Version 15 (modified by mathiot, 5 years ago) (diff)

Last edited Timestamp?


Author : Pierre Mathiot

ticket : #1495

Branch : dev_r5151_UKMO_ISF


Description

  • Improvement of zgr_isf: one block change coastline every where ⇒ done
  • Improvement of sbc_isf: CALL statement out of a 2d loop ⇒ done
  • Improvement of zpshde_isf: too much variable compute ⇒ done
  • Improvement of hpg_isf: can we used one as simple as for the bottom ⇒ done
  • Bug in zdfbfr: top friction initialisation missing ⇒ done (already reported in the trunk)
  • Change definition of mixed layer depth beneath ice shelf ⇒ done
  • Bug if ice shelf in ldfslp + change according to previous point ⇒ done
  • umask_i is not an interior mask, change it to ssumask (same on v, f)⇒ done
  • cleaning sbcisf ⇒ done
  • improve conservation (based on work of Jerome on runoff) ⇒ done (already reported in the trunk)
  • remove option rn_divisf in the namelist. Always apply on volume. ⇒ done
  • define ln_isf in namsbc as ln_rnf. Move nn_isf to namsbc_isf. ⇒ done

At this stage:

  • no change in result without ice shelf.
  • result of ISOMIP configuration changed due to bug correction. ISOMIP result similar to the previous one and to Losch 2008 (after 28 years of simulation)

Testing

Testing could consider (where appropriate) other configurations in addition to NVTK]. All the validation test are done with the version 3.6_STABLE at revision r5554.

NVTK TestedYES
Other model configurationsYES (ePERIANT025)
Processor configurations tested37/35/836
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

(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 (except for ISOMIP)
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 (for untested possible configuration a flag is set up to false to stop the model)
Is this change expected to preserve all diagnostics?
,,''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…….

!-----------------------------------------------------------------------
&namsbc        !   Surface Boundary Condition (surface module)
!-----------------------------------------------------------------------
   ...
   ln_rnf      = .true.    !  runoffs                                   (T   => fill namsbc_rnf)
   ln_isf      = .false.   !  ice shelf                                 (T   => fill namsbc_isf)
   ...
!-----------------------------------------------------------------------
&namsbc_isf    !  Top boundary layer (ISF)
!-----------------------------------------------------------------------
...
! for all case
   nn_isf      = 1         !  ice shelf melting/freezing
                           !  1 = presence of ISF    2 = bg03 parametrisation
                           !  3 = rnf file for isf   4 = ISF fwf specified
                           !  option 1 and 4 need ln_isfcav = .true. (domzgr)
...

and in namsbc_isf ln_divisf was removed and in namsbc nn_isf was moved to namsbc_isf.


Resources

Please summarize any changes in runtime or memory use caused by this change…… Runtime diagnostic: Test with ORCA2LIM3 (SETTE configuration) 300 timesteps (mean value over 4 simulations):

  • Total CPU time in branch = 2242s
  • Total CPU time in reference = 2237s

⇒ difference of +0.2%

Test with ISOMIP (SETTE configuration) 288 timesteps (mean value over 4 simulations):

  • Total CPU time in branch = 135s
  • Total CPU time in reference = 143s

⇒ difference of -5.6%

Memory diagnostic: Test in ORCA2LIM3 configuration (maxmemory):

  • 6.894 Gb in branch
  • 6.901 Gb in reference

⇒ difference of -0.1% Test in ISOMIP configuration (maxmemory):

  • 1.629 Gb in branch
  • 1.631 Gb in reference

⇒ difference of -0.1%


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……….

SVN command (merge)

merge at revision 5554 svn merge svn+ssh://mathiot@forge.ipsl.jussieu.fr/ipsl/forge/projets/nemo/svn/branches/2015/nemo_v3_6_STABLE