[MITgcm-devel] heff_max...more sea ice issues

[Martin Losch]

Matt,
Dimitris, is right. I completely overlooked that (which should make  
you feel very uneasy about the seaice model, as I have been turning  
it upside without knowing what it really can do (o:).

Dimitris: Does this also make sense for the EVP solver? We may want  
to include a flag that allows this only if the LSR solver is used.  
What do you think?

Martin
On 22 Dec 2006, at 16:13, Dimitris Menemenlis wrote:

>> 2. I don't see why changing the time step should save you any time  
>> anyway:
>> The seaice model (including the lsr or evp solver) is called at  
>> every time
>> step and changing the time step can only affect the stability (if  
>> you do an
>> asynchonous time stepping scheme). We have not (yet) implemented a  
>> scheme
>> that calls the seaice model or parts of it only every so often  
>> (depending on
>> the time step). This is commonly done in other models and seems to  
>> be good
>> way of reducing the computational cost (if the ice model is slow,  
>> why is the
>> ice model slow? It's a 2D model? I don't get it!).
>
> Martin, unless I have screwed up in implementation, when using LSR  
> solver, SEAICE_deltaTdyn allows you "not" to call LSR at every time  
> step.  For example one could have deltaTmom=900 and  
> SEAICE_deltaTdyn=3600, which would call LSR solver only once every  
> 3 model time steps.
> _______________________________________________
> MITgcm-devel mailing list
> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel