FW: [MITgcm-support] obcs for lock-exchange problem (fwd)

[Chris Hill]

Hi Michael,

 Glad to hear things are running a bit better, hope changing dt fixes the
remaining issues. 

 The main open boundary options that people are using with MITgcm are 

  o Orlanski radiation based schemes. This is the only "free" open boundary
capability that is available.

  o embedded configurations where boundaries are forced with values from a
coarser resolution run, or from some functional definition.

 If you consider sponge layers to be "open boundaries" then they are there
too.   

 We are always interested in code contributions, especially in the OBCS area
where we are a bit short-handed. So if you have any OB pieces that you would
be interested in contributing, please let us know. 

Thanks,

Chris

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mitgcm-support-bounces at mitgcm.org 
> [mailto:mitgcm-support-bounces at mitgcm.org] On Behalf Of 
> Michael Schaferkotter (Contractor)
> Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 10:18 AM
> To: mitgcm-support at mitgcm.org
> Subject: Re: FW: [MITgcm-support] obcs for lock-exchange problem (fwd)
> 
> greetings samar and chris:
> 
> there were two things that were keeping the simulation from 
> running as expected:
> 
> 1) h(1)=0 (i changed that back)
> 2) cVelTimeScale
> 
> after reading the code, it was determined that the filtering 
> of the phase speed probably needed to be adjusted,so setting 
> cVelTimeScale closer to deltaT changed things such that the 
> plumes go out the boundaries now.
> 
> the simulation still blows when two of the rotors combined 
> later in the simulation. (this is probably time step) 
> otherwise things go as expected now.
> 
> thanx to all who considered my question(s).
> 
> i/m still not clear as to exactly which OBCS schemes are 
> available. any pointers?
> 
> michael
> _______________________________________________
> MITgcm-support mailing list
> MITgcm-support at mitgcm.org
> http://dev.mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-support
>