4/25/23, 6:48 PM Grades - CIVL 852 Environmental Fluid Dynamics W23 - onQ

CIVL 852 Environmental Fluid Dynamics W23 SM

Grades Print

Grade Item Points Grade Comments and Assessments

Assignment 1 9 / 10 90 % Overall Feedback

Here are my estimates. Neither of us is wrong, just different. u’ ~ 2

mm/s (ADV), T’ ~ 0.5C (from instruments); L ~ 10 cm; u’ ~ 0.5 mm/s
(paper dots); T = 7.85 s.

Yes, poor signal to noise ratio for the ADV.

Your Ro is reasonable. I would have liked to have seen some discussion

on Ro for oceanic flows, as our experiment is the oceanic context, not
Lake Ontario. E.g., David E. Dietrich (1993) On modelling geophysical
flows having low rossby numbers, Atmosphere-Ocean, 31:1, 57-71,
DOI: 10.1080/07055900.1993.9649462

Your 165 W is correct, but you give a different value in the abstract?

It's not 100% clear how you got 186W. The calculation should be:
(density)(heat capacity)(u’)(T’)(depth)(perimeter at instrument location)

Assignment 2 9 / 10 90 % Overall Feedback

Good description of Reynolds averaging limitations.

I don't see any differences in the panels in some of your averaging

figures. You mention averaging masks detail - isn't that the point for a
Reynolds decomposition? What level of averaging would be suitable to
separate the mean flow?

I really like table 3.

Eq 12 from Doron et al is the most accurate, because it has the most

terms. This doesn't really come out in your discussion of the results.

Should plot log_10 of dissipation to bring out detail.

Paper presentation 1 10 / 10 100 % Overall Feedback

Batchelor fitting was applied to SCAMP microstructure, not the ADV,
which was just IDM. Great job Sarwesh, nothing to really criticize!

View Graded Rubric

https://onq.queensu.ca/d2l/lms/grades/my_grades/main.d2l?ou=766371 1/2
4/25/23, 6:48 PM Grades - CIVL 852 Environmental Fluid Dynamics W23 - onQ

Assignment 3 10 / 10 100 % Overall Feedback

Good discussion on changing the NFFT.

Inertial subranges look good in fig 4, but fig 6d doesn't look great.
Maybe use different NFFT in each direction?

My vertical dissipation was 1.06E-6, which is close to your values.

Assignment 4 10 / 10 100 % Overall Feedback

Nice report. Very detailed. Our numbers, including N are very close.
Good discussion, could have had more content on how the Fringer and
Street numbers varied temporally, compared to our bulk values.

Paper presentation 2 10 / 10 100 %

We are only doing one
paper this term, so I will
your grade from the first
presentation to here,
rather than change the
course marking scheme.

Exam 35 / 40 87.5 % Overall Feedback

Dissipation should be on log scale

Re too low to get 2 decades of wavenumber to fit IDM

https://onq.queensu.ca/d2l/lms/grades/my_grades/main.d2l?ou=766371 2/2