New URL for NEMO forge!   http://forge.nemo-ocean.eu

Since March 2022 along with NEMO 4.2 release, the code development moved to a self-hosted GitLab.
This present forge is now archived and remained online for history.
Changeset 12063 for NEMO/branches/2019/dev_ASINTER-01-05_merged/doc/latex/NEMO/subfiles/chap_time_domain.tex – NEMO

Ignore:
Timestamp:
2019-12-05T11:46:38+01:00 (4 years ago)
Author:
gsamson
Message:

dev_ASINTER-01-05_merged: update branch with dev_r11085_ASINTER-05_Brodeau_Advanced_Bulk@r12061 and trunk@r12055 + bugfix for agrif compatibility in sbcblk: sette tests with ref configs ok except ABL restartability (under investigation) (tickets #2159 and #2131)

Location:
NEMO/branches/2019/dev_ASINTER-01-05_merged/doc
Files:
5 edited

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
  • NEMO/branches/2019/dev_ASINTER-01-05_merged/doc

    • Property svn:externals set to
      ^/utils/badges badges
      ^/utils/logos logos
  • NEMO/branches/2019/dev_ASINTER-01-05_merged/doc/latex

    • Property svn:ignore deleted
  • NEMO/branches/2019/dev_ASINTER-01-05_merged/doc/latex/NEMO

    • Property svn:externals set to
      ^/utils/figures/NEMO figures
  • NEMO/branches/2019/dev_ASINTER-01-05_merged/doc/latex/NEMO/subfiles

    • Property svn:ignore
      •  

        old new  
        1 *.aux 
        2 *.bbl 
        3 *.blg 
        4 *.dvi 
        5 *.fdb* 
        6 *.fls 
        7 *.idx 
         1*.ind 
        82*.ilg 
        9 *.ind 
        10 *.log 
        11 *.maf 
        12 *.mtc* 
        13 *.out 
        14 *.pdf 
        15 *.toc 
        16 _minted-* 
  • NEMO/branches/2019/dev_ASINTER-01-05_merged/doc/latex/NEMO/subfiles/chap_time_domain.tex

