[[PageOutline]]
Last edited [[Timestamp]]

[[BR]]

'''Author''' : Olivier Le Galloudec olegallou@mercator-ocean.fr

'''ticket''' : 845

'''Branch''' : https://forge.ipsl.jussieu.fr/nemo/browser/branches/2011/dev_r2787_MERCATOR3_tidalpot
----

=== Description ===

MERCATOR.3 — Tidal potential
----
=== Testing ===
Testing could consider (where appropriate) other configurations in addition to NVTK].

||NVTK Tested||!'''YES!'''||
||Other model configurations||!'''YES!'''||
||Processor configurations tested||[ 1*1,4*4,2*8 ]||
||If adding new functionality please confirm that the [[BR]]New code doesn't change results when it is switched off [[BR]]and !''works!'' when switched on||!'''YES!'''||

(Answering UNSURE is likely to generate further questions from reviewers.)

'Please add further summary details here'

     Tests done on IBM power 6:

    * reproductiblity: ORCA2_LIM: compare 2*8 and 4*4 configurations: results are identical ( for 75 time steps, with key_mpp_rep ) 

        GYRE : compare 2*8 and 4*4 configurations: results are identical ( for 60 time steps, with key_mpp_rep ) GYRE : compare 2*8 and 1*1 configurations: results are identical ( for 60 time steps, with key_mpp_rep )

    * restartability: GYRE, with 1*1 configuration: compare 2 consecutives runs of 60 time steps with 1 run of 120 time steps : results are identical 

        GYRE, with 2*8 configuration: compare 2 consecutives runs of 60 time steps with 1 run of 120 time steps : results are identical (use nn_rstctl=2 to have
the good date in the second run).


=== Bit Comparability ===
||Does this change preserve answers in your tested standard configurations (to the last bit) ?||!'''YES !'''||
||Does this change bit compare across various processor configurations. (1xM, Nx1 and MxN are recommended)||!'''YES!'''||
||Is this change expected to preserve answers in all possible model configurations?||!'''YES!'''||
||Is this change expected to preserve all diagnostics? [[BR]]!,,!''Preserving answers in model runs does not necessarily imply preserved diagnostics. !''||!'''YES!'''||

If you answered !'''NO!''' to any of the above, please provide further details:

 * Which routine(s) are causing the difference?
 * Why the changes are not protected by a logical switch or new section-version
 * What is needed to achieve regression with the previous model release (e.g. a regression branch, hand-edits etc). If this is not possible, explain why not.
 * What do you expect to see occur in the test harness jobs?
 * Which diagnostics have you altered and why have they changed?Please add details here........

----
=== System Changes ===
||Does your change alter namelists?||!'''YES !'''||
||Does your change require a change in compiler options?||!'''NO !'''||

If any of these apply, please document the changes required here.......

----
=== Resources ===

Tests done on IBM power 6, 2*8 mpi configuration: 
    * 1 year of ORCA2_LIM with dynspg_ts and no tidal potential : 2013s
    * 1 year of ORCA2_LIM with dynspg_ts and tidal potential : 2836s

----
=== IPR issues ===
||Has the code been wholly (100%) produced by NEMO developers staff working exclusively on NEMO?||!'''YES !'''||

If No:

 * Identify the collaboration agreement details
 * Ensure the code routine header is in accordance with the agreement, (Copyright/Redistribution etc).Add further details here if required..........


----
=== Tidal potential forcing on ORCA2_LIM ===

Configuration: ORCA2_LIM standard + time splitting
Experience:
 *  1 year of simulation (01/09/2010 to 31/08/2011) without tidal potential forcing
 *  1 year of simulation (01/09/2010 to 31/08/2011) with tidal potential forcing

We compare to the Bilbao tide gauge.
We can see on the figure the data in black, the simulation without tidal potential forcing in orange and the simulation with tidal potential forcing in blue.
[[Image(comparison_bilbao_tide_gauge_orca2.gif)]]