Changes between Initial Version and Version 1 of ticket/1611_is_oce_cpl

Timestamp:

2015-10-05T12:12:00+02:00 (9 years ago)

Author:

mathiot

Comment:

--

ticket/1611_is_oce_cpl

@@ +1 @@
+[[PageOutline]]
+Last edited [[Timestamp]]
+
+[[BR]]
+
+'''Author''' : Mathiot 
+
+'''ticket''' : XXXX
+
+'''Branch''' : [https://forge.ipsl.jussieu.fr/nemo/browser/branches/NERC/dev_r5589_is_oce_cpl   dev_r5589_is_oce_cpl ] 
+----
+
+=== Description ===
+==== Purpose ====
+Allow NEMO to restart with a new geometry beneath the ice shelf. This branch allow to test ice sheet/ocean coupling at each restart time step through netcdf file exchange. 
+
+==== Limitation ====
+ * It is not suitable if high frequency coupling is needed. Because the model need to be stop each time you want to couple ocean/ice sheet.
+ * It not a conservative method (NEMO is creating/losing volume/mass/salt/heat at the coupling time step if the geometry change)
+
+==== Method ====
+notation: bt = barotropic transport, if not precise, U/V/T/S mean properties of the top wet cell.
+ * Thin/enlarge a top cell : T/S/SSH are unchanged, U/V in the top cell are corrected to keep bt_b = bt_n (usefull to improve stability)
+ * 'Dry a cell' case: set mask = 0, T/S = 0, U/V = 0, bt is corrected to keep bt_b = bt_n and ssh_b = ssh_n
+ * 'Dry a column' case: set mask = 0, T/S = 0, U/V = 0 and ssh = 0
+ * 'Wet a cell' case: set mask to 1, T/S = MEAN(T(ji+1,jj), T(ji-1,jj), T(ji,jj+1), T(ji,jj-1)) (if no neighbour along i/j axis check along the k axis), SSH unchanged, U/V = 0
+ * 'Wet a column' case: set mask to 1, T/S = MEAN(T(ji+1,jj), T(ji-1,jj), T(ji,jj+1), T(ji,jj-1)) (if no neighbour along i/j axis check along the k axis), SSH unchanged, U/V = 0
+
+ An option is available to keep trend due to unconservation of Vol./heat/salt to 0 using what is done for runoff with specified T/S. I.e the location and the amount of extra/loss vol./heat/salt is diagnosed, saved and used to come back to a acceptable level of conservation before the next restart time step. The vol./heat/salt is removed/added as close as possible to the source/sink location using the techniques used in sbcrnf to prescribed a source of volume/heat/salt in the runoff.
+----
+=== Testing ===
+Testing could consider (where appropriate) other configurations in addition to NVTK].
+
+||NVTK Tested||!'''YES/NO!'''||
+||Other model configurations||'''ISOMIP+ EXP 2 qnd 3'''||
+||Processor configurations tested||[ Enter processor configs tested here ]||
+||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/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? [[BR]]!,,!''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..........