    r11263 r12063  
    33\begin{document} 
    44 
    5 % ================================================================ 
    6 % Chapter 2 ——— Time Domain (step.F90) 
    7 % ================================================================ 
    8 \chapter{Time Domain (STP)} 
    9 \label{chap:STP} 
    10 \minitoc 
     5\chapter{Time Domain} 
     6\label{chap:TD} 
     7 
     8\thispagestyle{plain} 
     9 
     10\chaptertoc 
     11 
     12\paragraph{Changes record} ~\\ 
     13 
     14{\footnotesize 
     15  \begin{tabularx}{0.5\textwidth}{l||X|X} 
     16    Release          & Author(s)                                       & 
     17    Modifications                                                      \\ 
     18    \hline 
     19    {\em        4.0} & {\em J\'{e}r\^{o}me Chanut \newline Tim Graham} & 
     20    {\em Review \newline Update                                      } \\ 
     21    {\em        3.6} & {\em Christian \'{E}th\'{e}                   } & 
     22    {\em Update                                                      } \\ 
     23    {\em $\leq$ 3.4} & {\em Gurvan Madec                             } & 
     24    {\em First version                                               } \\ 
     25  \end{tabularx} 
     26} 
     27 
     28\clearpage 
    1129 
    1230% Missing things: 
    13 %  - daymod: definition of the time domain (nit000, nitend and the calendar) 
    14  
    15 \gmcomment{STEVEN :maybe a picture of the directory structure in the introduction which could be referred to here, 
    16   would help  ==> to be added} 
    17 %%%% 
    18  
    19 \newpage 
    20  
    21 Having defined the continuous equations in \autoref{chap:PE}, we need now to choose a time discretization, 
     31% - daymod: definition of the time domain (nit000, nitend and the calendar) 
     32 
     33\cmtgm{STEVEN :maybe a picture of the directory structure in the introduction which 
     34could be referred to here, would help  ==> to be added} 
     35 
     36Having defined the continuous equations in \autoref{chap:MB}, 
     37we need now to choose a time discretization, 
    2238a key feature of an ocean model as it exerts a strong influence on the structure of the computer code 
    23 (\ie on its flowchart). 
    24 In the present chapter, we provide a general description of the \NEMO  time stepping strategy and 
     39(\ie\ on its flowchart). 
     40In the present chapter, we provide a general description of the \NEMO\ time stepping strategy and 
    2541the consequences for the order in which the equations are solved. 
    2642 
    27 % ================================================================ 
    28 % Time Discretisation 
    29 % ================================================================ 
     43%% ================================================================================================= 
    3044\section{Time stepping environment} 
    31 \label{sec:STP_environment} 
    32  
    33 The time stepping used in \NEMO is a three level scheme that can be represented as follows: 
     45\label{sec:TD_environment} 
     46 
     47The time stepping used in \NEMO\ is a three level scheme that can be represented as follows: 
    3448\begin{equation} 
    35   \label{eq:STP} 
     49  \label{eq:TD} 
    3650  x^{t + \rdt} = x^{t - \rdt} + 2 \, \rdt \ \text{RHS}_x^{t - \rdt, \, t, \, t + \rdt} 
    37 \end{equation}  
     51\end{equation} 
    3852where $x$ stands for $u$, $v$, $T$ or $S$; 
    39 RHS is the Right-Hand-Side of the corresponding time evolution equation; 
     53RHS is the \textbf{R}ight-\textbf{H}and-\textbf{S}ide of the corresponding time evolution equation; 
    4054$\rdt$ is the time step; 
    4155and the superscripts indicate the time at which a quantity is evaluated. 
    42 Each term of the RHS is evaluated at a specific time stepping depending on the physics with which it is associated. 
     56Each term of the RHS is evaluated at a specific time stepping depending on 
     57the physics with which it is associated. 
    4358 
    4459The choice of the time stepping used for this evaluation is discussed below as well as 
    4560the implications for starting or restarting a model simulation. 
    4661Note that the time stepping calculation is generally performed in a single operation. 
    47 With such a complex and nonlinear system of equations it would be dangerous to let a prognostic variable evolve in 
    48 time for each term separately. 
     62With such a complex and nonlinear system of equations it would be dangerous to 
     63let a prognostic variable evolve in time for each term separately. 
    4964 
    5065The three level scheme requires three arrays for each prognostic variable. 
     
    5267The third array, although referred to as $x_a$ (after) in the code, 
    5368is usually not the variable at the after time step; 
    54 but rather it is used to store the time derivative (RHS in \autoref{eq:STP}) prior to time-stepping the equation. 
    55 The time stepping itself is performed once at each time step where implicit vertical diffusion is computed, \ie in the \mdl{trazdf} and \mdl{dynzdf} modules. 
    56  
    57 % ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
    58 %        Non-Diffusive Part---Leapfrog Scheme 
    59 % ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
     69but rather it is used to store the time derivative (RHS in \autoref{eq:TD}) 
     70prior to time-stepping the equation. 
     71The time stepping itself is performed once at each time step where 
     72implicit vertical diffusion is computed, 
     73\ie\ in the \mdl{trazdf} and \mdl{dynzdf} modules. 
     74 
     75%% ================================================================================================= 
    6076\section{Non-diffusive part --- Leapfrog scheme} 
    61 \label{sec:STP_leap_frog} 
    62  
    63 The time stepping used for processes other than diffusion is the well-known leapfrog scheme 
    64 \citep{mesinger.arakawa_bk76}. 
     77\label{sec:TD_leap_frog} 
     78 
     79The time stepping used for processes other than diffusion is 
     80the well-known \textbf{L}eap\textbf{F}rog (LF) scheme \citep{mesinger.arakawa_bk76}. 
    6581This scheme is widely used for advection processes in low-viscosity fluids. 
    66 It is a time centred scheme, \ie the RHS in \autoref{eq:STP} is evaluated at time step $t$, the now time step. 
     82It is a time centred scheme, \ie\ the RHS in \autoref{eq:TD} is evaluated at 
     83time step $t$, the now time step. 
    6784It may be used for momentum and tracer advection, pressure gradient, and Coriolis terms, 
    6885but not for diffusion terms. 
    6986It is an efficient method that achieves second-order accuracy with 
    7087just one right hand side evaluation per time step. 
    71 Moreover, it does not artificially damp linear oscillatory motion nor does it produce instability by 
    72 amplifying the oscillations. 
     88Moreover, it does not artificially damp linear oscillatory motion 
     89nor does it produce instability by amplifying the oscillations. 
    7390These advantages are somewhat diminished by the large phase-speed error of the leapfrog scheme, 
    74 and the unsuitability of leapfrog differencing for the representation of diffusion and Rayleigh damping processes. 
     91and the unsuitability of leapfrog differencing for the representation of diffusion and 
     92Rayleigh damping processes. 
    7593However, the scheme allows the coexistence of a numerical and a physical mode due to 
    7694its leading third order dispersive error. 
    7795In other words a divergence of odd and even time steps may occur. 
    78 To prevent it, the leapfrog scheme is often used in association with a Robert-Asselin time filter 
    79 (hereafter the LF-RA scheme). 
    80 This filter, first designed by \citet{robert_JMSJ66} and more comprehensively studied by \citet{asselin_MWR72}, 
     96To prevent it, the leapfrog scheme is often used in association with 
     97a \textbf{R}obert-\textbf{A}sselin time filter (hereafter the LF-RA scheme). 
     98This filter, 
     99first designed by \citet{robert_JMSJ66} and more comprehensively studied by \citet{asselin_MWR72}, 
    81100is a kind of laplacian diffusion in time that mixes odd and even time steps: 
    82101\begin{equation} 
    83   \label{eq:STP_asselin} 
     102  \label{eq:TD_asselin} 
    84103  x_F^t = x^t + \gamma \, \lt[ x_F^{t - \rdt} - 2 x^t + x^{t + \rdt} \rt] 
    85104\end{equation} 
    86105where the subscript $F$ denotes filtered values and $\gamma$ is the Asselin coefficient. 
    87 $\gamma$ is initialized as \np{rn\_atfp} (namelist parameter). 
    88 Its default value is \np{rn\_atfp}\forcode{ = 10.e-3} (see \autoref{sec:STP_mLF}), 
     106$\gamma$ is initialized as \np{rn_atfp}{rn\_atfp} (namelist parameter). 
     107Its default value is \np[=10.e-3]{rn_atfp}{rn\_atfp} (see \autoref{sec:TD_mLF}), 
    89108causing only a weak dissipation of high frequency motions (\citep{farge-coulombier_phd87}). 
    90109The addition of a time filter degrades the accuracy of the calculation from second to first order. 
    91110However, the second order truncation error is proportional to $\gamma$, which is small compared to 1. 
    92111Therefore, the LF-RA is a quasi second order accurate scheme. 
    93 The LF-RA scheme is preferred to other time differencing schemes such as predictor corrector or trapezoidal schemes, 
    94 because the user has an explicit and simple control of the magnitude of the time diffusion of the scheme.  
    95 When used with the 2nd order space centred discretisation of the advection terms in 
     112The LF-RA scheme is preferred to other time differencing schemes such as 
     113predictor corrector or trapezoidal schemes, because the user has an explicit and simple control of 
     114the magnitude of the time diffusion of the scheme. 
     115When used with the 2$^nd$ order space centred discretisation of the advection terms in 
    96116the momentum and tracer equations, LF-RA avoids implicit numerical diffusion: 
    97 diffusion is set explicitly by the user through the Robert-Asselin  
    98 filter parameter and the viscosity and diffusion coefficients. 
    99  
    100 % ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
    101 %        Diffusive Part---Forward or Backward Scheme 
    102 % ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
     117diffusion is set explicitly by the user through the Robert-Asselin filter parameter and 
     118the viscosity and diffusion coefficients. 
     119 
     120%% ================================================================================================= 
    103121\section{Diffusive part --- Forward or backward scheme} 
    104 \label{sec:STP_forward_imp} 
    105  
    106 The leapfrog differencing scheme is unsuitable for the representation of diffusion and damping processes. 
     122\label{sec:TD_forward_imp} 
     123 
     124The leapfrog differencing scheme is unsuitable for 
     125the representation of diffusion and damping processes. 
    107126For a tendency $D_x$, representing a diffusion term or a restoring term to a tracer climatology 
    108127(when present, see \autoref{sec:TRA_dmp}), a forward time differencing scheme is used : 
    109128\[ 
    110   %\label{eq:STP_euler} 
     129  %\label{eq:TD_euler} 
    111130  x^{t + \rdt} = x^{t - \rdt} + 2 \, \rdt \ D_x^{t - \rdt} 
    112131\] 
    113132 
    114133This is diffusive in time and conditionally stable. 
    115 The conditions for stability of second and fourth order horizontal diffusion schemes are \citep{griffies_bk04}: 
     134The conditions for stability of second and fourth order horizontal diffusion schemes are 
     135\citep{griffies_bk04}: 
    116136\begin{equation} 
    117   \label{eq:STP_euler_stability} 
     137  \label{eq:TD_euler_stability} 
    118138  A^h < 
    119139  \begin{cases} 
     
    122142  \end{cases} 
    123143\end{equation} 
    124 where $e$ is the smallest grid size in the two horizontal directions and $A^h$ is the mixing coefficient. 
    125 The linear constraint \autoref{eq:STP_euler_stability} is a necessary condition, but not sufficient. 
     144where $e$ is the smallest grid size in the two horizontal directions and 
     145$A^h$ is the mixing coefficient. 
     146The linear constraint \autoref{eq:TD_euler_stability} is a necessary condition, but not sufficient. 
    126147If it is not satisfied, even mildly, then the model soon becomes wildly unstable. 
    127 The instability can be removed by either reducing the length of the time steps or reducing the mixing coefficient. 
     148The instability can be removed by either reducing the length of the time steps or 
     149reducing the mixing coefficient. 
    128150 
    129151For the vertical diffusion terms, a forward time differencing scheme can be used, 
    130 but usually the numerical stability condition imposes a strong constraint on the time step. To overcome the stability constraint, a  
    131 backward (or implicit) time differencing scheme is used. This scheme is unconditionally stable but diffusive and can be written as follows: 
     152but usually the numerical stability condition imposes a strong constraint on the time step. 
     153To overcome the stability constraint, a backward (or implicit) time differencing scheme is used. 
     154This scheme is unconditionally stable but diffusive and can be written as follows: 
    132155\begin{equation} 
    133   \label{eq:STP_imp} 
     156  \label{eq:TD_imp} 
    134157  x^{t + \rdt} = x^{t - \rdt} + 2 \, \rdt \ \text{RHS}_x^{t + \rdt} 
    135158\end{equation} 
    136159 
    137 %%gm 
    138 %%gm   UPDATE the next paragraphs with time varying thickness ... 
    139 %%gm 
    140  
    141 This scheme is rather time consuming since it requires a matrix inversion. For example, the finite difference approximation of the temperature equation is: 
     160\cmtgm{UPDATE the next paragraphs with time varying thickness ...} 
     161 
     162This scheme is rather time consuming since it requires a matrix inversion. 
     163For example, the finite difference approximation of the temperature equation is: 
    142164\[ 
    143   % \label{eq:STP_imp_zdf} 
     165  % \label{eq:TD_imp_zdf} 
    144166  \frac{T(k)^{t + 1} - T(k)^{t - 1}}{2 \; \rdt} 
    145167  \equiv 
     
