[MITgcm-support] Diagnostic "Um_Advec"

[Jean-Michel Campin]

Hi David,

I think Um_Advec/ Vm_Advec, always include the Coriolis term (even if using fluxform).
The first level decomposition should be:
 Total-U-tendency = Um_Advec + Um_Diss + Um_ImplD + Um_dPhiX + Um_Ext + AB_gU

And on second level, can try to split Um_Advec. This depend on the use of 
flux-form or vector-inv. For the later, should be the sum of Coriolis, Bernouilli 
term (no diagnostics), Um_AdvZ3 and Um_AdvRe (+ vertical/NH metric terms).
but I did not checked so I might have missed one.

Cheers,
Jean-Michel

On Thu, Apr 24, 2025 at 04:41:01PM +0000, David Ferreira wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I?m trying to use the diagnostic Um_Advec/ Vm_Advec, and they don?t seem to give what I was expecting.
> (Um_dPhiX/Y, Um_Cori/ Vm_Cori, Um_hDis2/ Vm_hDis2 seem fine).
> 
> A quick look at mom_vecinv.F where Um_Advec is filled suggests this is not going to work for all options (I think that with NHmetric, Um_Advec is filled with the Coriolis term). In fact, this diagnostic may only make sense with the mom flux form.
> So, I wonder if someone has any quick insight in this before I start banging my head against this.
> 
> Cheers,
> David
> 
> 
> 
> 

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