Last edited Timestamp?
Author : Laurent Brodeau, (commit done by Gurvan Madec)
ticket : 1348
Branch : 2014/dev_CNRS0_blk_core
WP2014 Action : CNRS-0
Description
simplification and optimization of the CORE bulk formulae (sbcblk_core.F90)
The CORE bulk formulae has been modified by Laurent Brodeau (brodeau@…) in the following way:
- removed "ln_2m" and "ln_bulk2z" from namelist (&namsbc_core), not really needed information, rn_zqt and rn_zu are enough!
- ONLY 1 routine for computing bulk transfer coefficients: TURB_CORE_2Z now handles both cases zt=zu and zt/=zu
=> removed routine TURB_CORE_1Z - ONLY one call to TURB_CORE_2Z
- improved and slightly optimized TURB_CORE_2Z by decreasing the number of 2D allocated arrays and number of operations
- better first guess of stability by checking air-sea difference of virtual temperature rather than temperature difference only...
- added function "cd_neutral_10m" that uses the improved parametrization of Large & Yeager 2008, including the drag coefficient reduction for Cyclone conditions (i.e. V10m >= 33m/s).
Changes
code : new version of the sbcblk_core.F90 module
namelist : suppression of "ln_2m" and "ln_bulk2z" in the namsbc_core
Testing
The new sbcblk_core.F90 has been tested in both ORCA2_LIM2 and ORCA1_LIM2. Not significant changes have been found (but obviously for analytical tropical cyclones).
| NVTK Tested | '''YES/NO''' |
| Other model configurations | '''YES/NO''' |
| Processor configurations tested | [ Enter processor configs tested here ] |
| If adding new functionality please confirm that the New code doesn't change results when it is switched off and ''works'' when switched on | '''YES/NO/NA''' |
(Answering UNSURE is likely to generate further questions from reviewers.)
'Please add further summary details here'
- Processor configurations tested
- etc----
Bit Comparability
| Does this change preserve answers in your tested standard configurations (to the last bit) ? | '''YES/NO ''' |
| Does this change bit compare across various processor configurations. (1xM, Nx1 and MxN are recommended) | '''YES/NO''' |
| Is this change expected to preserve answers in all possible model configurations? | '''YES/NO''' |
| Is this change expected to preserve all diagnostics? ,,''Preserving answers in model runs does not necessarily imply preserved diagnostics. '' | '''YES/NO''' |
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/NO ''' |
| Does your change require a change in compiler options? | '''YES/NO ''' |
If any of these apply, please document the changes required here.......
Resources
''Please ''summarize'' any changes in runtime or memory use caused by this change......''
IPR issues
| Has the code been wholly (100%) produced by NEMO developers staff working exclusively on NEMO? | '''YES/ NO ''' |
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..........
