[MITgcm-devel] free drift ice model

[Jinlun Zhang]

The treatment is actually not very important. It is supposed to deal 
with open water areas, but I havn't heard any problems in the areas.
Jinlun

Martin.Losch at awi.de wrote:

>When I tried to understand the dynamics and lsr code, I could not find any implicit coriolis terms. Therefore I am almost 
>positive that the implicit coriolis term (as described in Zhang+Hibler98) is not implement in pkg/seaice.
>
>M
>
>Martin Losch
>Alfred Wegener Institute 
>Postfach 120161, 27515 Bremerhaven, Germany; 
>Tel./Fax: ++49(0471)4831-1872/1797
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Jinlun Zhang <zhang at apl.washington.edu>
>Date: Thursday, November 30, 2006 7:16 pm
>Subject: Re: [MITgcm-devel] free drift ice model
>
>  
>
>>There is no contraint on LSR time step. But generally it is better 
>>to be 
>>the same as the ocean time step. If the ocean is not resolving 
>>inertial 
>>oscillations, ice probably does not have too.
>>Jinlun
>>
>>Dimitris Menemenlis wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>I thought I have put there, No?
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>I don't know.  I seem to remember that we already had discussion 
>>>      
>>>
>>about 
>>    
>>
>>>maximum time step for LSR solver and that we had concluded that 
>>>      
>>>
>>it 
>>    
>>
>>>should not be longer than one hour in order not to alias inertial 
>>>oscillations.  Maybe that was inertial oscillations from ocean 
>>>forcing, where they are explicitly resolved, rather than a 
>>>      
>>>
>>constraint 
>>    
>>
>>>from LSR solver?
>>>
>>>D.
>>>      
>>>