[MITgcm-devel] ICE workshop - recap and homework!

[Menemenlis, Dimitris (3248)]

Gael, thank you for instructions.  Ian is working on this.
SEAICE_frazilForcing makes sense to me but I leave it
up to you and Ian to pick names and work out details.

Cheers

Dimitris Menemenlis

On Mar 7, 2012, at 9:17 AM, Gael Forget wrote:

> Hi Dimitris,
> 
> what we discussed as a pkg/frazil hook to seaice_growth.F is basically a one liner in CPP brackets.
> Assuming this is what you have in the pipe, now works just fine. Should not conflict. Aside from timing, 
> there are a few points I want to stress before you proceed. Just to save us/me some cleaning up later...
> 
> One, I expect to see a new pkg/seaice run time on/off switch for the added term (aside from the obviously 
> needed CPP switch, and useFrazil switch) that is reported to stdout by seaice_summary.F. And we should 
> agree on the switch name off the bat. Would SEAICE_frazilForcing make sense? What do you propose? 
> 
> Two, whatever logic check you think is needed should be added to seaice_check.F. 
> 
> Three, as far as I know, there is no need to touch the SEAICE_frazilFrac default or what it does, 
> regardless of whether SEAICE_frazilForcing is active or not. The same goes for solve4temp.
> 
> Four, including the needed/anticipated CADJ store with the original checkin would be best.
> 
> Cheers,
> Gael
> 
> On Mar 7, 2012, at 11:30 AM, Menemenlis, Dimitris (3248) wrote:
> 
>> Gael et al., is this a good time for Ian to check-in
>> his treatment of FrazilForcingT in seaice_growth.F ?