    147169\] 
    148170where RHS is the right hand side of the equation except for the vertical diffusion term. 
    149 We rewrite \autoref{eq:STP_imp} as: 
     171We rewrite \autoref{eq:TD_imp} as: 
    150172\begin{equation} 
    151   \label{eq:STP_imp_mat} 
     173  \label{eq:TD_imp_mat} 
    152174  -c(k + 1) \; T^{t + 1}(k + 1) + d(k) \; T^{t + 1}(k) - \; c(k) \; T^{t + 1}(k - 1) \equiv b(k) 
    153175\end{equation} 
    154 where  
    155 \begin{align*}  
    156   c(k) &= A_w^{vT} (k) \, / \, e_{3w} (k)     \\ 
    157   d(k) &= e_{3t}   (k)       \, / \, (2 \rdt) + c_k + c_{k + 1}    \\ 
    158   b(k) &= e_{3t}   (k) \; \lt( T^{t - 1}(k) \, / \, (2 \rdt) + \text{RHS} \rt) 
    159 \end{align*} 
    160  
    161 \autoref{eq:STP_imp_mat} is a linear system of equations with an associated matrix which is tridiagonal. 
    162 Moreover, 
    163 $c(k)$ and $d(k)$ are positive and the diagonal term is greater than the sum of the two extra-diagonal terms, 
     176where 
     177\[ 
     178  c(k) = A_w^{vT} (k) \, / \, e_{3w} (k) \text{,} \quad 
     179  d(k) = e_{3t}   (k)       \, / \, (2 \rdt) + c_k + c_{k + 1} \quad \text{and} \quad 
     180  b(k) = e_{3t}   (k) \; \lt( T^{t - 1}(k) \, / \, (2 \rdt) + \text{RHS} \rt) 
     181\] 
     182 
     183\autoref{eq:TD_imp_mat} is a linear system of equations with 
     184an associated matrix which is tridiagonal. 
     185Moreover, $c(k)$ and $d(k)$ are positive and 
     186the diagonal term is greater than the sum of the two extra-diagonal terms, 
    164187therefore a special adaptation of the Gauss elimination procedure is used to find the solution 
    165188(see for example \citet{richtmyer.morton_bk67}). 
    166189 
    167 % ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
    168 %        Surface Pressure gradient 
    169 % ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
     190%% ================================================================================================= 
    170191\section{Surface pressure gradient} 
    171 \label{sec:STP_spg_ts} 
    172  
    173 The leapfrog environment supports a centred in time computation of the surface pressure, \ie evaluated  
    174 at \textit{now} time step. This refers to as the explicit free surface case in the code (\np{ln\_dynspg\_exp}\forcode{ = .true.}).  
    175 This choice however imposes a strong constraint on the time step which should be small enough to resolve the propagation  
    176 of external gravity waves. As a matter of fact, one rather use in a realistic setup, a split-explicit free surface  
    177 (\np{ln\_dynspg\_ts}\forcode{ = .true.}) in which barotropic and baroclinic dynamical equations are solved separately with ad-hoc  
    178 time steps. The use of the time-splitting (in combination with non-linear free surface) imposes some constraints on the design of  
    179 the overall flowchart, in particular to ensure exact tracer conservation (see \autoref{fig:TimeStep_flowchart}). 
    180  
    181 Compared to the former use of the filtered free surface in \NEMO v3.6 (\citet{roullet.madec_JGR00}), the use of a split-explicit free surface is advantageous  
    182 on massively parallel computers. Indeed, no global computations are anymore required by the elliptic solver which saves a substantial amount of communication  
    183 time. Fast barotropic motions (such as tides) are also simulated with a better accuracy.  
    184  
    185 %\gmcomment{  
    186 %>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
    187 \begin{figure}[!t] 
    188   \begin{center} 
    189     \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Fig_TimeStepping_flowchart_v4} 
    190     \caption{ 
    191       \protect\label{fig:TimeStep_flowchart} 
    192       Sketch of the leapfrog time stepping sequence in \NEMO with split-explicit free surface. The latter combined 
    193        with non-linear free surface requires the dynamical tendency being updated prior tracers tendency to ensure  
    194        conservation. Note the use of time integrated fluxes issued from the barotropic loop  in subsequent calculations  
    195        of tracer advection and in the continuity equation. Details about the time-splitting scheme can be found  
    196        in \autoref{subsec:DYN_spg_ts}. 
    197     } 
    198   \end{center} 
     192\label{sec:TD_spg_ts} 
     193 
     194The leapfrog environment supports a centred in time computation of the surface pressure, 
     195\ie\ evaluated at \textit{now} time step. 
     196This refers to as the explicit free surface case in the code 
     197(\np[=.true.]{ln_dynspg_exp}{ln\_dynspg\_exp}). 
     198This choice however imposes a strong constraint on the time step which 
     199should be small enough to resolve the propagation of external gravity waves. 
     200As a matter of fact, one rather use in a realistic setup, 
     201a split-explicit free surface (\np[=.true.]{ln_dynspg_ts}{ln\_dynspg\_ts}) in which 
     202barotropic and baroclinic dynamical equations are solved separately with ad-hoc time steps. 
     203The use of the time-splitting (in combination with non-linear free surface) imposes 
     204some constraints on the design of the overall flowchart, 
     205in particular to ensure exact tracer conservation (see \autoref{fig:TD_TimeStep_flowchart}). 
     206 
     207Compared to the former use of the filtered free surface in \NEMO\ v3.6 (\citet{roullet.madec_JGR00}), 
     208the use of a split-explicit free surface is advantageous on massively parallel computers. 
