[MITgcm-support] Spurious internal buoyancy minima in long runs

[Christopher L. Wolfe]

Hi Mehmet,

I think Jean-Michel solved it (see my response to him). To answer your question, I've used schemes 2, 7, 33, 80, 81. I hadn't tried 77 until today. However, it doesn't appear to be a problem with the advection schemes (of course I still have to test this), but with me missing (in my analysis) rare but extreme convection events. 

Christopher

On May 11, 2011, at 7:13 AM, Mehmet Ilicak wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I'm very interested in this discussion but a little confused so I will 
> try to summarize what I understood so far,
> and please feel free to correct me.
> 
> Chris saw in his simulation that the bottom water is denser than the 
> surface forcing values using 81 scheme.
> On the other hand, Jean-Michel performed the same test but with 77 and 
> what I understood from his figures that
> he didn't see the same problem.
> Is this correct?
> 
> My next question is this: if I remember in first email correctly, Chris 
> wrote that he used also 7th order scheme which is also called 7.
> By chance, can both Jean-Michel and Chris tell separately whether or not 
> scheme 7 is producing the same error as 81.
> 
> Thanks a lot,
> Mehmet
> 
> -- 
> MI
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MITgcm-support mailing list
> MITgcm-support at mitgcm.org
> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-support