<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0"><?xmltex \makeatother\@nolinetrue\makeatletter?><?xmltex \hack{\allowdisplaybreaks}?>
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">OS</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Ocean Science</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">OS</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Ocean Sci.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1812-0792</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/os-14-1449-2018</article-id><title-group><article-title>A surface kinematics buoy (SKIB) for wave–current<?xmltex \hack{\break}?> interaction studies</article-title><alt-title>A surface kinematics buoy (SKIB)</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{A surface kinematics buoy (SKIB)}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{P.~Veras~Guimar\~{a}es et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Veras Guimarães</surname><given-names>Pedro</given-names></name>
          <email>pedro.veras-guimaraes@ec-nantes.fr</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Ardhuin</surname><given-names>Fabrice</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9309-9681</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Sutherland</surname><given-names>Peter</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Accensi</surname><given-names>Mickael</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Hamon</surname><given-names>Michel</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Pérignon</surname><given-names>Yves</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Thomson</surname><given-names>Jim</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Benetazzo</surname><given-names>Alvise</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9535-4922</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Ferrant</surname><given-names>Pierre</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Univ Brest, CNRS, IFREMER, IRD, LOPS, 29280 Plouzané, France</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>LHEEA lab – UMR6598, École Centrale de Nantes, 44300, Nantes, France</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>University of Washington, Applied Physics Lab, Seattle, WA 98105, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>ISMAR, 2737 Venice, Italy</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Pedro Veras Guimarães (pedro.veras-guimaraes@ec-nantes.fr)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>26</day><month>November</month><year>2018</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>14</volume>
      <issue>6</issue>
      <fpage>1449</fpage><lpage>1460</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>4</day><month>April</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>11</day><month>June</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>9</day><month>October</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>22</day><month>October</month><year>2018</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        
        
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/.html">This article is available from https://os.copernicus.org/articles/.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://os.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract>
    <p id="d1e177">Global navigation satellite systems (GNSSs) and modern motion-sensor packages
allow the measurement of ocean surface waves with low-cost drifters. Drifting
along or across current gradients provides unique measurements of
wave–current interactions. In this study, we investigate the response of
several combinations of GNSS receiver, motion-sensor package and hull design
in order to define a prototype “surface kinematics buoy” (SKIB) that is
particularly optimized for measuring wave–current interactions, including
relatively short wave components that are important for air–sea interactions
and remote-sensing applications. The comparison with existing Datawell
Directional Waverider and Surface Wave Instrument Float with Tracking (SWIFT)
buoys, as well as stereo-video imagery, demonstrates the performance of SKIB.
The use of low-cost accelerometers and a spherical ribbed and skirted hull
design provides acceptable heave spectra <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from 0.09 to 1 Hz with an
acceleration noise level <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> close to 0.023 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.
Velocity estimates from GNSS receivers yield a mean direction and directional
spread. Using a low-power acquisition board allows autonomous deployments
over several months with data transmitted by satellite. The capability to
measure current-induced wave variations is illustrated with data acquired in
a macro-tidal coastal environment.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

      <?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e251">Many devices have been developed to measure ocean waves, from
in situ moored or drifting sensors to remote-sensing systems using optical
or radar devices <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx9" id="paren.1"/>. Each measurement system has a specific
range of applications defined by the required space and time resolution and
coverage, water depth, and current speed. They have been very useful in
studying upper-ocean processes or monitoring sea states for various
applications. Among all these, surface buoys such as the Datawell Directional
Waverider have been reference instruments for the estimation of the sea
surface elevation frequency spectra from measurements of buoy acceleration.
The combined horizontal and vertical accelerations give the first five
angular moments of the directional spectrum that can be used to estimate the
directional wave spectrum <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx7" id="paren.2"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.,</named-content></xref>. In conditions with
strong currents, e.g., more than 1 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, it is usually impossible to
measure waves with a moored surface buoy, due to the tension on the mooring
line. This problem is avoided with drifting buoys, but the nature of the
measurement is different. Drifting buoys will not measure long time series at
the same location, but they can provide a unique along-section measurement of
waves following the current <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx18" id="paren.3"/>. Several devices such
drifting buoys have been developed recently for different applications
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx10 bib1.bibx28 bib1.bibx24" id="paren.4"/>. With our focus on relatively
short gravity waves, with a wavelength between 1 and 30 m, there is a
trade-off between the size of the device and its response to the waves.<?pagebreak page1450?> In
practice, the buoy cannot be too small so that it is easily found and
recovered nor too large so that it follows the motion of these short gravity
waves. Besides waves, the time evolution of the buoy position can also be
used to estimate surface currents in cases where the wind force on the buoy
is negligible.</p>
      <p id="d1e280"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx10" id="text.5"/> proposed a compact and low-cost 45 cm diameter
GPS-tracked drifting buoy. This buoy uses a GPS receiver for absolute
position tracking. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx10" id="text.6"/> compared it with Datawell and found that
the horizontal wave orbital displacements are accurately resolved, although
the vertical sea surface displacements were not well resolved by standard GPS
measurements, requiring an external high-precision antenna to be attached to
the drifter.</p>
      <p id="d1e288"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx28" id="text.7"/> developed the Surface Wave Instrument Float with Tracking
(SWIFT), a multi-sensor drifter buoy. This instrumented spar buoy has a
0.3 m diameter and 2.15 m height and has been designed to measure wind,
waves, whitecap properties, and underwater turbulence and current profiles.
Wave measurements are derived from the phase-resolving GPS, which contains the
wave orbital motions relative to the earth reference frame. The relatively
large size of the buoy is needed for the other measurements; however, the
size and shape result in a very weak response for wave frequencies above
0.4 Hz. Obviously, the SWIFT buoy design has other benefits, such as the use
of an acoustic Doppler current profiler that allows us to investigate the effect
of the vertical current shear on the waves <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx33" id="paren.8"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e296"><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx24" id="text.9"/> developed a surface wave rider (called “Surpact”) to
measure sea state and atmospheric sea level pressure as well as temperature
and salinity at a small fixed depth from the surface. Surpacts use a floating
annular ring (28 cm diameter) with a rotating axis across it, to which the
instrumented tag is attached and uses the vertical acceleration to obtain the
power spectrum between 0.2 and 2.2 Hz.</p>
      <p id="d1e302">Our goal is to measure the response of surface gravity waves to horizontal
current gradients, in order to better interpret airborne and satellite
imagery of waves and current features
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx11 bib1.bibx22 bib1.bibx23" id="paren.10"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.,</named-content></xref>. Further out, away from
the coasts, it is now understood that surface currents are the main cause of
the variability of wave properties on small spatial scales
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx4 bib1.bibx21" id="paren.11"/> and more measurements are required
to better understand the processes at play and improve on the
parameterizations of numerical wave models
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx1 bib1.bibx30" id="paren.12"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.,</named-content></xref>.</p>
      <p id="d1e318">In this context, most of the existing wave buoys are generally too large to
properly respond to short gravity waves. We have thus developed a low-cost
drifting buoy, the “surface kinematics buoy” (SKIB), specially developed
for wave–current interaction studies. Its design, tests and validations are
presented here. This paper is organized as follows.
Section <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S2"/> presents the relations between parameters recorded
by the various devices used in our study and the wave spectrum.
Section <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S3"/> explains the design of SKIB and validation in the
laboratory and in situ. Section <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S4"/> describes an example
application to measurements of waves and currents, and conclusions follow in
Sect. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="Ch1.S5"/>.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <title>Measurable parameters and processing</title>
      <p id="d1e335">For random wind waves, the variance of the sea surface elevation field can be
described using the variance density spectrum <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> or the
action density spectrum <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the
intrinsic (relative) wave frequency and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the wave direction.</p>
      <p id="d1e449">For linear waves, the wavenumber <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mi>k</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is related to the intrinsic wave
frequency, i.e., the frequency measured by a drifting buoy following the current:

              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M12" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>tanh⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

        where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mi>D</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the water depth and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mi>g</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> the acceleration of the gravitational force.</p>
      <p id="d1e503">In the presence of a horizontal current vector <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> that is vertically
uniform, the intrinsic frequency differs from the absolute frequency
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> observed in a reference frame attached to
the solid Earth:

              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M17" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">k</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

        A near-surface shear would lead to an effective current that varies with the
wavenumber <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx25" id="paren.13"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e564">When drifting with the surface current vector <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">u</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">v</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, a surface
buoy can measure the three components of the acceleration vector (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>z</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), the GPS horizontal Doppler velocities <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and positions
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mi>z</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>). In practice the accelerations and horizontal velocities have
relatively low noise and can be used to measure waves. In our SKIB
acquisition system, the GPS data are sampled at 1 Hz while the accelerometer
is sampled at 25 Hz, and they are independent systems.</p>
      <p id="d1e655">The spectra and co-spectra of these time series can provide the first five
Fourier coefficients of the angular distribution, also known as angular
moments: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx16 bib1.bibx13" id="paren.14"/>. From that, it is possible to obtain the
directional distribution of the spectrum <inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx16" id="paren.15"/>.</p>
      <?pagebreak page1451?><p id="d1e786">For completeness, here are how the spectra and co-spectra <inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of two
quantities <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> or <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> replaced by h for heave and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mi>u</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> or
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mi>v</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> for the horizontal velocity components, are linked to the angular
moments:

              <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M39" display="block"><mml:mtable rowspacing="5.690551pt" displaystyle="true"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mtable class="array" columnalign="center"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∫</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:munderover><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mtable class="array" columnalign="center"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mi>cos⁡</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mi>sin⁡</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mi>cos⁡</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mi>sin⁡</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:mfenced><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:munderover><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∫</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:munderover><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E3"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mtable class="array" rowspacing="5.690551pt 5.690551pt 5.690551pt" columnalign="center"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">uh</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hh</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">uu</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">vv</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">vh</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hh</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">uu</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">vv</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">uu</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">vv</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">uu</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">vv</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">uv</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">uu</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">vv</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
      <p id="d1e1172">From the first moments it is customary <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx12" id="paren.16"/> to define a mean
direction <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and directional spread <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>:

              <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M42" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E4"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>tan⁡</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E5"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
      <p id="d1e1329">When only velocity measurements are available, one can only access
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which give the
two following parameters:

              <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M46" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E6"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:msup><mml:mi>tan⁡</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E7"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msqrt><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:msqrt><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
      <p id="d1e1503">We estimated the auto- and cross-spectra following <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx31" id="text.17"/>, using
Fourier transforms over time series of 5000 samples, with a 50 % overlap,
and using a Hann window. The resulting spectra have a frequency resolution of
0.005 Hz and 24 degrees of freedom (12 independent windows and 11
overlapped windows).</p>
      <p id="d1e1509">Because the GPS and accelerometer have different sampling frequencies, the
buoy displacements are linearly interpolated on the accelerometer sampling
time steps. This is only required for the co-spectrum of the horizontal
displacements <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">uv</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and quadrature spectra of horizontal and
vertical displacements <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">uh</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">vh</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e1564">Here we will focus on frequencies between 0.06 and 0.80 Hz for our
investigation of current gradients. We will also discuss the full frequency
range for a validation of the buoy behavior.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <title>Buoy design and validation</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <title>Hull shape and constraints of deployment at sea</title>
      <p id="d1e1578">The hull shape is clearly important when resolving short wave components. The
main drivers are the stability of the buoy. We typically want to have the top
of the buoy stay above the water surface, in particular for GPS acquisitions
and radio transmission. We also wish to avoid rotation of the buoy relative
to the water around it, and finally the buoy has to be big enough to be
visible for recovery and small enough to be easily handled and to follow the
motion of short waves. One final driver is the overall cost of the buoy.
Because they also measure whitecaps with a camera and turbulence in the
water, the SWIFT buoys use a spar shape that is 1.8 m tall. Such a shape is
not ideal for short wave measurements because it
resonates for heave excitation at a
frequency around 0.8 Hz.</p>
      <p id="d1e1581">With all these constraints in mind we found that a nearly spherical shape
with ribs and an additional skirt provided a good water-following behavior,
whereas spherical shapes performed more poorly. Three-dimensional printing
was tested without much success due to the porosity of the printed material.
For the small number of buoys that we needed we finally settled on glass
spheres, for which we had other oceanographic uses for buoyancy in deep water
moorings. The standard ribbed cage for these spheres
(Figs. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>) was augmented
by a 3 cm wide skirt, as shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>, providing a
nice water-following capability.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1592">Surface kinematic buoy (SKIB) <bold>(a)</bold> main electronics
components: microcontroller board (EFM32 cortex M3), with data storage and
wireless link; GPS board; Iridium board; STM accelerometer or SBG IMU Ellipse
N. <bold>(b)</bold> SKIBs with top cover removed, showing the 25.4 cm diameter
glass spheres used to seal all the electronic
components.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/14/1449/2018/os-14-1449-2018-f01.pdf"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1610">Sensors used during oceanographic campaigns for in situ validation.
<bold>(a)</bold> SKIB deployment; <bold>(b)</bold> SKIB buoy; <bold>(c)</bold> SWIFT
buoy; <bold>(d)</bold> stereo-video system.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=284.527559pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/14/1449/2018/os-14-1449-2018-f02.jpg"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <title>SKIB electronics</title>
      <p id="d1e1637">The accelerometer and the GPS system are directly integrated in a
general-purpose oceanographic Advanced Low Energy Electronic System (ALEES)
board developed by Ifremer “Unité Recherche et Développements
Technologiques” (RDT) especially for autonomous applications that need very
low power consumption. This generic board uses a 32 bit microcontroller
working at 48 MHz, a 1 Mb flash memory and 128 Kb RAM. The data are stored
in a standard micro secure digital high-capacity (SDHC) memory card. The GPS
and the accelerometer acquisitions are not synchronized and the acquisition
rates are 1 and 25 Hz, respectively.</p>
      <p id="d1e1640">The integrated accelerometer is a STMicroelectronics model LIS3DH (when used with this configuration, this will be referenced as the SKIB STM buoy version),
already incorporated in the ALEES board for other uses, namely the detection
of strong motions for underwater sensors. This low-cost (less than USD 2)
component was chosen for its very low power use: between 2 and
6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">A</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at 2.5 V.</p>
      <p id="d1e1653">A specific board was designed to control the GPS acquisition and send the
buoy position via the Iridium board. We typically programmed the buoy to send position messages every
10 min, in order to be able to find the instruments at sea in highly
variable currents. The ALEES and GPS boards can be controlled by a Zigbee
wireless link. This wireless link also allows the user to set up the buoy and
to recover the data without opening the glass spheres, allowing the system to
power on and off.</p>
      <p id="d1e1656">All the system, including the electronic boards, battery pack and antennas
(Zigbee, GPS, Iridium) are mounted inside a 25.4 cm diameter
glass sphere, which is vacuum-sealed (see Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F1"/>).
Standard prices for all the parts in the year 2015 were about EUR 1100 for
all electronics, half of which is for the Iridium and GPS equipment and
another EUR 1100 of which is for the hull and mounts inside of the hull.
That expensive choice of the hull was, in our case, justified by a possible
reuse for other oceanographic applications.</p>
      <?pagebreak page1453?><p id="d1e1662">For a detailed validation we have also integrated a more accurate sensor in
two of the SKIB buoys (this is now referred to as the SKIB SBG buoy version).
In those buoys an SBG Ellipse inertial measurement unit (IMU) was used, set
to an acquisition rate of 50 Hz. However, this sensor significantly increases
the equipment cost and power consumption, with a unit price typically above
USD 4000.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <title>Laboratory tests and in situ validation</title>
      <p id="d1e1671">Buoy testing started with the verification of the expected acceleration accuracy in a
wave tank, followed by a comparison with in situ measurements with a
reference wave buoy.</p>
      <p id="d1e1674">The laboratory tests were very useful for testing various hull shapes, from
spheres to short cylinders. These led to the addition of the plastic skirt
that effectively removes rotations around the horizontal axes, with a limited
impact on the water-following capacity for short wave components. This final
design has a heave transfer function of almost 1 up to 0.8 Hz, decreasing to
0.6 at 1 Hz, as established in wave basin tests <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx27" id="paren.18"/>. This
extends the useful range of buoys such as Datawell Waveriders or SWIFTs to a
high frequency. For in situ validation, the SKIB buoy was deployed drifting
within 200 m of a MkIII Datawell Directional Waverider of 70 cm diameter, moored in a region of weak
currents with a mean water depth of 60 m at 48.2857<inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N,
4.9684<inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> W. This Waverider buoy is part of the permanent CEREMA wave
buoy network, with the World Meteorological Organization number 62069
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx3" id="paren.19"/>. This buoy provides measurements of the first five
moments for frequencies of 0.025 to 0.580 Hz, based on accelerometer data.</p>
      <p id="d1e1701">Contrary to <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx10" id="text.20"/> who strapped their new acquisition system on
a Waverider buoy, we wanted to validate the full system, including the hull
response. As a result the different sensors do not measure the same waves
(with the same phases) but should be measuring the same sea state, i.e., the
same spectrum, moments and derived parameters.</p>
      <p id="d1e1707">The test presented here was performed on 21 September 2016, from 10:44 to
11:56 UTC, following a similar test in 2015 with only a SKIB and a with a
different GPS receiver but the same hull and a Datawell Waverider. The
results were very similar. In the 2016 experiment, we also deployed a SWIFT
buoy <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx28" id="paren.21"/> and a ship-mounted stereo-video wave system
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6" id="paren.22"/>. Pictures of all these systems as used during the experiment are shown in
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e1719">The SWIFT model used is shown in the water in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>c.
It uses a GPS receiver integrated with an IMU (Microstrain 3DM-GX3-35), a
Doppler velocity profiler (Nortek AquadoppHR), an autonomous meteorological
station ultrasonic anemometer (AirMar PB200), a digital video recorder system
and a real-time tracked radio frequency transmitter. The wave spectra for
each 10 min burst are calculated as the ensemble average of the fast Fourier
transform of 16 sub-windows with 50 % overlap, which results in
32 degrees of freedom and a frequency bandwidth <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.0117</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Hz
in the range <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The IMU data give information about the tilt
and horizontal rotation, as well as accelerations, of the SWIFT as it follows
wave motions. Note that the hull shape of the SWIFT follows displacements and
velocities at the sea surface but not surface slopes. Hence, only velocities
and accelerations are used in wave processing. Post-processing of the merged
GPS and IMU data is applied as a classic RC (resistor–capacitor) filter to exclude signals
at frequencies lower than <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Hz.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1768">Comparison of wave spectra estimates from SKIB, SWIFT, Datawell and
stereo video. <bold>(a)</bold> Wave sensor path, with the colors representing 10 min
displacement, starting in red: <bold>(b)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> sea surface variance
spectral density; <bold>(c)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> directional spreading from
first- and second-order angular moments (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>);
<bold>(d)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> frequency-dependent mean wave direction
from first- and second-order angular moments (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). The
shadow in the lines represent the error for a 95 % confidence interval.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/14/1449/2018/os-14-1449-2018-f03.jpg"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1882">The stereo-video system is the same as used by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx15" id="text.23"/>, based
on a pair of synchronized video cameras (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2048</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2456</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> pixels) BM-500GE
JAI, mounted with wide-angle lenses. Here the system was installed at the bow
of R/V <italic>Thalia</italic>, a 24.5 m ship of the French coastal oceanographic
fleet (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>d). The cameras are located approximately
7 m above the sea surface, and an Ellipse-D inertial measurement unit is
fixed on the bar joining the cameras to correct for ship motion with
0.2<inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> accuracy on all rotation angles. The video processing follows
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx6" id="text.24"/>. The only difference in the present case is that the
mean surface plane correction, which was used for deployment from fixed
platforms, is replaced by an optimization of the rotation matrix given by an SBG motion package mounted with the cameras. The resulting surface elevation
maps <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ζ</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>x</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> acquired over 30 min records at 12 Hz are gridded in a
10 by 10 m square surface with 0.1 m resolution. This square moves with
the mean velocity <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, relative to the solid Earth, as given by the GPS
data. The 3-D spectrum <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was obtained after applying a Hann
window in all three dimensions to the elevation maps over time intervals of
85.33 s  (1024 frames), with 50 % overlapping as well. As a result,
the energy over frequency and wavenumber are in a reference frame moving at
the speed <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the measured radian frequency of the waves
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> must be corrected by the mean ship velocity
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) over each time window. So the absolute frequency in an
Earth reference frame is <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">k</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. This procedure is particularly prone to errors for wave
components longer than 20 m, which are not resolved in the field of view.
These longer components can be treated separately using a slope array
estimation of the directional spectrum <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx15" id="paren.25"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.,</named-content></xref>, but
we focus here on the short waves. The stereo heave frequency spectrum <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
is obtained by integration over wavenumbers, and it is expressed in terms of
the absolute frequency <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ω</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">k</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">U</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is a current field that can
be estimated using the drifting buoys.</p>
      <p id="d1e2108">A comparison of the different sensors at the same sea state conditions is
shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>. For this comparison the records from
each sensor were synchronized over 10 min intervals and averaged over
the 30 min of the Waverider records and an integration interval from 0.06 to
0.58 Hz. Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>a shows the buoys' drift trajectories
for the 1 h of the acquisition, with one color symbol every 10 min and the
track of R/V <italic>Thalia</italic>. The stereo-video record is 20 min, starting at
the same time<?pagebreak page1454?> as SKIB and SWIFT acquisitions. The Waverider data correspond
to two acquisition of 28 min each, ending at 10:30 and 11:00 UTC.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e2121">Comparison of wave parameters, significant waves height
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), mean absolute wave period (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and mean wave
direction (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). The root mean square difference between
Waverider and other sensors is given in a second column for each variable. [<inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>] represents the maximum and
minimum limits for 95 % <inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> confidence interval, considering a
chi square distribution <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx32" id="paren.26"><named-content content-type="pre">according to</named-content><named-content content-type="post">Eqs. 5 and 6</named-content></xref> for two
perfect devices measuring the same random wave
field.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="9">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="center"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Sensor</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">[<inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RMSD</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RMSD</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RMSD</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">ν</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(m)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">(s)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Datawell MkIII</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2.55</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">[2.31, 2.64]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10.49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">238.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">193.4</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SKIB STM</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2.86</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">[2.63, 2.94]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.36</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10.85</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.91</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">245.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">8.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">289.9</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SKIB SBG</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2.55</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">[2.29, 2.65]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">10.52</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.44</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">231.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">7.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">169.3</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">SWIFT</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2.08</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">[1.88, 2.16]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.48</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">9.98</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.89</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">263.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">25.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">193.4</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Stereo video</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.89</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">[1.73, 1.94]</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.63</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">9.40</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.54</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">249.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">8.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">253.9</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e2550">A closer look at the heave spectra (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>b) shows a
good correspondence between Datawell Waverider and SKIB buoys at the peak of
the spectrum. The main source of error in the SWIFT data, around the peak of
the spectrum, was associated with a high-pass filter applied to the IMU
acceleration before each time integration. This part of the SWIFT processing,
to obtain <inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, was optimized by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx29" id="text.27"/> to reduce the low-frequency noise and to have best agreement with a Datawell Waverider at Ocean
Station Papa. This was obtained from the double time integration of the IMU
acceleration, with a high-pass filter at each integration, to reconstruct a
wave-resolved time series of sea surface elevations. This generally improves
the estimation of the spectrum for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Hz, but it reduces the level of
lower frequencies (as it is also observed in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>b).</p>
      <p id="d1e2586">For the SKIBs we have not filtered the acceleration data and the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was
directly obtained from the double time integration of the accelerometer data.
Other differences are found for the main direction
(Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>d), which is better retrieved with the SBG IMU.
The main benefit of the SBG IMU is the reduction of the noise floor at low
frequencies compared to an estimation of the motion from GPS alone. This is
most important for swells of long periods and low heights but not critical
for our investigation of wind seas interacting with currents.</p>
      <p id="d1e2605">Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>c and d present the estimates of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:math></inline-formula> based on the first- and second-order angular moments.
We see a<?pagebreak page1455?> significant difference in the wave spread and mean direction
estimates, especially in the first-order estimation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:math></inline-formula>). This occurs because the accelerometer is not
internally synchronized with the GPS and because they have different
characteristics errors. The second-order moment depends only on the
horizontal displacements while the first-order moment depends on both
horizontal and vertical displacements. So, the second-order moments are more
accurate because there is no cross product between different sensors.
Although there are differences, the results suggest that the usage of the
combination of GPS drifter displacement and vertical acceleration produces a
good estimation of the spectrum directionality. These results are
particularly important, as the drifter was not equipped with a compass and
only used a low-cost GPS receiver. Because the GPS acquisition was limited
to 1 Hz in the SKIB with STM accelerometer, the directional analyses are
limited to 0.5 Hz (and 0.8 Hz for SBG, which uses only accelerometer data).</p>
      <p id="d1e2659">A comparison of the different sensors in terms of the usual sea state parameters
is shown in Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T1"/>, with the significant wave height
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, mean wave period <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and peak wave period
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Since the only reliable directions are provided by the GPS
data alone, we define the peak wave direction <inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the mean
wave direction (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) from the second moments as
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi>tan⁡</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with

                <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M105" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E8"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∫</mml:mo><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E9"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∫</mml:mo><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
      <p id="d1e2865">As reported in Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="Ch1.T1"/>, SKIB results generally agree
on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and mean directions, with confidence
intervals for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> overlapping with the reference Waverider buoy.</p>
      <p id="d1e2906">The largest differences are between the SKIB STM and SWIFT buoys and are
associated with the filtering of low-frequency content in the SWIFT
processing chain (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F3"/>b) and unfiltered low-frequency noise in the SKIB STM. However, for frequencies from 0.1 to
0.5 Hz, the spectra are consistent with the stereo video and Datawell
Waverider data. At higher frequencies, for which we do not have other
validation data, the power spectra result follows the same trend and appears
realistic up to at least 0.8 Hz, consistent with laboratory tests
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx27" id="paren.28"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e2915">In order to validate the SKIB buoys in different sea state conditions, other deployments were performed next to the buoy 62069: one on 5 August 2015 and
another four between 21 and 27 September of 2016. For the 2016 experiment, we
used two SKIB buoys equipped with SBG IMU and two others with the STM
accelerometer. For the 2015 experiment we had only one buoy equipped with
the STM accelerometer. Results for integral parameters are presented in
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>, and a selection of two spectra with different
shapes is shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F5"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e2922">For most sea states <inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are measured correctly
(Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>a and d), with RMSE around 0.3 m and
5.3<inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively. As expected, the SKIB SBG agrees best with the
Waverider for all the analyzed parameters, and the regression lines for the
SBG data (Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>) are closer to the ideal correlation
line (gray dashed lines Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>) than those from the
SKIB STM data. In general, the STM accelerometer has more energy at the lower
frequencies and this can produce overestimations in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> measurements.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e2990">Comparison of the integrated wave parameter estimates from Datawell
and SKIB with SBG (IMU sensor) and STM (accelerometer).
<bold>(a)</bold> Significant wave height (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). <bold>(b)</bold> Mean wave
period (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). <bold>(c)</bold> Peak wave period (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and
<bold>(d)</bold> peak direction (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) for a frequency interval between
0.06 and 0.6 Hz. The regression lines are computed independently for the SBG
and STM data set. The gray dashed line represent the ideal correlation
regression line, and the statistics coefficients written in the figures are
computed considering both data sets from SBG and STM. The
statistical parameters are the Pearson's coefficient of determination <inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
the root mean square error (RMSE) and the normalized root mean square error
(NRMSE).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=284.527559pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/14/1449/2018/os-14-1449-2018-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3070">These errors are confined to frequencies below 0.12 Hz. The main difference
between the SKIB and Datawell Waverider was found at the peak wave period
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F4"/>c). Higher errors in the
identification of the peak frequency are expected a priori as the buoys
present different spectral resolutions and different numbers of degrees of
freedom <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx32" id="paren.29"/>. Again the SKIB SBG performs better than SKIB STM.</p>
      <p id="d1e3089">The buoy's low-frequency noise varies according to the sea state conditions.
The errors associated with the low-frequency limit and at the spectrum peak
are illustrated in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F5"/>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e3097">Comparison of Datawell and SKIB with SBG and STM for the sea surface
variance spectral density <inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for two different field measurements around
the Datawell Waverider buoy “Pierres Noires” (with World Meteorological
Organization number 62069).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=312.980315pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/14/1449/2018/os-14-1449-2018-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e3122">Study field location and local experimental conditions.
<bold>(a)</bold> Chenal du Four location. <bold>(b)</bold> Local current condition
and drifter path. The current field shown here comes from a barotropic model
simulation at 250 m resolution <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx14 bib1.bibx20" id="paren.30"/>.
Colored lines shows the 10 min SKIB displacement over the current gradient
on 23 October 2015, 14:40 UTC.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/14/1449/2018/os-14-1449-2018-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e3140">In most sea states analyzed here, the SKIB buoy correctly measured the sea
state condition at frequencies higher than 0.07 Hz. In terms of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>H</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the instrument usually presents a root mean square error
within the statistical uncertainty expected for two perfect devices measuring
the same random wave field <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx32" id="paren.31"><named-content content-type="post">Eq. 6</named-content></xref>. However, because of<?pagebreak page1456?> a
significant low-frequency noise in SKIB STM we reduced the integration
interval for this buoy. The low-frequency noise was reduced by using the SBG
IMU, which presented the best performance among the sensors tested here. In
summary, we had a good performance of SKIB for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.07</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Hz, which makes it
appropriate to use in the investigation of young wind waves interacting with
currents.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page1457?><sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <title>Wave evolution in current gradients</title>
      <p id="d1e3179">Wave properties are largely defined by the wind field and the geometry of the
basin in which they develop, but currents can introduce large variations,
particularly on small scales
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx19 bib1.bibx17 bib1.bibx4" id="paren.32"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.,</named-content></xref>. Current effects are
generally strongest for the shortest wave components due to a larger ratio of
current speed to phase speed and can enhance the probability of wave
breaking <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx8 bib1.bibx33" id="paren.33"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.,</named-content></xref>.</p>
      <p id="d1e3192">Here we illustrate the capabilities of SKIB drifters with a deployment
through a current gradient that opposes the waves, following the method of
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx18" id="text.34"/>. We deployed buoys in the current upstream of a large
gradient area and recorded the evolution of the wave field as the buoys
drifted across the current gradient.</p>
      <p id="d1e3198">The selected area for this study is at the southern end of the Chenal du
Four, a passage oriented north–south surrounded by shallow rocks, with
Beniguet island to the west and the mainland to the east (see
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/>). The water depth in this region ranges from 10
to 13 m relative to chart datum, and increases to 25 m at the southern end
near 48.32<inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N. At the time of our measurements, the water depth was
the depth relative to chart datum plus 6 m. The tidal flow in this area is
stronger in the shallower part of the channel, resulting in a current
gradient at the channel mouth that often enhances wave breaking and can lead
to hazardous navigation conditions.</p>
      <p id="d1e3212">On 23 October 2015 from 13:40 to 14:40 UTC, six drifters buoys were deployed
from a small boat (see Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F2"/>a).</p>
      <p id="d1e3218">Winds were approximately 6.2 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> from the south, blowing against a
tidal current of approximately 1.4 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (see
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F7"/>). The offshore wave conditions, as recorded by the
Waverider buoy, included a 0.9 m swell with a peak period of 13 s coming
from west–northwest and a 1.2 m wind sea. The location of our measurements
is well sheltered from this west–northwest swell, and the swell heights tend
to increase as the buoys drift away from Chanel du Four.
Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F7"/> presents the mean current velocity estimated from
the successive GPS positions for all buoys and each of the 10 min records
over which wave spectra are estimated. After increasing from 1.3 to
1.4 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, the current drops to 0.9 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> over the deeper
region. As the waves travel against the current, they first experience the
increase in the adverse current from 0.9 to 1.4 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7"><caption><p id="d1e3288">Evolution of the current speed during the drift of the buoys. For
each time segment, each dot represents a single buoy.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=221.931496pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/14/1449/2018/os-14-1449-2018-f07.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e3297">The corresponding wave spectra are shown in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F8"/>.
There is little variation in the mean direction and directional spread (not
shown).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8"><caption><p id="d1e3304">Variance spectral density evolution over time; 10 min Fourier
transform from 23 October 2015 13:40 to 14:40 UTC. The gray dashed lines
shows the wind-sea saturation <inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and noise floor at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>E</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> limits
for the first 10 min of acquisition. The color of the lines follows the
buoys' displacement as in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F6"/>. The solid lines
shows the spatial mean of the spectral density measured in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
during each 10 min acquisition. The lines' shadow represent the 99 %
confidence interval. The dashed dark line is the spectral density measured by
Pierre Noires Datawell Waverider buoy at a nearby offshore location, outside
the current region.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/14/1449/2018/os-14-1449-2018-f08.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e3359">The increase in energy at low frequencies is mostly due to the buoys drifting
to more exposed areas in the presence of a swell. The effect of the current
on the shape of the wind waves is analyzed using the nondimensional
saturation spectrum <inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mi>B</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, following <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx19" id="text.35"/>. With a velocity
increase <inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>U</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> over a 1 km scale, we measure an
increase<?pagebreak page1458?> in the saturation level at frequencies from 0.35 to 0.5 Hz that
does not exceed 50 %. The following reduction in wave energy is more
pronounced over the 3 km where the current slows down.</p>
      <p id="d1e3400">Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F9"/> shows that the saturation level increases
when waves face an accelerating and opposing current. This is similar to the
cases studied in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx33" id="text.36"/>, from the Columbia River, in
which opposing currents increase the steepness locally (without gradient
analysis). In the final portion of the trajectories, the current speed
decreases and the saturation relaxes to a lower value.</p>
      <p id="d1e3408">Given the complex interaction of wave generation by the wind, wave
dissipation by breaking and nonlinear evolution, there are no simple
theoretical results to interpret our observations. Starting from a dynamical
balance in the absence of currents, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx19" id="text.37"/> provides an analysis
of the current effect as a deviation of the wave spectrum from a
near-equilibrium state, assuming that the wind forcing is proportional to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mi>B</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
and a dissipation rate that is proportional to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>≃</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. For a
scale of current variation <inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mi>L</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, he finds that the maximum value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mi>B</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is

