Ignore:
Timestamp:
2019-10-14T14:53:52+02:00 (13 months ago)
Author:
nicolasmartin
Message:

Macros renaming

File:
1 edited

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
  • NEMO/trunk/doc/latex/NEMO/subfiles/chap_LDF.tex

    r11690 r11693  
    6868\label{sec:LDF_slp} 
    6969 
    70 \gmcomment{ 
     70\cmtgm{ 
    7171  we should emphasize here that the implementation is a rather old one. 
    7272  Better work can be achieved by using \citet{griffies.gnanadesikan.ea_JPO98, griffies_bk04} iso-neutral scheme. 
     
    8484$r_{1f}$, $r_{1vw}$, $r_{2t}$, $r_{2vw}$ for $v$. 
    8585 
    86 %gm% add here afigure of the slope in i-direction 
     86\cmtgm{Add here afigure of the slope in i-direction} 
    8787 
    8888%% ================================================================================================= 
     
    9494the diffusive fluxes in the three directions are set to zero and $T$ is assumed to be horizontally uniform, 
    9595\ie\ a linear function of $z_T$, the depth of a $T$-point. 
    96 %gm { Steven : My version is obviously wrong since I'm left with an arbitrary constant which is the local vertical temperature gradient} 
     96\cmtgm{Steven : My version is obviously wrong since 
     97  I'm left with an arbitrary constant which is the local vertical temperature gradient} 
    9798 
    9899\begin{equation} 
     
    112113\end{equation} 
    113114 
    114 %gm%  caution I'm not sure the simplification was a good idea! 
     115\cmtgm{Caution I'm not sure the simplification was a good idea!} 
    115116 
    116117These slopes are computed once in \rou{ldf\_slp\_init} when \np[=.true.]{ln_sco}{ln\_sco}, 
     
    144145\end{equation} 
    145146 
    146 %gm% rewrite this as the explanation is not very clear !!! 
     147\cmtgm{rewrite this as the explanation is not very clear !!!} 
    147148%In practice, \autoref{eq:LDF_slp_iso} is of little help in evaluating the neutral surface slopes. Indeed, for an unsimplified equation of state, the density has a strong dependancy on pressure (here approximated as the depth), therefore applying \autoref{eq:LDF_slp_iso} using the $in situ$ density, $\rho$, computed at T-points leads to a flattening of slopes as the depth increases. This is due to the strong increase of the $in situ$ density with depth. 
    148149 
     
    173174  will include a pressure dependent part, leading to the wrong evaluation of the neutral slopes. 
    174175 
    175 %gm% 
    176176  Note: The solution for $s$-coordinate passes trough the use of different (and better) expression for 
    177177  the constraint on iso-neutral fluxes. 
     
    182182    \alpha \ \textbf{F}(T) = \beta \ \textbf{F}(S) 
    183183  \] 
    184   % gm{  where vector F is ....} 
     184  \cmtgm{where vector F is ....} 
    185185 
    186186This constraint leads to the following definition for the slopes: 
     
    229229This allows an iso-neutral diffusion scheme without additional background horizontal mixing. 
    230230This technique can be viewed as a diffusion operator that acts along large-scale 
    231 (2~$\Delta$x) \gmcomment{2deltax doesnt seem very large scale} iso-neutral surfaces. 
     231(2~$\Delta$x) \cmtgm{2deltax doesnt seem very large scale} iso-neutral surfaces. 
    232232The diapycnal diffusion required for numerical stability is thus minimized and its net effect on the flow is quite small when compared to the effect of an horizontal background mixing. 
    233233 
     
    478478 
    479479%%gm  from Triad appendix  : to be incorporated.... 
    480 \gmcomment{ 
     480\cmtgm{ 
    481481  Values of iso-neutral diffusivity and GM coefficient are set as described in \autoref{sec:LDF_coef}. 
    482482  If none of the keys \key{traldf\_cNd}, N=1,2,3 is set (the default), spatially constant iso-neutral $A_l$ and 
     
    544544\colorbox{yellow}{TBC} 
    545545 
    546 \onlyinsubfile{\input{../../global/epilogue}} 
     546\subinc{\input{../../global/epilogue}} 
    547547 
    548548\end{document} 
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.