     209Indeed, no global computations are anymore required by the elliptic solver which 
     210saves a substantial amount of communication time. 
     211Fast barotropic motions (such as tides) are also simulated with a better accuracy. 
     212 
     213%\cmtgm{ 
     214\begin{figure} 
     215  \centering 
     216  \includegraphics[width=0.66\textwidth]{TD_TimeStepping_flowchart_v4} 
     217  \caption[Leapfrog time stepping sequence with split-explicit free surface]{ 
     218    Sketch of the leapfrog time stepping sequence in \NEMO\ with split-explicit free surface. 
     219    The latter combined with non-linear free surface requires 
     220    the dynamical tendency being updated prior tracers tendency to ensure conservation. 
     221    Note the use of time integrated fluxes issued from the barotropic loop in 
     222    subsequent calculations of tracer advection and in the continuity equation. 
     223    Details about the time-splitting scheme can be found in \autoref{subsec:DYN_spg_ts}.} 
     224  \label{fig:TD_TimeStep_flowchart} 
    199225\end{figure} 
    200 %>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
    201226%} 
    202227 
    203 % ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
    204 %        The Modified Leapfrog -- Asselin Filter scheme 
    205 % ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
    206 \section{Modified Leapfrog -- Asselin filter scheme} 
    207 \label{sec:STP_mLF} 
    208  
    209 Significant changes have been introduced by \cite{leclair.madec_OM09} in the LF-RA scheme in order to 
    210 ensure tracer conservation and to allow the use of a much smaller value of the Asselin filter parameter. 
     228%% ================================================================================================= 
     229\section{Modified LeapFrog -- Robert Asselin filter scheme (LF-RA)} 
     230\label{sec:TD_mLF} 
     231 
     232Significant changes have been introduced by \cite{leclair.madec_OM09} in 
     233the LF-RA scheme in order to ensure tracer conservation and to 
     234allow the use of a much smaller value of the Asselin filter parameter. 
    211235The modifications affect both the forcing and filtering treatments in the LF-RA scheme. 
    212236 
    213 In a classical LF-RA environment, the forcing term is centred in time, 
    214 \ie it is time-stepped over a $2 \rdt$ period: 
     237In a classical LF-RA environment, 
     238the forcing term is centred in time, \ie\ it is time-stepped over a $2 \rdt$ period: 
    215239$x^t = x^t + 2 \rdt Q^t$ where $Q$ is the forcing applied to $x$, 
    216 and the time filter is given by \autoref{eq:STP_asselin} so that $Q$ is redistributed over several time step. 
     240and the time filter is given by \autoref{eq:TD_asselin} so that 
     241$Q$ is redistributed over several time step. 
    217242In the modified LF-RA environment, these two formulations have been replaced by: 
    218243\begin{gather} 
    219   \label{eq:STP_forcing} 
     244  \label{eq:TD_forcing} 
    220245  x^{t + \rdt} = x^{t - \rdt} + \rdt \lt( Q^{t - \rdt / 2} + Q^{t + \rdt / 2} \rt)  \\ 
    221   \label{eq:STP_RA} 
     246  \label{eq:TD_RA} 
    222247  x_F^t       = x^t + \gamma \, \lt( x_F^{t - \rdt} - 2 x^t + x^{t + \rdt} \rt) 
    223248                    - \gamma \, \rdt \, \lt( Q^{t + \rdt / 2} - Q^{t - \rdt / 2} \rt) 
    224249\end{gather} 
    225 The change in the forcing formulation given by \autoref{eq:STP_forcing} (see \autoref{fig:MLF_forcing}) 
    226 has a significant effect: 
    227 the forcing term no longer excites the divergence of odd and even time steps \citep{leclair.madec_OM09}. 
     250The change in the forcing formulation given by \autoref{eq:TD_forcing} 
     251(see \autoref{fig:TD_MLF_forcing}) has a significant effect: 
     252the forcing term no longer excites the divergence of odd and even time steps 
     253\citep{leclair.madec_OM09}. 
    228254% forcing seen by the model.... 
    229255This property improves the LF-RA scheme in two aspects. 
    230256First, the LF-RA can now ensure the local and global conservation of tracers. 
    231257Indeed, time filtering is no longer required on the forcing part. 
    232 The influence of the Asselin filter on the forcing is explicitly removed by adding a new term in the filter 
    233 (last term in \autoref{eq:STP_RA} compared to \autoref{eq:STP_asselin}). 
     258The influence of the Asselin filter on the forcing is explicitly removed by 
     259adding a new term in the filter (last term in \autoref{eq:TD_RA} compared to \autoref{eq:TD_asselin}). 
    234260Since the filtering of the forcing was the source of non-conservation in the classical LF-RA scheme, 
    235261the modified formulation becomes conservative \citep{leclair.madec_OM09}. 
    236 Second, the LF-RA becomes a truly quasi -second order scheme. 
    237 Indeed, \autoref{eq:STP_forcing} used in combination with a careful treatment of static instability 
    238 (\autoref{subsec:ZDF_evd}) and of the TKE physics (\autoref{subsec:ZDF_tke_ene})  
     262Second, the LF-RA becomes a truly quasi-second order scheme. 
     263Indeed, \autoref{eq:TD_forcing} used in combination with a careful treatment of static instability 
     264(\autoref{subsec:ZDF_evd}) and of the TKE physics (\autoref{subsec:ZDF_tke_ene}) 
    239265(the two other main sources of time step divergence), 
    240266allows a reduction by two orders of magnitude of the Asselin filter parameter. 
     
    242268Note that the forcing is now provided at the middle of a time step: 
    243269$Q^{t + \rdt / 2}$ is the forcing applied over the $[t,t + \rdt]$ time interval. 
    244 This and the change in the time filter, \autoref{eq:STP_RA}, 
     270This and the change in the time filter, \autoref{eq:TD_RA}, 
    245271allows for an exact evaluation of the contribution due to the forcing term between any two time steps, 
    246272even if separated by only $\rdt$ since the time filter is no longer applied to the forcing term. 
    247273 
    248 %>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
    249 \begin{figure}[!t] 
    250   \begin{center} 
    251     \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Fig_MLF_forcing} 
    252     \caption{ 
    253       \protect\label{fig:MLF_forcing} 
    254       Illustration of forcing integration methods. 
    255       (top) ''Traditional'' formulation: 
    256       the forcing is defined at the same time as the variable to which it is applied 
    257       (integer value of the time step index) and it is applied over a $2 \rdt$ period. 
    258       (bottom)  modified formulation: 
    259       the forcing is defined in the middle of the time (integer and a half value of the time step index) and 
    260       the mean of two successive forcing values ($n - 1 / 2$, $n + 1 / 2$) is applied over a $2 \rdt$ period. 
    261     } 
    262   \end{center} 
     274\begin{figure} 
     275  \centering 
     276  \includegraphics[width=0.66\textwidth]{TD_MLF_forcing} 
     277  \caption[Forcing integration methods for modified leapfrog (top and bottom)]{ 
     278    Illustration of forcing integration methods. 
     279    (top) ''Traditional'' formulation: 
     280    the forcing is defined at the same time as the variable to which it is applied 
     281    (integer value of the time step index) and it is applied over a $2 \rdt$ period. 
     282    (bottom)  modified formulation: 
     283    the forcing is defined in the middle of the time 
     284    (integer and a half value of the time step index) and 
     285    the mean of two successive forcing values ($n - 1 / 2$, $n + 1 / 2$) is applied over 
     286    a $2 \rdt$ period.} 
     287  \label{fig:TD_MLF_forcing} 
    263288\end{figure} 
    264 %>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
    265  
    266 % ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
    267 %        Start/Restart strategy 
    268 % ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
     289 
     290%% ================================================================================================= 
    269291\section{Start/Restart strategy} 
    270 \label{sec:STP_rst} 
    271  
    272 %--------------------------------------------namrun------------------------------------------- 
    273 \nlst{namrun} 
    274 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
    275  
    276 The first time step of this three level scheme when starting from initial conditions is a forward step 
    277 (Euler time integration): 
     292\label{sec:TD_rst} 
     293 
     294\begin{listing} 
     295  \nlst{namrun} 
     296  \caption{\forcode{&namrun}} 
     297  \label{lst:namrun} 
     298\end{listing} 
     299 
     300The first time step of this three level scheme when starting from initial conditions is 
     301a forward step (Euler time integration): 
    278302\[ 
    279   % \label{eq:DOM_euler} 
     303  % \label{eq:TD_DOM_euler} 
    280304  x^1 = x^0 + \rdt \ \text{RHS}^0 
    281305\] 
    282 This is done simply by keeping the leapfrog environment (\ie the \autoref{eq:STP} three level time stepping) but 
     306This is done simply by keeping the leapfrog environment 
     307(\ie\ the \autoref{eq:TD} three level time stepping) but 
    283308setting all $x^0$ (\textit{before}) and $x^1$ (\textit{now}) fields equal at the first time step and 
    284 using half the value of a leapfrog time step ($2 \rdt$).  
     309using half the value of a leapfrog time step ($2 \rdt$). 
    285310 
    286311It is also possible to restart from a previous computation, by using a restart file. 
     
    289314running the model for $2N$ time steps in one go, 
    290315or by performing two consecutive experiments of $N$ steps with a restart. 
    291 This requires saving two time levels and many auxiliary data in the restart files in machine precision. 
     316This requires saving two time levels and many auxiliary data in 
     317the restart files in machine precision. 
    292318 
    293319Note that the time step $\rdt$, is also saved in the restart file. 
    294 When restarting, if the time step has been changed, or one of the prognostic variables at \textit{before} time step  
    295 is missing, an Euler time stepping scheme is imposed. A forward initial step can still be enforced by the user by setting  
    296 the namelist variable \np{nn\_euler}\forcode{=0}. Other options to control the time integration of the model  
    297 are defined through the  \ngn{namrun} namelist variables. 
    298 %%% 
    299 \gmcomment{ 
     320When restarting, if the time step has been changed, or 
     321one of the prognostic variables at \textit{before} time step is missing, 
     322an Euler time stepping scheme is imposed. 
     323A forward initial step can still be enforced by the user by 
     324setting the namelist variable \np[=0]{nn_euler}{nn\_euler}. 
     325Other options to control the time integration of the model are defined through 
     326the \nam{run}{run} namelist variables. 
     327 
     328\cmtgm{ 
    300329add here how to force the restart to contain only one time step for operational purposes 
    301330 
    302331add also the idea of writing several restart for seasonal forecast : how is it done ? 
    303332 
    304 verify that all namelist pararmeters are truly described  
     333verify that all namelist parameters are truly described 
    305334 
    306335a word on the check of restart  ..... 
    307336} 
    308 %%% 
    309  
    310 \gmcomment{       % add a subsection here   
    311  
    312 %------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
    313 %        Time Domain 
    314 % ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
     337 
     338\cmtgm{       % add a subsection here 
     339 
     340%% ================================================================================================= 
    315341\subsection{Time domain} 
    316 \label{subsec:STP_time} 
    317 %--------------------------------------------namrun------------------------------------------- 
    318  
    319 \nlst{namdom}          
    320 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
    321  
    322 Options are defined through the  \ngn{namdom} namelist variables. 
     342\label{subsec:TD_time} 
     343 
     344Options are defined through the\nam{dom}{dom} namelist variables. 
    323345 \colorbox{yellow}{add here a few word on nit000 and nitend} 
    324346 
    325347 \colorbox{yellow}{Write documentation on the calendar and the key variable adatrj} 
    326348 
    327 add a description of daymod, and the model calandar (leap-year and co) 
    328  
    329 }        %% end add 
    330  
    331  
    332  
    333 %% 
    334 \gmcomment{       % add implicit in vvl case  and Crant-Nicholson scheme    
     349add a description of daymod, and the model calendar (leap-year and co) 
     350 
     351}     %% end add 
     352 
     353\cmtgm{       % add implicit in vvl case  and Crant-Nicholson scheme 
    335354 
    336355Implicit time stepping in case of variable volume thickness. 
     
    381400\end{flalign*} 
    382401 
    383 %% 
    384402} 
    385403 
    386 \biblio 
    387  
    388 \pindex 
     404\subinc{\input{../../global/epilogue}} 
    389405 
    390406\end{document} 
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.