[MITgcm-devel] seaice code beyond checkoint61j blows for ECCO-GODAE

[Dimitris Menemenlis]

Martin, are there any negative consequences to implementing the  
etaMeanZ=0 boundary fix?  At the very least it would be good to make  
sure that this also fixes Patrick's ECCO-GODAE reported problem.

P A T R I C K  ---  WE NEED YOU TO RESPOND TO THIS PLEASE ! ! !

I have a configuration (the 18-km Arctic domain with saltplume package  
turned on) that fails within 20 time steps or so.  The crash occurs  
suddenly due to sea ice velocity in a near-boundary point (it's  
touching land by a corner)  in an area where there is no sea ice.  Do  
you want me to package and send you this configuration?  Or I can  
generate and send pictures of differences with and without the  
etaMeanZ=0 fix?

Let me know.  D.

On May 20, 2009, at 4:35 AM, Martin Losch wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I am not sure what to do about the problems with the seaice code.
> Currently there is potentially (most probably) broken code in the
> repository. I have a suspicion what it is (free-slip boundary
> conditions), but I cannot reproduce the problems that have been
> reported (especially not the ECCO-GODAE). Also I cannot narrow down
> the problem further, if I don't get more details.
>
> It seems that Patrick is happy with the running system with seaice
> reverted to ckpt61j (which I can understand), but I am very
> uncomfortable with the current code and would like to fix it.
>
> Should I go ahead and implement/check-in the fix that has worked for
> Dimitris (setting etaMeanZ=0 on boundaries in case of free-slip)? Or
> should I wait until more diagnostics are reported?
>
> Martin
>
> On May 14, 2009, at 8:28 AM, Martin Losch wrote:
>
>> Hi Patrick,
>>
>> do you have any further diagnosis for the seaice problem?
>> SEAICE_no_slip = true or false (default is false)?
>>
>> I have a fix for the free slip case, that seems to work for
>> Dimitris, and if it works for you I can check it in (I probably
>> should), but first I'd like to hear from you about this.
>>
>> Martin
>>
>> On May 7, 2009, at 8:26 PM, Dimitris Menemenlis wrote:
>>
>>> That's correct.  In all the tests that we have done here, dozens of
>>> years of integration on the Arctic, Weddell, CS510, and CS510-
>>> adjoint domains, we have not experienced a single failure when:
>>>
>>> i) SEAICE_no_slip=.true.
>>>
>>> ii) SEAICE_no_slip=.false. and the etaMeanZ mask is applied.
>>>
>>> Patrick, what is your experience with the ECCO-GODAE set up?
>>>
>>> D.
>>>
>>> On May 6, 2009, at 11:16 PM, Martin Losch wrote:
>>>
>>>> I would really like to get to the bottom of the blow-ups. As far
>>>> as I
>>>> can see they are all with free-slip boundary conditons
>>>> (SEAICE_no_slip=.false.). Correct? (Patrick?)
>>>> If that's the case, then I would change the implementation of the
>>>> free
>>>> slip BC (include the masking of etaMeanZ).
>>>
>>> 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
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> MITgcm-devel mailing list
> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel

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