[MITgcm-devel] seaice_growth_if.F

[Jean-Michel Campin]

Hi Ian,

Dimitris is (almost) right: with useRealFreshWaterFlux=.FALSE., and 
convertFW2Salt=-1, it will not matter. 
However, we don't have to care about how the ocean is dealing with 
fresh-water: just need to put the salt (taken from the ocean when 
forming salty ice, release to the ocean when melting salty ice) into 
saltFlux and the fresh-water into EmPmR, and the ocean forcing code 
will do what it's supposed to do.

Did not have time to look at your changes yet.

Thanks,
Jean-Michel

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 08:07:59PM -0700, Menemenlis, Dimitris (3248) wrote:
> Ian, great that you are tooling away on sea ice code.
> 
> Regarding your question below, I think you need to separate
> freshwater and salt flux when
> useRealFreshWaterFlux=.TRUE.,
> otherwise you will not get the correct ocean volume change.
> I agree that if useRealFreshWaterFlux=.FALSE.,
> then it is OK to lump everything in EmPmR.
> 
> D.
> 
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 7:56 PM, Ian G. Fenty wrote:
> 
> > There is no contribution to salt flux because I am using EmPmR alone to 
> > make seawater salinity adjustments.  Is using EmPmR alone is no longer 
> > considered good form.  If I understand it correctly, the default current 
> > seaice_growth.F gives the volume of ice grown or melted to EmPmR (which 
> > I read as saying that the ice is fresh)  and separately determines the 
> > ice's salt and gives that to saltFlux so that seawater salinity is 
> > adjusted properly.  Is there some reason to prefer that method?
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MITgcm-devel mailing list
> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel