[MITgcm-devel] another diagnostics puzzle

[Jean-Michel Campin]

Hi Martin,

What I suspect is that the seaice state-variable diagnostics 
are filled from the wrong place, meaning from do_the_model_io.F ;
If I compare with what is done in pkg/thsice,
do_the_model_io.F calls thsice_output (snap-shot but no diagnostics)
but thsice_diagnostics_fill (state-variable) is called 
from do_statevars_diags.

it would be better to do it in the same (right) way; 
might find a way to go arround this by adding some if/conditions
in seaice_do_diags but I don't have time right now
to try different possible hack.

I will do a short test to confirm that this is the cause
of this problem (since it's still not completely clear to me).

Jean-Michel

On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 05:41:09PM +0200, Martin Losch wrote:
> Hi Andrea and  others,
> 
> the if statement is only there for SIsigI,SIsigII,SIpress,SIzeta,SIeta.
> All others don't have one. I have put an if-statement before the  
> SIhsnow call, but that does not change anything.
> 
> the diagnostics_status-files don't tell me much, except that the  
> three fields in question are the first three fields in my list of  
> diagnostics, but the order doesn't matter (I tried with a different  
> order and the result is the same).
> 
> Oh, and an important detail was missing: I use a negative frequency  
> (that is -1 in my test case by before I was trying much longer  
> intervals, eg. frequency = -21600) to get snap shots. for averaging,  
> the output is OK.
> 
> Martin
> PS I'll attach the two diagnostics_status files, maybe you can see  
> something there:



> 
> On 6 Jun 2007, at 17:13, Andrea Molod wrote:
> 
> >hi martin,
> >
> >On Wed, 6 Jun 2007, Martin Losch wrote:
> >
> >>I am seeing a strange behavior of the diagnostics package for seaice:
> >>When I use averaging (only) the first field that is written (both  
> >>by mnc and mdsio) is wrong (by a factor of 2, I only noticed  
> >>because my AREA was suddenly 2 instead of 1=max(AREA)). This is  
> >>true for Siarea,SIheff,SIhsnow, but not for SIuice,SIvice,SIpress,  
> >>etc. I don't recognize a pattern in this, do you?
> >
> >the ones that are ok have an if-loop around the 'fill' sequence  
> >(call diagnostics_fill....) checking whether 'diagnostics_is_on',  
> >the ones that
> >are not ok don't. i don't know about your configuration, etc... but  
> >there
> >are a few reasons why the diagnostics gets turned 'off' temporarily  
> >during
> >the run. i bet if you put that call (if diagnostics_is_on(...)  )  
> >in there
> >the behavior will be ok.
> >
> >my 2 cents.
> >
> >andrea
> >_______________________________________________
> >MITgcm-devel mailing list
> >MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> >http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel
> 

> _______________________________________________
> MITgcm-devel mailing list
> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel