at the locations
would be in the same relative position in the water column.

2.4 Coordinate System
Principal Component Analysis is used to determine the coordinate frame orientation due to the
tides moving parallel shore (Rosenfeld, etal., 2008). The along shore component is defined as
the major principal direction of the depth averaged flow between the normalized depths of 0.25
to 0.75. These depths were chosen taking into account bottom friction and surface gravity waves
respectively. The resulting minor principal axis is roughly perpendicular to the local isobaths.
A west coast coordinate system is used where x is positive onshore eastward, y is positive along
shore northward, and z is positive upward. The surface wind stress is denoted as
s
= (
s
x
,
s
y
)
and the horizontal component of the subaqueous velocity is u = (u, v).

2.5 Wind Stress
Surface wind stress is calculated from STRESSTC (Smith 1988) using wind speed and air
temperature at height 10 m above sea level.
s
x
and
s
y
were then calculated and rotated to the
proper coordinate system.

2.6 Subaqueous Velocity
The ADCPs are a 1200 kHz RDI Workhorse Monitor, with 0.5-m bins, deployed
in a bottom-mounted, upward-looking configuration. We used data from the bottom most
bin, at depth z
bot
= -10.5 m, to the top good bin, z
top
= -0.5 m. We determined the top good bin
based on the bin-bin shear and the signal correlation returned by the ADCP. To calculate depth-
average velocities (z/h between 0 and 1), we assumed the velocity is constant from the lowest
ADCP bin to the bottom (z = -12 m), and from the top good ADCP bin to the water surface.

2.7 Waves
The significant wave height Hsig , dominant wave period Tw and wave speed c are calculated
from the ADCP velocity measurements. The predicted onshore volume transport due to
dominant waves, Qw, is (Longuet-Higgins, 1953):
2
cos
16
sig
w
gH
w
c
Q =

where g is the acceleration due to gravity and
w
is the direction the waves are going, measured
counterclockwise from the positive x axis. Therefore
w
= 0 indicates waves propagating
directly onshore. Its important to note, volume transport Qw takes place above the wave troughs
in an Eulerian reference frame.
2
cos
sig w
H is the measure of the strength of the wave forcing at a
given time.

2.7 Removing Tides
The tidal velocities at Monterey Bay are dominated by both the M2 tide (the principal lunar
semidiurnal tide, with period 12.42 hr) and the K
1
tide (the principal luni-solar diurnal tide, with
a period of 23.93 hr)(Rosenfeld et al, 2008). Both are relatively large (Figure 2). Because we
are interested here in the non-tidal component of the velocity, we subtract from the observed
velocity time series (at each ADCP bin depth) a least squares fit tidal prediction generated by T
TIDE (Pawlowicz et al., 2002). The principal meteorological constituent S1 (period of 24 hr)
must not be removed from the data since we are looking specifically at diurnal wind events. It is
also important to note that the tidal prediction must be run for 366 days or more in order for the
prediction to differentiate between S1 and K1. Finally, to avoid removing seasonal variability,
we limit the prediction to tidal frequencies greater than 1 cycle/month.

Figure2.MontereyBay'stop8tidalconstuents

2.8 Creation of a Master Data set
Finally, after doing all the above functions to the raw data, a master data set must be created for
each location. That is, one .mat file that contains cross-shore and along shore wind stresses as
well as subaqueous u and v components. Significant wave height and period are also included,
all in hourly means. This now becomes my starting point from which all analysis is done. For
each location there are two master data sets, one with tides and one without.

2.9 Bin Averaging
We take advantage of the large number of synoptic wind and wave forcing events in each time
series to separate those events into cases where only the cross-shelf wind or the along-shelf wind
forcing is strong, and the other two forcings are weak. By examining those three cases
separately, we are able to isolate the effect of each forcing mechanism on the cross-shelf flow.
This also allows us to separate out when the significant sea breeze events occur and compare
them to the subsequent relaxation events (This is potentially the road I will be going down but I
am not there yet).

3. Results
To this point in my research, I only have preliminary results as discussed in my brief.
We will look at the Marina site first since the majority of the surface wind stress is shore normal.
Spectral Analysis was run on non-detided data in order to see if there was a correlation between
the subaqueous velocity(u and v components) and both the along shore and cross shore wind
stresses (Figure 3).
The spectral analysis indicates there is significant energy at 0.043 Hz, indicating a 24 hour
period. In comparing wind stresses, the diurnal effect is more than tenfold stronger in the cross
shore component. The u component of the subaqueous velocity at the surface contains a
majority of the energy as well. This would indicate that the diurnal sea breeze induced cross
shore wind stress acting on the ocean surface is forcing the u component significantly.

Figure 3. Spectral Analysis of subaqueous u and v components(near the surface) and the along shore and
cross shore wind stresses.

To get an indication of how far down the water column the cross-shore wind stress forces, I ran
spectral analysis at z/h values of 0.75, 0.5 and 0.25 (Figs 4-6). At z/h = 0.75, the cross shore
velocity energy is significantly less than the along shore velocity energy at 0.043 Hz. This trend
continues down the column, indicating that the K1 constituent becomes significant deeper into
the water column as the S1 forcing reduces dramatically. There may also be a rotation in the
column. Cross rotary spectral analysis has not been done yet. Its also important to note that M2
begins to strengthen deeper down the column as well.

Figure4.Spectralanalysisforuandvatz/h=0.75

Figure5.Spectralanalysisforuandvatz/h=0.5

Figure6.Spectralanalysisforuandvatz/h=0.25

Coherence gives a measure of the dependence of two random variables. In our case, we
compared
s
x
and u as well as
s
y
and v at different levels in the water column (Figs. 7-10).
Focusing on the cross-shore components, at the surface there is strong coherence between
s
x
and
u with no phase shift at 0.043 Hz. Deeper down the water column, the coherence reduces
slightly and there is a 180 deg rotation, indicating offshore flow. This does not definitively mean
that there is rotation due to the surface wind wind stress since K1 has a period so close to S1,
there may be spill over between energies. More analysis will be needed.

Figure7.Coherenceatthesurface


Figure8.Coherenceatz/h=0.75

Figure9.Coherenceatz/h=0.5

Figure10.Coherenceatz/h=0.25

3. Discussion
The preliminary results are promising but the next step will be a cross rotary spectral analysis to
see if there indeed is rotation in the column. Once we have those results, the bin averaging will
be done for time periods when only one forcing element is present. This will give us an idea as
to how the cross-shore vertical profiles look for each forcing element. From what we have so
far, we are expecting to see a significant onshore flow near the top of the column and offshore
flow thru the rest of the column (undertow).
The biggest challenge with this research is that any number of factors may be impacting the
water column at any given time. I presented Marina in this paper and in my research we have
moved this to the top of the list due to it being the northern most location thus having the most
significant cross shore wind stress. At Del Monte for example, the sea breeze is not shore
normal and actually has a stronger along shore component. The key in this research to this point,
is to minimize the amount of unknowns.

4. Conclusion
The interesting thing about scientific research is that at each point in your analysis you have to
carefully review what you have because it may take you in a different direction or provide you
with insight you didnt expect. Im still traveling down that path, but will be presenting at the
AGU conference in December. We are not sure if we will continue on what is discussed in this
document or analyze diurnal events and their subsequent relaxation periods case by case. Its
attacking the same problem, just looking at it differently. It depends on which direction allows
us to isolate the forcing element of interest most directly.

5. Bibliography

Austin, J.A., and S.J. Lentz, The Inner Shelf Response to Wind-Driven Upwelling and
Downwelling, J. Phys. Oceanography, 32, 2171-2193, 2002.
Csanady, G.T., The arrested topographic wave. Journal of Physical Oceanography,
8, 47-62, 1978.
Cudaback, C.N., L. Washburn, and E. Dever. Subtidal inner-shelf circulation near
Point Conception, California. Journal of Geophysical Research, 110(C10007):
doi:10.1029/2004JC002608, 2005.
Ekman, V.W., On the inuence of the Earth's rotation on ocean-currents.
Arkiv f or Matematik, Astronomi och Fysik, 2, 1-53, 1905.

Falkowski, P.G., R.T. Barber, and V. Smetacek, Biogeochemical Controls and Feedbacks
on Ocean Primary Production, Science, 281, 200-206, 1998.

Garvine, R.W., A Simple Model of Coastal Upwelling Dynamics, J. Phys.
Oceanography, 32, 2171-2193, 2002.

Hasselmann, K., Wave Driven Inertial Oscillations, Geophys. Flud Dyn., 1, 463-502,
1970.
Kirincich, A.R., John A. Barth, Brian A. Grantham, Bruce A. Menge, and Jane
Lubchenco. Wind-driven inner-shelf circulation o_ central Oregon during summer.
Journal of Geophysical Research, 110(C11), 2005. doi: 10.1029/2004JC002611.

Lentz, S.J., Current Dynamics over the Northern California Inner Shelf, J. Phys.
Oceanography, 24, 2461-2478, 1994.

Lentz, S.J., Sensitivity of the Inner-Shelf Circulation to the Form of the Eddy Viscosity
Profile, J. Phys. Oceanography, 25, 19-28, 1995.

Lentz, S.J., The Influence of Stratification on the Wind-Driven Cross-Shelf Circulation
over the North Carolina Shelf, J. Phys. Oceanography, 31, 2749-2760, 2001.

Liu, Y., and Robert H. Weisberg. Momentum balance diagnoses for the West
Florida Shelf. Continental Shelf Research, 25,2054-2074, 2005.
Li, Z. and R.H. Weisberg. West Florida shelf response to upwelling
favorable wind forcing: Kinematics. Journal of Geophysical Research, 104,
13,507-13,527, June 1999a.
Li,Z. and Robert H. Weisberg. West Florida continental shelf response to
upwelling favorable wind forcing 2. Dynamics. Journal of Geophysical Research,
104, 23,427-23,442, October 1999b.
Longuet-Higgins,M.S., Mass transport in water waves. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London
A, 245,535-581, 1953.

Noble, M., and Bradford Butman. On the longshelf structure and dynamics
of subtidal currents on the Eastern United States Continental Shelf. Journal of
Physical Oceanography, 13, 2125-2146, December 1983.

Pawlowicz, R., Robert C. Beardsley, and Steven J. Lentz. Harmonic analysis including
error estimates in MATLAB using T TIDE. Computers and Geosciences,
2002.
Rosenfeld, L.K., I. Shulman, M. Cook, J. Paduan, and L. Shulman. Methodology for a
Regional Tidal Model Evaluation, with application to Central California. Submitted
to Deep-Sea Research October 17, 2007

Roughgarden, J., S. Gaines, and H. Possingham. Recruitment dynamics in complex
life cycles. Science, 241(4872),1460-1466, 1988.
Smith, R.L., A comparison of the structure and variability of the flow field in three
coastal upwelling regions: Oregon, Northwest Africa, and Peru. In F. A. Richards,
editor, Coastal Upwelling, pages 107-118. AGU, 1981.
Tilburg, C.E., Across-shelf transport on a continental shelf: Do across-shelf
winds matter? J. Phys. Oceanography, 33, 2675-2688, 2003.