[MITgcm-devel] changing offline_exf_seaice

[Martin Losch]

Hi Jean-Michel,

sounds good to me.
I probably would have left out the "dyn_"  in (5) and (6), but I have no strong feelings about that

Is it Ok to wait for your check-ins before I design (6)? Maybe I can do it next week, while I am at MIT.

Martin

On Dec 7, 2012, at 2:41 AM, Jean-Michel Campin <jmc at ocean.mit.edu> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I would like to change the test experiment "offline_exf_seaice",
> to use a re-entrant channel with idealized costline (based on the
> set-up I put few weeks ago in http://mitgcm.org/~jmc/icedyn_v02.tar.gz)
> If things go well, would like to start the changes tomorrow (Friday)
> with only the forward set-up for now.
> 
> I propose the following forward tests:
> (1) input        : seaice-dynamics + thermodynamics and SST relaxation
>                   (to replace current offline_exf_seaice/input.seaice)
> (2) input.thsice : thermodynamics(pkg/thsice) and SST relaxation
> (3) input.thermo : thermodynamics(pkg/seaice) and SST relaxation
> (4) input.fixedSST : thermodynamics(pkg/seaice) and fixed SST
>                   (to replace current offline_exf_seaice/input.seaicetd)
> (5) input.dyn_lsr  : seaice-dynamics, using LSR
> (6) input.dyn_jfnk : seaice-dynamics, using JFNK
> (7) input.exf_bulk : no seaice, just bulk-formulae
>                   (to replace current offline_exf_seaice/input)
> 
> I think I have 2 & 5 ready to go. I need to put something for (1)
> (otherwise the other will not be tested), and as a temporary test,
> I was going to use thsice and LSR (as in 2 + 5) but this could be changed 
> later on.
> 
> Martin, when you have time, if you can take care of (6), it would be nice.
> One thing we could try is to test both pkg/seaice advection and 
> pkg/thsice advection in 5 & 6 (e.g., thsice in 5 ?).
> 
> Gael, I made several changes to the thermodynamic forcing you sent me,
> so that it fits thsice, it's also a stronger forcing (but once I add 
> the dynamics, it's still dominated by advection vs thermodynamic forcing),
> and I get immediately some places with surface melting and other places
> with melting and freezing from below.
> When you are back, we could talk about (3) and (4), and from there
> it should be easy to get (7) (+ update (1) ?).
> 
> Comments and suggestions are welcome (specially for dir name, since
> it's a pain to changed them with CVS).
> 
> Cheers,
> Jean-Michel
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MITgcm-devel mailing list
> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel