[MITgcm-support] (no subject)

[Alistair Adcroft]

Davide,

If you are convinced the presence of topography is leading to the numerical
instability then the CFL number in the output line %MON advcfl_W_hf_max
should be growing the fastest (faster than the others). In this case try
combining a smaller time-step with a larger value of hFacMin .

Here's two tests that should reveal something:

 1.  hFacMin=1.,  should run if the box ran
 2.  hFacMin=0.2, hFacMinDr=<same value as DELZ(1)>

If you compare the output file "Depth" in these two runs you'll see that it
is changing the representation of topography from "full step" to mostly
"partial step".

A.

-----Original Message-----
From: mitgcm-support-bounces at mitgcm.org
[mailto:mitgcm-support-bounces at mitgcm.org] On Behalf Of
prosperi at wicc.weizmann.ac.il
Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 8:28 AM
To: mitgcm-support at mitgcm.org
Subject: [MITgcm-support] (no subject)


Hi everybody!
I am trying to run my own experiment with real forcing and bathymetry. But I
get a stop due to extreme value of the solutions after few time 
steps for every value of deltaT or abEps. I checked the stability criteria 
and the parameter values satisfy them. The experiment run with a box 
instead of the topography. Of course for each one of the external field 
that I am trying to put I have the same prooblem.
The bathymetry is normally acquired and the file Depth is slightly less 
smooth than the input bathymetry. 
Thanking you for any advice.. 
All the best
Davide 

_______________________________________________
MITgcm-support mailing list
MITgcm-support at mitgcm.org
http://dev.mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-support