[MITgcm-support] seaice setup for idealized ice leads experiment

[Martin Losch]

Mehmet,

sorrry for the late reply
> Now I have two questions since I don't have any experience in ice modelling.
> First, is it proper to assume Tice=-2?
Perfectly OK, implies a very high salinity of about 36.359. You can let the model compute the insitu freezing point from local salinity
> Second, if I run the simulation with lead, should I prescribe the LW radiation over the lead also?
> Because if I do it, that will reduce the forcing and less water will sink.
I think it's easiest to prescribe lwdown homogeneously. From a physical point of view it makes sense, because it is basically the radiation temerature of the low clouds (stefanBoltzmann*Tcloud^4), and there is no reason, why that should be very heterogeneous. You can compensate by making the air colder.
BTW you can prescribe constant exf-fields in the data.exf with, e.g., lwdownconst = yourValue, and avoid having to generate 2D fields. See exf_readparms.F for more details (and namelist variable names and defaults)

M.

> 
> Best,
> Mehmet
> 
> 
> On 09/17/2012 06:00 PM, mitgcm-support-request at mitgcm.org wrote:
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 11:57:51 +0200
>> From: Martin Losch<Martin.Losch at awi.de>
>> To:mitgcm-support at mitgcm.org
>> Subject: Re: [MITgcm-support] seaice setup for idealized ice leads
>> 	experiment
>> Message-ID:<239DE773-EAC5-4308-BFF7-B51663307E7C at awi.de>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII
>> 
>> Mehmet,
>> 
>> I think you need to specify some radiation fields, at least non-zero downward longwave radiation to balance the upward radiation by the ice (stefanBoltzmann*Tice**4). I think (without checking your set up very closely) you see ice formation because of this strong imbalance.
>> 
>> Martin
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MITgcm-support mailing list
> MITgcm-support at mitgcm.org
> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-support