Changes between Version 2 and Version 3 of 2020WP/KERNEL-01_Amy_Mike_newHPGschemes


Ignore:
Timestamp:
2020-06-04T13:57:03+02:00 (4 months ago)
Author:
ayoung
Comment:

Expanded description of proposed test case.

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • 2020WP/KERNEL-01_Amy_Mike_newHPGschemes

    v2 v3  
    5959 
    6060{{{#!box width=50em info 
    61 These developments will be assessed using the idealised seamount configuration introduced by Beckmann & Haidvogel (1993).  This is a standard, widely used test case for evaluating the performance of hpg calculations. 
     61These developments will be assessed using the idealised seamount configuration introduced by Beckmann & Haidvogel (1993).  This is a standard, widely used test case for evaluating the performance of hpg calculations.  It consists of a Gaussian bump bathymetry initialised with the flow at rest, and an expontential vertical density perturbation profile. 
    6262These developments should introduce no change to results unless the new hpg options are activated. 
    6363If activated, the new schemes should result in a reduction of spurious currents in regions of sloping bathymetry when using terrain following coordinates (sco). 
     64The test configuration requires a bespoke set of MY_SRC files, a modification to the eosbn2.F90 module, and several namelist parameters.  This configuration currently exists as a UKMO branch from r4.0.2 (http://forge.ipsl.jussieu.fr/nemo/browser/NEMO/branches/UKMO/NEMO_4.0.2_SEAMOUNT) though does not yet run on multiple processors. 
     65There is no obvious single verification value.  Ideally, the result would be a reduction in error with respect to the standard sco formulation.  This may be defined in terms of a reduction in the maximum error (i.e. |umax_new| < |umax_sco|) or it may be a reduction in the time integrated value.  Depending on the scheme in question, there may also be results which should be identically zero. 
    6466[[Include(wiki:Developers/DevProcess#tests)]] 
    6567}}}