              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E10" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M140" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mo>max⁡</mml:mo></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msup><mml:mfenced close="]" open="["><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>U</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mo>[</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

        where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the equilibrium level of the saturation outside of the current
gradient. In this expression <inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mi>c</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the phase speed and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mi>S</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the scale of
current variation normalized by the wind stress <inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi>d</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. In our case, taking <inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>L</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km gives <inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.93</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> Hz. With the same parameters, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>U</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E10"/>) gives <inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mo>max⁡</mml:mo></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.8</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. If <inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
is reduced to 2, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mo>max⁡</mml:mo></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is as large as 3.4 and diverges as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> goes
to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:math></inline-formula>. In other words, the dissipation rate must be a very steep function of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:mi>B</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> in order to absorb the wind forcing energy that converges into the small
region of the current gradient. The limited increase in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:mi>B</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> in our data
supports <inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. With <inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E10"/>) gives a reduction in
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mo>max⁡</mml:mo></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from 1.8 at 0.5 Hz to 1.25 at 0.8 Hz, which is consistent
with the weaker ratio found for the higher frequencies in
Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F9"/>.</p>
      <p id="d1e3793">For example, a current speed of 1.6 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> corresponds to blocking
conditions for waves with periods shorter than 2 s, which have a group speed
slower than 1.6 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, and these short waves should be strongly
attenuated in a fixed reference frame. However, our measurements are in a
reference frame moving with the current, in which the waves, even those with
periods shorter than 2 s, are propagating past the drifting buoys. At
frequencies above 0.5 Hz, the intrinsic group speed is less than
1.6 m s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and waves must be generated by the local wind and cannot
propagate from the south. Our data are consistent with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, as used in
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx5" id="text.38"/> and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx2" id="text.39"/>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9"><caption><p id="d1e3853">Saturation of the spectral density. Time evolution over 10 min
Fourier transform from 23 October 2015 13:40 to 14:40 UTC. The colored lines
follow the buoys' displacement as in Fig. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="Ch1.F8"/>. The solid
lines show the spatial mean of the spectral density measured during each
10 min acquisition. The lines' shadow represents the 99 % confidence
interval. The dashed black line is the saturation measured at an offshore
location by the Pierre Noires Datawell buoy.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://os.copernicus.org/articles/14/1449/2018/os-14-1449-2018-f09.png"/>

      </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <title>Summary and conclusion</title>
      <p id="d1e3870">The surface kinematics
buoy (SKIB) is a new drifter that has been designed for the investigation of
wave–current interactions, including relatively short waves from 0.07 Hz
and up to 1 Hz in frequency. Here we mostly used the heave data<?pagebreak page1459?> from the
accelerometer that was first validated by comparing it to the reference
Datawell Waverider buoy up to 0.6 Hz. Typical costs for the electronics are
around EUR 1100, with an additional EUR 1100 for the hull, which could be
reduced by using plastics instead of our glass sphere. The combined analysis
with the vertical acceleration and buoy velocity from the instrument GPS
allowed us to measure the directional properties of the wave spectrum without
using an internal compass, simplifying the equipment design and reducing the
costs. Still, the combination of the GPS velocity and accelerometer posed
particular problems, and only the parameters <inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
obtained from the GPS velocity appear reliable.</p>
      <p id="d1e3898">For cases in which the steepness of the waves of interest is very small, we
replaced the cheap STM accelerometer by an SBG Ellipse-N inertial navigation
unit. This SKIB SGB model performs better, both for the heave spectrum and for
the directional parameters derived from first moments (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). This model was used by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx26" id="text.40"/> for the
investigation of wave propagation in sea ice.</p>
      <p id="d1e3929">The capabilities of the new drifters were illustrated here by measuring the
variation in wave properties across a current gradient that was relatively
uniform and along the propagation direction. Such measurements are important
for testing existing theories for wave dissipation, such as proposed by
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx19" id="text.41"/> and now widely used in numerical wave models
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx2" id="paren.42"><named-content content-type="pre">e.g.,</named-content></xref>. In particular, the frequency-dependent
saturation level is found to respond to current gradients in a way that is
consistent with the proposition by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bib1.bibx19" id="text.43"/> of a nonlinear
dissipation rate. We expect further applications to the investigation of
small-scale gradients in wave heights and mean square slopes in the presence
of current gradients.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability">

      <p id="d1e3947">The data used in this paper are available at
<uri>ftp://ftp.ifremer.fr/ifremer/ww3/COM/PAPERS/2018_OS_GUIMARAES_ETAL/dataset</uri>;
however, the stereo video results are to large to be shared in this
repository.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="authorcontribution">

      <p id="d1e3956">The manuscript writing, data processing and analysis were
mostly done by PVG with the assistance of FA, PS, YP, JT and PF. The SKIB
buoy design and construction was led by MH, with the collaboration of PS and MA.
JT contributed to the SWIFT buoys and data processing. AB, PS, MA and PVG
prepared, mounted and analyzed data from the ship-mounted stereo video
system. The field experiments were led by FA in 2015 and by PS in 2016. All
authors discussed the results and commented on the
manuscript.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests">

      <p id="d1e3962">The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e3968">Work described here is supported by DGA under the PROTEVS program LabexMer,
via grant ANR-10-LABX-19-01, and CNES as part of the CFOSAT and SWOT
preparatory program. We thank all the TOIS group at LOPS, Olivier Peden, for
his contributions to buoy tests, and the crew of R/V <italic>Thalia</italic> for
their performance during the BBWAVES-2016 experiment.<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>
Edited by: John M. Huthnance <?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>
Reviewed by: Judith Wolf and one anonymous referee</p></ack><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bibx1"><label>Ardhuin et al.(2009)</label><mixed-citation>Ardhuin, F., Chapron, B., and Collard, F.: Observation of swell dissipation
across oceans, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L06607, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GL037030" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2008GL037030</ext-link>,
2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx2"><label>Ardhuin et al.(2010)</label><mixed-citation>
Ardhuin, F., Rogers, E., Babanin, A., Filipot, J.-F., Magne, R., Roland, A.,
van der Westhuysen, A., Queffeulou, P., Lefevre, J.-M., Aouf, L., and
Collard, F.: Semi-empirical dissipation source functions for wind-wave
models: part I, definition, calibration and validation, J. Phys. Oceanogr.,
40, 1917–1941, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx3"><label>Ardhuin et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>Ardhuin, F., Roland, A., Dumas, F., Bennis, A.-C., Sentchev, A., Forget, P.,
Wolf, J., Girard, F., Osuna, P., and Benoit, M.: Numerical wave modelling in
conditions with strong currents: dissipation, refraction and relative wind,
J. Phys. Oceanogr., 42, 2101–2120, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-11-0220.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JPO-D-11-0220.1</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx4"><label>Ardhuin et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>Ardhuin, F., Rascle, N., Chapron, B., Gula, J., Molemaker, J., Gille, S. T.,
Menemenlis, D., and Rocha, C.: Small scale currents have large effects on
wind wave heights, J. Geophys. Res., 122, 4500–4517,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JC012413" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016JC012413</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx5"><label>Banner et al.(2000)</label><mixed-citation>Banner, M. L., Babanin, A. V., and Young, I. R.: Breaking Probability for
Dominant Waves on the Sea Surface, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 30, 3145–3160,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0485(2000)030&lt;3145:BPFDWO&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0485(2000)030&lt;3145:BPFDWO&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx6"><label>Benetazzo et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>Benetazzo, A., Barbariol, F., Bergamasco, F., Torsello, A., Carniel, S., and
Sclavo, M.: Stereo wave imaging from moving vessels: Practical use and
applications, Coast. Eng., 109, 114–127,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2015.12.008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.coastaleng.2015.12.008</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx7"><label>Benoit et al.(1997)</label><mixed-citation>
Benoit, M., Frigaard, P., and Schäffer, H. A.: Analysing
multidirectional wave spectra: A tentative classification of available
methods, in: IAHR-Seminar: Multidirectional Waves and their Interaction with
Structures, San Francisco, 10–15 August 1997, 131–158, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx8"><label>Chawla and Kirby(2002)</label><mixed-citation>Chawla, A. and Kirby, J. T.: Monochromatic and random wave breaking at
blocking points, J. Geophys. Res., 107, 3067, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JC001042" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2001JC001042</ext-link>,
2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx9"><label>COST Action 714 Working Group 3(2005)</label><mixed-citation>
COST Action 714 Working Group 3, W. G.: Measuring and analysing the
directional spectra of ocean waves, Office for Official Publications of the
European Communities, Luxembourg, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx10"><label>Herbers et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>Herbers, T. H. C., Jessen, P. F., Janssen, T. T., Colbert, D. B., and
MacMahan, J. H.: Observing ocean surface waves with GPS-tracked buoys,
J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 29, 944–959, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-11-00128.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JTECH-D-11-00128.1</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx11"><label>Kudryavtsev(2005)</label><mixed-citation>Kudryavtsev, V.: On radar imaging of current features: 1. Model and
comparison with observations, J. Geophysical Research, 110, C07016,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JC002505" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2004JC002505</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page1460?><ref id="bib1.bibx12"><label>Kuik et al.(1988a)</label><mixed-citation>
Kuik, A. J., van Vledder, G. P., and Holthuijsen, L. H.: A method for the
routine analysis of pitch-and-roll buoy wave data, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 18,
1020–1034, 1988a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx13"><label>Kuik et al.(1988b)</label><mixed-citation>
Kuik, A. J., Vledder, G. P. V., and Holthuijsen, L. H.: A Method for the
Routine Analysis of Pitch-and-Roll Buoy Wave Data, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 18,
1020–1034, 1988b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx14"><label>Lazure and Dumas(2008)</label><mixed-citation>Lazure, P. and Dumas, F.: An external-internal mode coupling for a 3D
hydrodynamical model for applications at regional scale (MARS), Adv. Water
Resour., 31, 233–250, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2007.06.010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.advwatres.2007.06.010</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx15"><label>Leckler et al.(2015)</label><mixed-citation>Leckler, F., Ardhuin, F., Peureux, C., Benetazzo, A., Bergamasco, F., and
Dulov, V.: Analysis and interpretation of frequency-wavenumber spectra of
young wind waves, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 45, 2484–2496,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-14-0237.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JPO-D-14-0237.1</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx16"><label>Longuet-Higgins et al.(1963)</label><mixed-citation>
Longuet-Higgins, M. S., Cartwright, D., and Smith, N. D.: Observations of
the directional spectrum of sea waves using the motions of a floating buoy,
in: Ocean wave spectra, Prentice-Hall, Easton, Md., 1–4 May 1961, 111–136,
1963.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx17"><label>Masson(1996)</label><mixed-citation>
Masson, D.: A case study of wave-current interaction in a strong tidal
current, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 26, 359–372, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx18"><label>Pearman et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
Pearman, D. W., Herbers, T. H. C., Janssen, T. T., van Ettinger, H. D.,
McIntyre, S. A., and Jessen, P. F.: Drifter observations of the effects of
shoals and tidal-currents on wave evolution in San Francisco Bight, Cont.
Shelf Res., 91, 109–119, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx19"><label>Phillips(1984)</label><mixed-citation>
Phillips, O. M.: On the response of short ocean wave components at a fixed
wavenumber to ocean current variations, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 14, 1425–1433,
1984.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx20"><label>Pineau-Guillou(2013)</label><mixed-citation>Pineau-Guillou, L.: Validation des modèles hydrodynamiques 2D des
côtes de la Manche et de l'Atlantique, Tech. rep., Ifremer, Brest,
<uri>http://archimer.ifremer.fr/doc/00157/26800/</uri> (last access: 12 November
2018), 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx21"><label>Quilfen et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>Quilfen, Y., Yurovskaya, M., Chapron, B., and Ardhuin, F.: Storm waves
sharpening in the Agulhas current: satellite observations and modeling,
Remote Sens. Environ., 216, 561–571, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2018.07.020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.rse.2018.07.020</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx22"><label>Rascle et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>Rascle, N., Chapron, B., Ponte, A., Ardhuin, F., and Klein, P.: Surface
roughness imaging of currents shows divergence and strain in the wind
direction, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 44, 2153–2163,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-13-0278.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JPO-D-13-0278.1</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx23"><label>Rascle et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>Rascle, N., Molemaker, J., Marié, L., Nouguier, F., Chapron, B., Lund,
B., and Mouche, A.: Intense deformation field at oceanic front inferred from
directional sea surface roughness observations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 48,
5599–5608, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL073473" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017GL073473</ext-link>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx24"><label>Reverdin et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>Reverdin, G., Morisset, S., Bourras, D., Martin, N., Lourenço, A.,
Boutin, J., Caudoux, C., Font, J., and Salvador, J.: Surpact A SMOS Surface
Wave Rider for Air–Sea Interaction, Oceanography, 26, 48–57,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2013.04" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5670/oceanog.2013.04</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx25"><label>Stewart and Joy(1974)</label><mixed-citation>Stewart, R. H. and Joy, J. W.: HF radio measurements of surface currents,
Deep Sea Research and Oceanographic Abstracts, 21, 1039–1049,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0011-7471(74)90066-7" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/0011-7471(74)90066-7</ext-link>, 1974.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx26"><label>Sutherland and Dumont(2018)</label><mixed-citation>Sutherland, P. and Dumont, D.: Marginal ice zone thickness and extent due to
wave radiation stress, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 48, 1885–1901,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-17-0167.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JPO-D-17-0167.1</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx27"><label>Thomas(2015)</label><mixed-citation>
Thomas, P.: Developpement d'une bouee derivante pour mesures de vagues,
PhD thesis, ENSTA Bretagne, France, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx28"><label>Thomson(2012)</label><mixed-citation>Thomson, J.: Wave breaking dissipation observed with “swift” drifters,
J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 29, 1866–1882, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-12-00018.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JTECH-D-12-00018.1</ext-link>,
2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx29"><label>Thomson et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>Thomson, J., Schwendeman, M. S., Zippel, S. F., Moghimi, S., Gemmrich, J.,
and Rogers, W. E.: Wave-Breaking turbulence in the ocean surface layer,
J. Phys. Oceanogr., 46, 1857–1870, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-15-0130.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JPO-D-15-0130.1</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx30"><label>van der Westhuysen et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>van der Westhuysen, A. J., van Dongeren, A. R., Groeneweg, J., van Vledder,
G. P., Peters, H., Gautier, C., and van Nieuwkoop, J. C. C.: Improvements in
spectral wave modeling in tidal inlet seas, J. Geophys. Res., 117, C00J28,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JC007837" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011JC007837</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx31"><label>Welch(1967)</label><mixed-citation>
Welch, P. D.: The use of fast Fourier transform for the estimation of power
spectra: a method based on time averaging over short, modified periodograms,
IEEE T. Audio Electroacoustics, 15, 70–73, 1967.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx32"><label>Young(1995)</label><mixed-citation>
Young, I.: The determination of confidence limits associated with estimates
of the spectral peak frequency, Ocean Eng., 22, 669–686, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bibx33"><label>Zippel and Thomson(2017)</label><mixed-citation>Zippel, S. and Thomson, J.: Surface wave breaking over sheared currents:
Observations from the Mouth of the Columbia River, J. Geophys. Res., 122,
3311–3328, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JC012498" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016JC012498</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>A surface kinematics buoy (SKIB) for wave–current interaction studies</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>Global navigation satellite systems (GNSSs) and modern motion-sensor packages
allow the measurement of ocean surface waves with low-cost drifters. Drifting
along or across current gradients provides unique measurements of
wave–current interactions. In this study, we investigate the response of
several combinations of GNSS receiver, motion-sensor package and hull design
in order to define a prototype <q>surface kinematics buoy</q> (SKIB) that is
particularly optimized for measuring wave–current interactions, including
relatively short wave components that are important for air–sea interactions
and remote-sensing applications. The comparison with existing Datawell
Directional Waverider and Surface Wave Instrument Float with Tracking (SWIFT)
buoys, as well as stereo-video imagery, demonstrates the performance of SKIB.
The use of low-cost accelerometers and a spherical ribbed and skirted hull
design provides acceptable heave spectra <i>E</i>(<i>f</i>) from 0.09 to 1&thinsp;Hz with an
acceleration noise level (2<i>π</i><i>f</i>)<sup>4</sup><i>E</i>(<i>f</i>) close to 0.023&thinsp;m<sup>2</sup>&thinsp;s<sup>−3</sup>.
Velocity estimates from GNSS receivers yield a mean direction and directional
spread. Using a low-power acquisition board allows autonomous deployments
over several months with data transmitted by satellite. The capability to
measure current-induced wave variations is illustrated with data acquired in
a macro-tidal coastal environment.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>Ardhuin et al.(2009)</label><mixed-citation>
Ardhuin, F., Chapron, B., and Collard, F.: Observation of swell dissipation
across oceans, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L06607, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GL037030" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GL037030</a>,
2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>Ardhuin et al.(2010)</label><mixed-citation>
Ardhuin, F., Rogers, E., Babanin, A., Filipot, J.-F., Magne, R., Roland, A.,
van der Westhuysen, A., Queffeulou, P., Lefevre, J.-M., Aouf, L., and
Collard, F.: Semi-empirical dissipation source functions for wind-wave
models: part I, definition, calibration and validation, J. Phys. Oceanogr.,
40, 1917–1941, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>Ardhuin et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Ardhuin, F., Roland, A., Dumas, F., Bennis, A.-C., Sentchev, A., Forget, P.,
Wolf, J., Girard, F., Osuna, P., and Benoit, M.: Numerical wave modelling in
conditions with strong currents: dissipation, refraction and relative wind,
J. Phys. Oceanogr., 42, 2101–2120, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-11-0220.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-11-0220.1</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>Ardhuin et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>
Ardhuin, F., Rascle, N., Chapron, B., Gula, J., Molemaker, J., Gille, S. T.,
Menemenlis, D., and Rocha, C.: Small scale currents have large effects on
wind wave heights, J. Geophys. Res., 122, 4500–4517,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JC012413" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JC012413</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>Banner et al.(2000)</label><mixed-citation>
Banner, M. L., Babanin, A. V., and Young, I. R.: Breaking Probability for
Dominant Waves on the Sea Surface, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 30, 3145–3160,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0485(2000)030&lt;3145:BPFDWO&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0485(2000)030&lt;3145:BPFDWO&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>Benetazzo et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Benetazzo, A., Barbariol, F., Bergamasco, F., Torsello, A., Carniel, S., and
Sclavo, M.: Stereo wave imaging from moving vessels: Practical use and
applications, Coast. Eng., 109, 114–127,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2015.12.008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2015.12.008</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>Benoit et al.(1997)</label><mixed-citation>
Benoit, M., Frigaard, P., and Schäffer, H. A.: Analysing
multidirectional wave spectra: A tentative classification of available
methods, in: IAHR-Seminar: Multidirectional Waves and their Interaction with
Structures, San Francisco, 10–15 August 1997, 131–158, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>Chawla and Kirby(2002)</label><mixed-citation>
Chawla, A. and Kirby, J. T.: Monochromatic and random wave breaking at
blocking points, J. Geophys. Res., 107, 3067, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JC001042" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JC001042</a>,
2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>COST Action 714 Working Group 3(2005)</label><mixed-citation>
COST Action 714 Working Group 3, W. G.: Measuring and analysing the
directional spectra of ocean waves, Office for Official Publications of the
European Communities, Luxembourg, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>Herbers et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Herbers, T. H. C., Jessen, P. F., Janssen, T. T., Colbert, D. B., and
MacMahan, J. H.: Observing ocean surface waves with GPS-tracked buoys,
J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 29, 944–959, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-11-00128.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-11-00128.1</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>Kudryavtsev(2005)</label><mixed-citation>
Kudryavtsev, V.: On radar imaging of current features: 1. Model and
comparison with observations, J. Geophysical Research, 110, C07016,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JC002505" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JC002505</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>Kuik et al.(1988a)</label><mixed-citation>
Kuik, A. J., van Vledder, G. P., and Holthuijsen, L. H.: A method for the
routine analysis of pitch-and-roll buoy wave data, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 18,
1020–1034, 1988a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>Kuik et al.(1988b)</label><mixed-citation>
Kuik, A. J., Vledder, G. P. V., and Holthuijsen, L. H.: A Method for the
Routine Analysis of Pitch-and-Roll Buoy Wave Data, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 18,
1020–1034, 1988b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>Lazure and Dumas(2008)</label><mixed-citation>
Lazure, P. and Dumas, F.: An external-internal mode coupling for a 3D
hydrodynamical model for applications at regional scale (MARS), Adv. Water
Resour., 31, 233–250, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2007.06.010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2007.06.010</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>Leckler et al.(2015)</label><mixed-citation>
Leckler, F., Ardhuin, F., Peureux, C., Benetazzo, A., Bergamasco, F., and
Dulov, V.: Analysis and interpretation of frequency-wavenumber spectra of
young wind waves, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 45, 2484–2496,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-14-0237.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-14-0237.1</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>Longuet-Higgins et al.(1963)</label><mixed-citation>
Longuet-Higgins, M. S., Cartwright, D., and Smith, N. D.: Observations of
the directional spectrum of sea waves using the motions of a floating buoy,
in: Ocean wave spectra, Prentice-Hall, Easton, Md., 1–4 May 1961, 111–136,
1963.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>Masson(1996)</label><mixed-citation>
Masson, D.: A case study of wave-current interaction in a strong tidal
current, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 26, 359–372, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>Pearman et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
Pearman, D. W., Herbers, T. H. C., Janssen, T. T., van Ettinger, H. D.,
McIntyre, S. A., and Jessen, P. F.: Drifter observations of the effects of
shoals and tidal-currents on wave evolution in San Francisco Bight, Cont.
Shelf Res., 91, 109–119, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>Phillips(1984)</label><mixed-citation>
Phillips, O. M.: On the response of short ocean wave components at a fixed
wavenumber to ocean current variations, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 14, 1425–1433,
1984.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>Pineau-Guillou(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Pineau-Guillou, L.: Validation des modèles hydrodynamiques 2D des
côtes de la Manche et de l'Atlantique, Tech. rep., Ifremer, Brest,
<a href="http://archimer.ifremer.fr/doc/00157/26800/" target="_blank">http://archimer.ifremer.fr/doc/00157/26800/</a> (last access: 12 November
2018), 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>Quilfen et al.(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Quilfen, Y., Yurovskaya, M., Chapron, B., and Ardhuin, F.: Storm waves
sharpening in the Agulhas current: satellite observations and modeling,
Remote Sens. Environ., 216, 561–571, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2018.07.020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2018.07.020</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>Rascle et al.(2014)</label><mixed-citation>
Rascle, N., Chapron, B., Ponte, A., Ardhuin, F., and Klein, P.: Surface
roughness imaging of currents shows divergence and strain in the wind
direction, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 44, 2153–2163,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-13-0278.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-13-0278.1</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>Rascle et al.(2017)</label><mixed-citation>
Rascle, N., Molemaker, J., Marié, L., Nouguier, F., Chapron, B., Lund,
B., and Mouche, A.: Intense deformation field at oceanic front inferred from
directional sea surface roughness observations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 48,
5599–5608, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL073473" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL073473</a>, 2017.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>Reverdin et al.(2013)</label><mixed-citation>
Reverdin, G., Morisset, S., Bourras, D., Martin, N., Lourenço, A.,
Boutin, J., Caudoux, C., Font, J., and Salvador, J.: Surpact A SMOS Surface
Wave Rider for Air–Sea Interaction, Oceanography, 26, 48–57,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2013.04" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2013.04</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>Stewart and Joy(1974)</label><mixed-citation>
Stewart, R. H. and Joy, J. W.: HF radio measurements of surface currents,
Deep Sea Research and Oceanographic Abstracts, 21, 1039–1049,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0011-7471(74)90066-7" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/0011-7471(74)90066-7</a>, 1974.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>Sutherland and Dumont(2018)</label><mixed-citation>
Sutherland, P. and Dumont, D.: Marginal ice zone thickness and extent due to
wave radiation stress, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 48, 1885–1901,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-17-0167.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-17-0167.1</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>Thomas(2015)</label><mixed-citation>
Thomas, P.: Developpement d'une bouee derivante pour mesures de vagues,
PhD thesis, ENSTA Bretagne, France, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>Thomson(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
Thomson, J.: Wave breaking dissipation observed with “swift” drifters,
J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 29, 1866–1882, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-12-00018.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-12-00018.1</a>,
2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>Thomson et al.(2016)</label><mixed-citation>
Thomson, J., Schwendeman, M. S., Zippel, S. F., Moghimi, S., Gemmrich, J.,
and Rogers, W. E.: Wave-Breaking turbulence in the ocean surface layer,
J. Phys. Oceanogr., 46, 1857–1870, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-15-0130.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JPO-D-15-0130.1</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>van der Westhuysen et al.(2012)</label><mixed-citation>
van der Westhuysen, A. J., van Dongeren, A. R., Groeneweg, J., van Vledder,
G. P., Peters, H., Gautier, C., and van Nieuwkoop, J. C. C.: Improvements in
spectral wave modeling in tidal inlet seas, J. Geophys. Res., 117, C00J28,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JC007837" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JC007837</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>Welch(1967)</label><mixed-citation>
Welch, P. D.: The use of fast Fourier transform for the estimation of power
spectra: a method based on time averaging over short, modified periodograms,
IEEE T. Audio Electroacoustics, 15, 70–73, 1967.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>Young(1995)</label><mixed-citation>
Young, I.: The determination of confidence limits associated with estimates
of the spectral peak frequency, Ocean Eng., 22, 669–686, 1995.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>Zippel and Thomson(2017)</label><mixed-citation>
Zippel, S. and Thomson, J.: Surface wave breaking over sheared currents:
Observations from the Mouth of the Columbia River, J. Geophys. Res., 122,
3311–3328, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JC012498" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JC012498</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
