[MITgcm-support] Query regarding BLING

[Matthew Mazloff]

Hi Kunal

Thanks for checking!

Now I suspect it is the circulation. You have salt gradients of like 25 psu over relatively short distances. Have you looked at U,V,W? 
I bet you have huge vertical overturning cells bringing up low pH waters. Can you check this?

Matt



> On Sep 27, 2023, at 3:07 PM, kunal madkaiker <kunal.madkaiker02 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Matt,
> 
> I tried commenting the lines you suggested in bling_carbon_chem.F as well as increasing PTRACERS_ref of DIC and ALK. Also define/undef USE_SIBLING isn't changing anything.
> The values of DIC/ALK at runoff points keep on diluting as the model evolves. However, pH is decreasing there instead of increasing (refer Fig1).
> 
> Besides DIC and ALK, the PTRACERS_ref values for other tracers (O2, PO4, NO3, SiO4, etc) is Zero. Still the conc. are increasing at the runoff points (Fig2).
> 
> Are the PTRACERS_ref values being overwritten somehow? Is there a way I can completely switch off tracers at runoff points?
> 
> Thanks,
> Kunal
> 
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 10:06 PM kunal madkaiker <kunal.madkaiker02 at gmail.com <mailto:kunal.madkaiker02 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> Thanks Matt, I'll try these fixes and let you know.
>> 
>> Hi Francesco, as of now I am prescribing a constant pCO2 value of 391.E-6 atm.
>> 
>> Kunal
>> 
>> On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 9:13 PM Dattilo, Francesco <fdattilo at ogs.it <mailto:fdattilo at ogs.it>> wrote:
>>> I'm not really expert, but is pCO2 value corrected?
>>> CO2 partial pressure could also affect the values of dic and alkalinity.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Il lun 25 set 2023, 17:14 kunal madkaiker <kunal.madkaiker02 at gmail.com <mailto:kunal.madkaiker02 at gmail.com>> ha scritto:
>>>> Thanks Matt,
>>>> 
>>>> I tried with #undef CARBONCHEM_SOLVESAPHE but the issue persists.
>>>> 
>>>> Just an observation, when I keep PTRACERS_ref=0 in data.dic, it doesn't impact the DIC and ALK at those runoff points (ref. using_dic.gif)
>>>> However, whether I keep PTRACERS_ref=0 or any other value, it impacts the conc. of those points (which keep on drifting as the run progresses, ref. using_bling.gif).
>>>> 
>>>> Kunal
>>>> 
>>>> On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 7:35 PM Matthew Mazloff <mmazloff at ucsd.edu <mailto:mmazloff at ucsd.edu>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Kunal
>>>>> 
>>>>> The default bling chemistry is the same as the DIC package. Is your run with the funny behavior using 
>>>>> #undef CARBONCHEM_SOLVESAPHE
>>>>> If so, can you check that you get the desired outcome with this undefined.
>>>>> 
>>>>> There may be a bug in the BLING SOLVESAPHE code.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Matt
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> > On Sep 25, 2023, at 6:58 AM, kunal madkaiker <kunal.madkaiker02 at gmail.com <mailto:kunal.madkaiker02 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>> > 
>>>>> > Hi all,
>>>>> > 
>>>>> > I have some issues resolving the carbon chemistry using the BLING package. My domain has river runoff included as a point source. When using the 'DIC' package, DIC and ALK conc. get diluted causing pH to increase at those points (which is correct).
>>>>> > 
>>>>> > However, when I use the same setup with the BLING package, the DIC and ALK conc. are getting diluted but the pH decreases rapidly (5-6 pH).
>>>>> > 
>>>>> > Secondly, has the SOLVESAPHE algorithm been fully implemented in BLING or not yet? I tried defining 'CARBONCHEM_SOLVESAPHE' in BLING_OPTIONS.h and 'selectpHsolver=1' in data.bling but then I got the segmentation error. Otherwise, it works fine.
>>>>> > 
>>>>> > Let me know what you think. I am attaching the required files and plots for your reference.
>>>>> > 
>>>>> > Thanks,
>>>>> > Kunal
>>>>> > <BLING_OPTIONS.h><DIC_OPTIONS.h><data.dic><data.bling><sterr_file><using_bling.gif><using_dic.gif>_______________________________________________
>>>>> > MITgcm-support mailing list
>>>>> > MITgcm-support at mitgcm.org <mailto:MITgcm-support at mitgcm.org>
>>>>> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://mailman.mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-support__;!!Mih3wA!DU6XPS0r_V-iBbpy1DoUX0ePkKRdvMrbR61lSsmKcyG9Zzh1h9aJz2ECIYMYIci2i2Dseq_pUBQUpbrrkaBMwp8yzH-6$ 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> MITgcm-support mailing list
>>>>> MITgcm-support at mitgcm.org <mailto:MITgcm-support at mitgcm.org>
>>>>> http://mailman.mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-support <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://mailman.mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-support__;!!Mih3wA!Ge3z1MrPIishnR-2tbYVoN3BTmRZjsgWLzLjcaU3BxzfqHvVuKwADypnZOFyZtJAVtCjvJv91_M0dLoj5oc1FSeXOIiQ$>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> MITgcm-support mailing list
>>>> MITgcm-support at mitgcm.org <mailto:MITgcm-support at mitgcm.org>
>>>> http://mailman.mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-support <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://mailman.mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-support__;!!Mih3wA!Ge3z1MrPIishnR-2tbYVoN3BTmRZjsgWLzLjcaU3BxzfqHvVuKwADypnZOFyZtJAVtCjvJv91_M0dLoj5oc1FSeXOIiQ$>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> MITgcm-support mailing list
>>> MITgcm-support at mitgcm.org <mailto:MITgcm-support at mitgcm.org>
>>> http://mailman.mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-support <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://mailman.mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-support__;!!Mih3wA!Ge3z1MrPIishnR-2tbYVoN3BTmRZjsgWLzLjcaU3BxzfqHvVuKwADypnZOFyZtJAVtCjvJv91_M0dLoj5oc1FSeXOIiQ$>
> <Fig2.gif><Fig1.gif><data.ptracers>_______________________________________________
> MITgcm-support mailing list
> MITgcm-support at mitgcm.org
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://mailman.mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-support__;!!Mih3wA!Ge3z1MrPIishnR-2tbYVoN3BTmRZjsgWLzLjcaU3BxzfqHvVuKwADypnZOFyZtJAVtCjvJv91_M0dLoj5oc1FSeXOIiQ$ 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.mitgcm.org/pipermail/mitgcm-support/attachments/20230927/5bdd8904/attachment.html>