[MITgcm-devel] KPP diagnostics

[Dimitris Menemenlis]

David, I agree.
KPPmld is redundant and it can be removed.
KPPhbl needs to stay.
D.

Dimitris Menemenlis <menemenlis at jpl.nasa.gov>
Jet Propulsion Lab, California Institute of Technology
MS 300-323, 4800 Oak Grove Dr, Pasadena CA 91109-8099, USA
tel: 818-354-1656;  cell: 818-625-6498;  fax: 818-393-6720

On Oct 29, 2008, at 3:23 PM, David Ferreira wrote:

> Hi all,
> Quick question: is there someone against removing the
> mixed-layer depth diagnostics in KPP (KPPmld) ?
>
> It redundant since there is already a mixed-layer depth diagnostics
> in calc_oce_mxlayer.F (MXLDEPTH). Just in case, you care
> why keeping MXLDEPTH:
> - it is more flexible because is available even with KPP turned off
> - it's more flexible because the mixed-layer criteria is not hard- 
> coded
> but a runtime parameter.
> - it's smarter (avoid multiple recomputations of density)
> - by default, it's doing the same as KPPmld
>
> Quid ?
> david