[MITgcm-devel] changing offline_exf_seaice

[Jean-Michel Campin]

Hi Martin,

On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 08:31:29AM +0100, Martin Losch wrote:
> 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

Will think about the "dyn_" prefix.

> 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.

Yes, it's perfectly fine like this.

Cheers,
Jean-Michel

> 
> 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
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MITgcm-devel mailing list
> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel