Changeset 11031 for NEMO/trunk/doc/latex/SI3/subfiles/chap_domain.tex
- Timestamp:
- 2019-05-21T21:41:02+02:00 (5 years ago)
- File:
-
- 1 edited
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
-
NEMO/trunk/doc/latex/SI3/subfiles/chap_domain.tex
r11015 r11031 75 75 \nlst{namitd} 76 76 77 Thickness space is discretized using $jl=1, ..., jpl$ thickness categories, with prescribed boundaries $hi\_max(jl-1),hi\_max(jl)$. Following \cite{ Lipscomb01}, ice thickness can freely evolve between these boundaries. The number of ice categories $jpl$ can be adjusted from the namelist ($nampar$).77 Thickness space is discretized using $jl=1, ..., jpl$ thickness categories, with prescribed boundaries $hi\_max(jl-1),hi\_max(jl)$. Following \cite{lipscomb_2001}, ice thickness can freely evolve between these boundaries. The number of ice categories $jpl$ can be adjusted from the namelist ($nampar$). 78 78 79 79 There are two means to specify the position of the thickness boundaries of ice categories. The first option (ln\_cat\_hfn) is to use a fitting function that places the category boundaries between 0 and 3$\overline h$, with $\overline h$ the expected mean ice thickness over the domain (namelist parameter rn\_himean), and with a greater resolution for thin ice (Fig. \ref{fig_dom_icecats}). More specifically, the upper limits for ice in category $jl=1, ..., jpl-1$ are: … … 100 100 The other option (ln\_cat\_usr) is to specify category boundaries by hand using rn\_catbnd. The first category must always be thickner than rn\_himin (0.1 m by default). 101 101 102 The choice of ice categories is important, because it constraints the ability of the model to resolve the ice thickness distribution. The latest study \citep{ Massonnetetal18b} recommends to use at least 5 categories, which should include one thick ice with lower bounds at $\sim$4 m and $\sim$2 m for the Arctic and Antarctic, respectively, for allowing the storage of deformed ice.102 The choice of ice categories is important, because it constraints the ability of the model to resolve the ice thickness distribution. The latest study \citep{massonnet_2018} recommends to use at least 5 categories, which should include one thick ice with lower bounds at $\sim$4 m and $\sim$2 m for the Arctic and Antarctic, respectively, for allowing the storage of deformed ice. 103 103 104 104 With a fixed number of cores, the cost of the model linearly increases with the number of ice categories. Using $jpl=1$ single ice category is also much cheaper than with 5 categories, but seriously deteriorates the ability of the model to grow and melt ice. Indeed, thin ice thicknes faster than thick ice, and shrinks more rapidly as well. When nn\_virtual\_itd=1 ($jpl$ = 1 only), two parameterizations are activated to compensate for these shortcomings. Heat conduction and areal decay of melting ice are adjusted to closely approach the 5 categories case.
Note: See TracChangeset
for help on using the changeset viewer.