#2096 closed Bug (fixed)
coastline value of u-, v-tau in presence of sea-ice
Reported by: | mathiot | Owned by: | systeam |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | low | Milestone: | 2018 release-4.0 |
Component: | OCE | Version: | v3.6 |
Severity: | minor | Keywords: | LIM* OPA stress v3.6 v4.0 |
Cc: |
Description (last modified by nicolasmartin)
Context
ocean surface stresses are unmask along coastlines. It seems to be needed for zdftke at least. In case of sea ice, the coastline value (on land) in some places is very different to the adjacent value (on water), especially in area with concentration close to 1. It is because the sea ice concentration interpolated at u- and v-points along coastlines is computed using sic land value (0 I think) in the averaging.
Analysis
Fix
I suggest to do a weighted average using tmask(:,:,1) to compute the sic at u- and v- points in iceupdate (trunk) and sbclim, sbclim_2 (nemo_3.6).
It means replace :
zat_u = ( at_i(ji,jj) + at_i(ji+1,jj) ) * 0.5_wp ! ice area at u and V-points zat_v = ( at_i(ji,jj) + at_i(ji,jj+1) ) * 0.5_wp
by:
! ice area at u and v-points ! land values on u-, v- points along coastline set to adjacent t-point ocean value zat_u = ( at_i(ji,jj) * tmask(ji,jj) + at_i(ji+1,jj ) * tmask(ji+1,jj ) ) / MAX(1.0_wp,tmask(ji,jj)+tmask(ji+1,jj )) zat_v = ( at_i(ji,jj) * tmask(ji,jj) + at_i(ji ,jj+1) * tmask(ji ,jj+1) ) / MAX(1.0_wp,tmask(ji,jj)+tmask(ji ,jj+1))
Commit History (2)
Changeset | Author | Time | ChangeLog |
---|---|---|---|
9778 | mathiot | 2018-06-12T11:26:43+02:00 | v3.6 correction of ticket #2096 |
9774 | mathiot | 2018-06-11T14:28:37+02:00 | trunk correction of ticket #2096 |
Change History (6)
comment:1 Changed 6 years ago by nicolasmartin
- Description modified (diff)
comment:2 Changed 6 years ago by mathiot
comment:3 Changed 6 years ago by mathiot
In 9778:
comment:4 Changed 6 years ago by mathiot
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from new to closed
There was a bug in the suggested fix committed this morning (r9774 and r9778). Thank you Clement. tmask is obviously 3d not 2d. Cray compiler catches it as a warning not an error and assume it is the first level. So compilation and execution went fine. It is now fixed in r9782 (trunk) and r9783 (v3.6).
comment:5 Changed 3 years ago by nemo
- Keywords OPA v3.6 added
comment:6 Changed 3 years ago by nemo
- Keywords v4.0 added
In 9774: