[MITgcm-devel] changes in seaice with OBCS

[Martin Losch]

Hi Jean-Michel,

I actually use some of this in an awkward way. What I want is that all ice that reaches the boundary, disappears. Not sure if it really works, but the ice does not pile up against the boundary, so I am happy. Here an excerpt from my data.obcs. aaomip_heff.obce contains only zeros.
> # all zeros
>  OBEhFile='../input/aaomip_heff.obce'
>  OBWhFile='../input/aaomip_heff.obce'
>  OBEaFile='../input/aaomip_heff.obce'
>  OBWaFile='../input/aaomip_heff.obce'
>  OBEsnFile='../input/aaomip_heff.obce'
>  OBWsnFile='../input/aaomip_heff.obce'
> # this is very counterintuitive: we need to specify
> # an input field for the code to do anything, even
> # though with the current CPP Flag settings
> # (OBCS_SEAICE_COMPUTE_UVICE defined), these values
> # have no effect whatsoever
>  OBWuiceFile='../input/aaomip_heff.obce'
>  OBWviceFile='../input/aaomip_heff.obce'
>  OBEuiceFile='../input/aaomip_heff.obce'
>  OBEviceFile='../input/aaomip_heff.obce'

I agree with you that this is not very practice, and something more straightforward would be nice (like defining or computing the values in obcs_calc.F).

Martin

On Nov 10, 2010, at 3:30 PM, Jean-Michel Campin wrote:

> Hi Dimitris,
> 
> Thanks for doing this. I made the checkpoint62n tag yesterday.
> 
> I have an other question related to obcs_apply_seaice.F:
> I would like to remove all the conditions on non-empty 
> file-name when applying OBC to seaice fieds:
>>          IF ( SEAICEadvHeff .AND. OBNhfile .NE. ' ' )
>>    &          HEFF(I,J,bi,bj)  = OBNh (I,bi,bj)
>>          IF ( SEAICEadvArea .AND. OBNafile .NE. ' ' )
>>    &          AREA(I,J,bi,bj)  = OBNa (I,bi,bj)
> In fact, I don't know how the seaice model will deal with OB 
> when only part of the fields are specified in OB regions.
> I expect some funny things when the ice-field is advected.
> And in the case where the ice field is not advected, I really
> don't know. I would be tempted to remove also the test
> "IF ( SEAICEadvHeff )", and to always apply what has been 
> set in obcs_calc, to make seaice-obcs like ptracer,T,S,
> and momentum (all the other obcs_apply S/R).
> 
> But may be a more basic question, is this feature (not to 
> apply OBC to some seaice-fields when it's done for other
> fields) used and for what purpose ?
> If this is really a feature we want to maintain, I am afraid
> this might be broken after my recent changes.
> 
> Cheers,
> Jean-Michel
> 
> On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 01:37:52PM -0800, Menemenlis, Dimitris (3248) wrote:
>> JM, I will revert back to 1.50 plus your 1.52 changes.
>> will check it in in a few minutes, after I test make sure I didn't
>> break seaice_obcs
>> 
>> D.
>> 
>> 
>> On Nov 8, 2010, at 1:07 PM, Jean-Michel Campin wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Dimitris,
>>> 
>>> I made some changes in OBCS for T & S, also ptracers,
>>> and did similar changes in pkg/seaice.
>>> If you see something strange, let me know.
>>> 
>>> I was going to make a checkpoint sometime this week
>>> (may be tomorrow), and was wondering about your changes in
>>> seaice mask with OBCS (in seaice_init_varia): Do prefer to change 
>>> it back ? Anyway, it would be better to fix it
>>> before the checkpoint (62n).
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Jean-Michel
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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