[MITgcm-devel] [MITgcm-cvs] MITgcm/pkg/exf CVS Commit

[Jean-Michel Campin]

Hi Dimitris,

Thanks for fixing this. Good idea to have it tested.
It does not depend on temp_EvPrRn being set or not, right ?
so it could go in 1 of the 2 tests you suggest (but I would 
prefer only 1 of these 2).

Just a detail: if you pick
> verification/global_ocean.cs32x15/input.seaice
before updating output.seaice.txt,  could you also remove these 2 lines:
> #- set wrong celsius2K to reproduce old results:
>  celsius2K=273.16,
from input.seaice/data ?

Cheers,
Jean-Michel

On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 12:44:43PM -0700, Dimitris Menemenlis wrote:
> Jean-Michel, thanks for pointing out the numerous mistakes and bugs
> in RUNOFTEMP addition and sorry for long delay getting back.
> I have fixed so that runoftemp is compatible with Energy Reference
> Level temp_EvPrRn and sign and comment are correct.
> 
> Is it OK to add a runoftempfile in one of the verification experiments,
> both as a usage example as well as for testing?
>  Specifically, could I add runoftempfile to
> verification/global_ocean.cs32x15/input.seaice
> or
> verification/global_ocean.cs32x15/input.icedyn
> ?
> 
> Dimitris Menemenlis
> 
> On Apr 29, 2013, at 10:17 AM, Jean-Michel Campin wrote:
> 
> > Hi Dimitris,
> > 
> > I have 2 comments related to thi new feature (ALLOW_RUNOFTEMP) you added:
> > 1) it would have been nice to make it compatible with what I addeed
> >  recently (when setting temp_EvPrRn to use an Energy Reference Level).
> >  From what I see in exf_mapfields.F, the treatment of the case 
> >> IF ( temp_EvPrRn .NE. UNSET_RL )
> >  is ignored when ALLOW_RUNOFTEMP is defined.
> >  I would recommand, if you leave exf_mapfields.F as it is now,
> >  to add a stop in exf_check.F:
> >> #ifdef ALLOW_RUNOFTEMP 
> >> IF ( temp_EvPrRn .NE. UNSET_RL ) STOP
> >> #endif
> > 
> >  And from my point of view, I don't really like the updated comment:
> > C     4) By default, RunOff comes at the temp of surface water (with same Cp);
> > C        ifdef ALLOW_RUNOFTEMP, RunOff temp can be specified in runoftempfile.
> > since I have the impression that it does not apply to the case
> > where temp_EvPrRn is defined (as opposed to comments 1,2,3 & 5)
> > 2) I am comfused with the sign of the term you added to Qnet.
> > Could you check again ?
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Jean-Michel
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MITgcm-devel mailing list
> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel