1 |
mlosch |
1.4 |
\section{Model Formulation} |
2 |
dimitri |
1.1 |
\label{sec:model} |
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
mlosch |
1.4 |
The MITgcm sea ice model (MITsim) is based on a variant of the |
5 |
|
|
viscous-plastic (VP) dynamic-thermodynamic sea ice model |
6 |
|
|
\citep{zhang97} first introduced by \citet{hibler79, hibler80}. In |
7 |
|
|
order to adapt this model to the requirements of coupled |
8 |
|
|
ice-ocean simulations, many important aspects of the original code have |
9 |
|
|
been modified and improved: |
10 |
|
|
\begin{itemize} |
11 |
|
|
\item the code has been rewritten for an Arakawa C-grid, both B- and |
12 |
|
|
C-grid variants are available; the C-grid code allows for no-slip |
13 |
|
|
and free-slip lateral boundary conditions; |
14 |
|
|
\item two different solution methods for solving the nonlinear |
15 |
mlosch |
1.6 |
momentum equations have been adopted: LSOR \citep{zhang97}, EVP |
16 |
mlosch |
1.4 |
\citep{hunke97}; |
17 |
|
|
\item ice-ocean stress can be formulated as in \citet{hibler87}; |
18 |
|
|
\item ice variables are advected by sophisticated advection schemes; |
19 |
|
|
\item growth and melt parameterizaion have been refined and extended |
20 |
|
|
in order to allow for automatic differentiation of the code. |
21 |
|
|
\end{itemize} |
22 |
|
|
The model equations and their numerical realization are summarized |
23 |
|
|
below. |
24 |
|
|
|
25 |
dimitri |
1.1 |
\subsection{Dynamics} |
26 |
|
|
\label{sec:dynamics} |
27 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
The momentum equation of the sea-ice model is |
29 |
|
|
\begin{equation} |
30 |
|
|
\label{eq:momseaice} |
31 |
|
|
m \frac{D\vek{u}}{Dt} = -mf\vek{k}\times\vek{u} + \vtau_{air} + |
32 |
|
|
\vtau_{ocean} - m \nabla{\phi(0)} + \vek{F}, |
33 |
|
|
\end{equation} |
34 |
|
|
where $m=m_{i}+m_{s}$ is the ice and snow mass per unit area; |
35 |
|
|
$\vek{u}=u\vek{i}+v\vek{j}$ is the ice velocity vector; |
36 |
|
|
$\vek{i}$, $\vek{j}$, and $\vek{k}$ are unit vectors in the $x$, $y$, and $z$ |
37 |
|
|
directions, respectively; |
38 |
|
|
$f$ is the Coriolis parameter; |
39 |
|
|
$\vtau_{air}$ and $\vtau_{ocean}$ are the wind-ice and ocean-ice stresses, |
40 |
|
|
respectively; |
41 |
|
|
$g$ is the gravity accelation; |
42 |
|
|
$\nabla\phi(0)$ is the gradient (or tilt) of the sea surface height; |
43 |
|
|
$\phi(0) = g\eta + p_{a}/\rho_{0}$ is the sea surface height potential |
44 |
|
|
in response to ocean dynamics ($g\eta$) and to atmospheric pressure |
45 |
|
|
loading ($p_{a}/\rho_{0}$, where $\rho_{0}$ is a reference density); |
46 |
|
|
and $\vek{F}=\nabla\cdot\sigma$ is the divergence of the internal ice stress |
47 |
|
|
tensor $\sigma_{ij}$. |
48 |
|
|
When using the rescaled vertical coordinate system, z$^\ast$, of |
49 |
|
|
\citet{cam08}, $\phi(0)$ also includes a term due to snow and ice |
50 |
|
|
loading, $mg/\rho_{0}$. |
51 |
|
|
Advection of sea-ice momentum is neglected. The wind and ice-ocean stress |
52 |
|
|
terms are given by |
53 |
|
|
\begin{align*} |
54 |
|
|
\vtau_{air} = & \rho_{air} C_{air} |\vek{U}_{air} -\vek{u}| |
55 |
|
|
R_{air} (\vek{U}_{air} -\vek{u}), \\ |
56 |
|
|
\vtau_{ocean} = & \rho_{ocean}C_{ocean} |\vek{U}_{ocean}-\vek{u}| |
57 |
|
|
R_{ocean}(\vek{U}_{ocean}-\vek{u}), \\ |
58 |
|
|
\end{align*} |
59 |
|
|
where $\vek{U}_{air/ocean}$ are the surface winds of the atmosphere |
60 |
|
|
and surface currents of the ocean, respectively; $C_{air/ocean}$ are |
61 |
|
|
air and ocean drag coefficients; $\rho_{air/ocean}$ are reference |
62 |
|
|
densities; and $R_{air/ocean}$ are rotation matrices that act on the |
63 |
|
|
wind/current vectors. |
64 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
For an isotropic system the stress tensor $\sigma_{ij}$ ($i,j=1,2$) can |
66 |
|
|
be related to the ice strain rate and strength by a nonlinear |
67 |
mlosch |
1.4 |
viscous-plastic (VP) constitutive law \citep{hibler79, zhang97}: |
68 |
dimitri |
1.1 |
\begin{equation} |
69 |
|
|
\label{eq:vpequation} |
70 |
|
|
\sigma_{ij}=2\eta(\dot{\epsilon}_{ij},P)\dot{\epsilon}_{ij} |
71 |
|
|
+ \left[\zeta(\dot{\epsilon}_{ij},P) - |
72 |
|
|
\eta(\dot{\epsilon}_{ij},P)\right]\dot{\epsilon}_{kk}\delta_{ij} |
73 |
|
|
- \frac{P}{2}\delta_{ij}. |
74 |
|
|
\end{equation} |
75 |
|
|
The ice strain rate is given by |
76 |
|
|
\begin{equation*} |
77 |
|
|
\dot{\epsilon}_{ij} = \frac{1}{2}\left( |
78 |
|
|
\frac{\partial{u_{i}}}{\partial{x_{j}}} + |
79 |
|
|
\frac{\partial{u_{j}}}{\partial{x_{i}}}\right). |
80 |
|
|
\end{equation*} |
81 |
|
|
The maximum ice pressure $P_{\max}$, a measure of ice strength, depends on |
82 |
|
|
both thickness $h$ and compactness (concentration) $c$: |
83 |
|
|
\begin{equation} |
84 |
|
|
P_{\max} = P^{*}c\,h\,e^{[C^{*}\cdot(1-c)]}, |
85 |
|
|
\label{eq:icestrength} |
86 |
|
|
\end{equation} |
87 |
|
|
with the constants $P^{*}$ and $C^{*}$. The nonlinear bulk and shear |
88 |
|
|
viscosities $\eta$ and $\zeta$ are functions of ice strain rate |
89 |
|
|
invariants and ice strength such that the principal components of the |
90 |
|
|
stress lie on an elliptical yield curve with the ratio of major to |
91 |
|
|
minor axis $e$ equal to $2$; they are given by: |
92 |
|
|
\begin{align*} |
93 |
|
|
\zeta =& \min\left(\frac{P_{\max}}{2\max(\Delta,\Delta_{\min})}, |
94 |
|
|
\zeta_{\max}\right) \\ |
95 |
|
|
\eta =& \frac{\zeta}{e^2} \\ |
96 |
|
|
\intertext{with the abbreviation} |
97 |
|
|
\Delta = & \left[ |
98 |
|
|
\left(\dot{\epsilon}_{11}^2+\dot{\epsilon}_{22}^2\right) |
99 |
|
|
(1+e^{-2}) + 4e^{-2}\dot{\epsilon}_{12}^2 + |
100 |
|
|
2\dot{\epsilon}_{11}\dot{\epsilon}_{22} (1-e^{-2}) |
101 |
|
|
\right]^{-\frac{1}{2}} |
102 |
|
|
\end{align*} |
103 |
|
|
The bulk viscosities are bounded above by imposing both a minimum |
104 |
|
|
$\Delta_{\min}=10^{-11}\text{\,s}^{-1}$ (for numerical reasons) and a |
105 |
|
|
maximum $\zeta_{\max} = P_{\max}/\Delta^*$, where |
106 |
|
|
$\Delta^*=(5\times10^{12}/2\times10^4)\text{\,s}^{-1}$. For stress |
107 |
|
|
tensor computation the replacement pressure $P = 2\,\Delta\zeta$ |
108 |
|
|
\citep{hibler95} is used so that the stress state always lies on the |
109 |
|
|
elliptic yield curve by definition. |
110 |
|
|
|
111 |
|
|
In the so-called truncated ellipse method the shear viscosity $\eta$ |
112 |
|
|
is capped to suppress any tensile stress \citep{hibler97, geiger98}: |
113 |
|
|
\begin{equation} |
114 |
|
|
\label{eq:etatem} |
115 |
|
|
\eta = \min\left(\frac{\zeta}{e^2}, |
116 |
|
|
\frac{\frac{P}{2}-\zeta(\dot{\epsilon}_{11}+\dot{\epsilon}_{22})} |
117 |
|
|
{\sqrt{(\dot{\epsilon}_{11}+\dot{\epsilon}_{22})^2 |
118 |
|
|
+4\dot{\epsilon}_{12}^2}}\right). |
119 |
|
|
\end{equation} |
120 |
|
|
|
121 |
|
|
In the current implementation, the VP-model is integrated with the |
122 |
|
|
semi-implicit line successive over relaxation (LSOR)-solver of |
123 |
|
|
\citet{zhang98}, which allows for long time steps that, in our case, |
124 |
|
|
are limited by the explicit treatment of the Coriolis term. The |
125 |
|
|
explicit treatment of the Coriolis term does not represent a severe |
126 |
|
|
limitation because it restricts the time step to approximately the |
127 |
|
|
same length as in the ocean model where the Coriolis term is also |
128 |
|
|
treated explicitly. |
129 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
\citet{hunke97}'s introduced an elastic contribution to the strain |
131 |
|
|
rate in order to regularize Eq.\refeq{vpequation} in such a way that |
132 |
|
|
the resulting elastic-viscous-plastic (EVP) and VP models are |
133 |
|
|
identical at steady state, |
134 |
|
|
\begin{equation} |
135 |
|
|
\label{eq:evpequation} |
136 |
|
|
\frac{1}{E}\frac{\partial\sigma_{ij}}{\partial{t}} + |
137 |
|
|
\frac{1}{2\eta}\sigma_{ij} |
138 |
|
|
+ \frac{\eta - \zeta}{4\zeta\eta}\sigma_{kk}\delta_{ij} |
139 |
|
|
+ \frac{P}{4\zeta}\delta_{ij} |
140 |
|
|
= \dot{\epsilon}_{ij}. |
141 |
|
|
\end{equation} |
142 |
|
|
%In the EVP model, equations for the components of the stress tensor |
143 |
|
|
%$\sigma_{ij}$ are solved explicitly. Both model formulations will be |
144 |
|
|
%used and compared the present sea-ice model study. |
145 |
|
|
The EVP-model uses an explicit time stepping scheme with a short |
146 |
|
|
timestep. According to the recommendation of \citet{hunke97}, the |
147 |
|
|
EVP-model is stepped forward in time 120 times within the physical |
148 |
|
|
ocean model time step (although this parameter is under debate), to |
149 |
|
|
allow for elastic waves to disappear. Because the scheme does not |
150 |
|
|
require a matrix inversion it is fast in spite of the small timestep |
151 |
|
|
\citep{hunke97}. For completeness, we repeat the equations for the |
152 |
|
|
components of the stress tensor $\sigma_{1} = |
153 |
|
|
\sigma_{11}+\sigma_{22}$, $\sigma_{2}= \sigma_{11}-\sigma_{22}$, and |
154 |
|
|
$\sigma_{12}$. Introducing the divergence $D_D = |
155 |
|
|
\dot{\epsilon}_{11}+\dot{\epsilon}_{22}$, and the horizontal tension |
156 |
|
|
and shearing strain rates, $D_T = |
157 |
|
|
\dot{\epsilon}_{11}-\dot{\epsilon}_{22}$ and $D_S = |
158 |
|
|
2\dot{\epsilon}_{12}$, respectively, and using the above abbreviations, |
159 |
|
|
the equations can be written as: |
160 |
|
|
\begin{align} |
161 |
|
|
\label{eq:evpstresstensor1} |
162 |
|
|
\frac{\partial\sigma_{1}}{\partial{t}} + \frac{\sigma_{1}}{2T} + |
163 |
|
|
\frac{P}{2T} &= \frac{P}{2T\Delta} D_D \\ |
164 |
|
|
\label{eq:evpstresstensor2} |
165 |
|
|
\frac{\partial\sigma_{2}}{\partial{t}} + \frac{\sigma_{2} e^{2}}{2T} |
166 |
|
|
&= \frac{P}{2T\Delta} D_T \\ |
167 |
|
|
\label{eq:evpstresstensor12} |
168 |
|
|
\frac{\partial\sigma_{12}}{\partial{t}} + \frac{\sigma_{12} e^{2}}{2T} |
169 |
|
|
&= \frac{P}{4T\Delta} D_S |
170 |
|
|
\end{align} |
171 |
|
|
Here, the elastic parameter $E$ is redefined in terms of a damping timescale |
172 |
|
|
$T$ for elastic waves \[E=\frac{\zeta}{T}.\] |
173 |
|
|
$T=E_{0}\Delta{t}$ with the tunable parameter $E_0<1$ and |
174 |
|
|
the external (long) timestep $\Delta{t}$. \citet{hunke97} recommend |
175 |
|
|
$E_{0} = \frac{1}{3}$. |
176 |
|
|
|
177 |
|
|
For details of the spatial discretization, the reader is referred to |
178 |
|
|
\citet{zhang98, zhang03}. Our discretization differs only (but |
179 |
|
|
importantly) in the underlying grid, namely the Arakawa C-grid, but is |
180 |
|
|
otherwise straightforward. The EVP model, in particular, is discretized |
181 |
|
|
naturally on the C-grid with $\sigma_{1}$ and $\sigma_{2}$ on the |
182 |
|
|
center points and $\sigma_{12}$ on the corner (or vorticity) points of |
183 |
|
|
the grid. With this choice all derivatives are discretized as central |
184 |
|
|
differences and averaging is only involved in computing $\Delta$ and |
185 |
|
|
$P$ at vorticity points. |
186 |
|
|
|
187 |
|
|
For a general curvilinear grid, one needs in principle to take metric |
188 |
|
|
terms into account that arise in the transformation of a curvilinear |
189 |
|
|
grid on the sphere. For now, however, we can neglect these metric |
190 |
|
|
terms because they are very small on the \ml{[modify following |
191 |
|
|
section3:] cubed sphere grids used in this paper; in particular, |
192 |
|
|
only near the edges of the cubed sphere grid, we expect them to be |
193 |
|
|
non-zero, but these edges are at approximately 35\degS\ or 35\degN\ |
194 |
|
|
which are never covered by sea-ice in our simulations. Everywhere |
195 |
|
|
else the coordinate system is locally nearly cartesian.} However, for |
196 |
|
|
last-glacial-maximum or snowball-earth-like simulations the question |
197 |
|
|
of metric terms needs to be reconsidered. Either, one includes these |
198 |
|
|
terms as in \citet{zhang03}, or one finds a vector-invariant |
199 |
|
|
formulation for the sea-ice internal stress term that does not require |
200 |
|
|
any metric terms, as it is done in the ocean dynamics of the MITgcm |
201 |
|
|
\citep{adcroft04:_cubed_sphere}. |
202 |
|
|
|
203 |
|
|
Lateral boundary conditions are naturally ``no-slip'' for B-grids, as |
204 |
|
|
the tangential velocities points lie on the boundary. For C-grids, the |
205 |
|
|
lateral boundary condition for tangential velocities is realized via |
206 |
|
|
``ghost points'', allowing alternatively no-slip or free-slip |
207 |
|
|
conditions. In ocean models free-slip boundary conditions in |
208 |
|
|
conjunction with piecewise-constant (``castellated'') coastlines have |
209 |
|
|
been shown to reduce in effect to no-slip boundary conditions |
210 |
|
|
\citep{adcroft98:_slippery_coast}; for sea-ice models the effects of |
211 |
|
|
lateral boundary conditions have not yet been studied. |
212 |
|
|
|
213 |
|
|
Moving sea ice exerts a stress on the ocean which is the opposite of |
214 |
|
|
the stress $\vtau_{ocean}$ in Eq.\refeq{momseaice}. This stess is |
215 |
|
|
applied directly to the surface layer of the ocean model. An |
216 |
|
|
alternative ocean stress formulation is given by \citet{hibler87}. |
217 |
|
|
Rather than applying $\vtau_{ocean}$ directly, the stress is derived |
218 |
|
|
from integrating over the ice thickness to the bottom of the oceanic |
219 |
|
|
surface layer. In the resulting equation for the \emph{combined} |
220 |
|
|
ocean-ice momentum, the interfacial stress cancels and the total |
221 |
|
|
stress appears as the sum of windstress and divergence of internal ice |
222 |
|
|
stresses: $\delta(z) (\vtau_{air} + \vek{F})/\rho_0$, \citep[see also |
223 |
|
|
Eq.\,2 of][]{hibler87}. The disadvantage of this formulation is that |
224 |
|
|
now the velocity in the surface layer of the ocean that is used to |
225 |
|
|
advect tracers, is really an average over the ocean surface |
226 |
|
|
velocity and the ice velocity leading to an inconsistency as the ice |
227 |
|
|
temperature and salinity are different from the oceanic variables. |
228 |
|
|
|
229 |
mlosch |
1.4 |
%\subparagraph{boundary conditions: no-slip, free-slip, half-slip} |
230 |
|
|
%\begin{itemize} |
231 |
|
|
%\item transition from existing B-Grid to C-Grid |
232 |
|
|
%\item boundary conditions: no-slip, free-slip, half-slip |
233 |
|
|
%\item fancy (multi dimensional) advection schemes |
234 |
|
|
%\item VP vs.\ EVP \citep{hunke97} |
235 |
|
|
%\item ocean stress formulation \citep{hibler87} |
236 |
|
|
%\end{itemize} |
237 |
dimitri |
1.1 |
|
238 |
|
|
\subsection{Thermodynamics} |
239 |
|
|
\label{sec:thermodynamics} |
240 |
|
|
|
241 |
|
|
In the original formulation the sea ice model \citep{menemenlis05} |
242 |
|
|
uses simple thermodynamics following the appendix of |
243 |
|
|
\citet{semtner76}. This formulation does not allow storage of heat |
244 |
|
|
(heat capacity of ice is zero, and this type of model is often refered |
245 |
mlosch |
1.3 |
to as a ``zero-layer'' model). Upward conductive heat flux is parameterized |
246 |
dimitri |
1.1 |
assuming a linear temperature profile and together with a constant ice |
247 |
|
|
conductivity. It is expressed as $(K/h)(T_{w}-T_{0})$, where $K$ is |
248 |
|
|
the ice conductivity, $h$ the ice thickness, and $T_{w}-T_{0}$ the |
249 |
|
|
difference between water and ice surface temperatures. The surface |
250 |
mlosch |
1.3 |
heat flux is computed in a similar way to that of \citet{parkinson79} |
251 |
|
|
and \citet{manabe79}. |
252 |
|
|
|
253 |
|
|
The conductive heat flux depends strongly on the ice thickness $h$. |
254 |
|
|
However, the ice thickness in the model represents a mean over a |
255 |
|
|
potentially very heterogeneous thickness distribution. In order to |
256 |
|
|
parameterize this sub-grid scale distribution for heat flux |
257 |
|
|
computations, the mean ice thickness $h$ is split into seven thickness |
258 |
|
|
categories $H_{n}$ that are equally distributed between $2h$ and |
259 |
|
|
minimum imposed ice thickness of $5\text{\,cm}$ by $H_n= |
260 |
mlosch |
1.4 |
\frac{2n-1}{7}\,h$ for $n\in[1,7]$. The heat fluxes computed for each |
261 |
|
|
thickness category area averaged to give the total heat flux. \ml{[I |
262 |
|
|
don't have citation for that, anyone?]} |
263 |
mlosch |
1.3 |
|
264 |
|
|
The atmospheric heat flux is balanced by an oceanic heat flux from |
265 |
|
|
below. The oceanic flux is proportional to |
266 |
|
|
$\rho\,c_{p}\left(T_{w}-T_{fr}\right)$ where $\rho$ and $c_{p}$ are |
267 |
|
|
the density and heat capacity of sea water and $T_{fr}$ is the local |
268 |
|
|
freezing point temperature that is a function of salinity. Contrary to |
269 |
|
|
\citet{menemenlis05}, this flux is not assumed to instantaneously melt |
270 |
|
|
or create ice, but a time scale of three days is used to relax $T_{w}$ |
271 |
|
|
to the freezing point. |
272 |
|
|
|
273 |
|
|
The parameterization of lateral and vertical growth of sea ice follows |
274 |
|
|
that of \citet{hibler79, hibler80}. |
275 |
|
|
|
276 |
|
|
On top of the ice there is a layer of snow that modifies the heat flux |
277 |
|
|
and the albedo \citep{zhang98}. If enough snow accumulates so that its |
278 |
|
|
weight submerges the ice and the snow is flooded, a simple mass |
279 |
|
|
conserving parameterization of snowice formation (a flood-freeze |
280 |
|
|
algorithm following Archimedes' principle) turns snow into ice until |
281 |
|
|
the ice surface is back at $z=0$ \citep{leppaeranta83}. |
282 |
|
|
|
283 |
|
|
Effective ich thickness (ice volume per unit area, |
284 |
|
|
$c\cdot{h}$), concentration $c$ and effective snow thickness |
285 |
mlosch |
1.4 |
($c\cdot{h}_{s}$) are advected by ice velocities: |
286 |
mlosch |
1.5 |
\begin{equation} |
287 |
|
|
\label{eq:advection} |
288 |
|
|
\frac{\partial{X}}{\partial{t}} = - \nabla\cdot\left(\vek{u}\,X\right) + |
289 |
|
|
\Gamma_{X} + D_{X} |
290 |
|
|
\end{equation} |
291 |
mlosch |
1.4 |
where $\Gamma_X$ are the thermodynamic source terms and $D_{X}$ the |
292 |
mlosch |
1.5 |
diffusive terms for quantities $X=(c\cdot{h}), c, (c\cdot{h}_{s})$. |
293 |
mlosch |
1.4 |
% |
294 |
|
|
From the various advection scheme that are available in the MITgcm |
295 |
|
|
\citep{mitgcm02}, we choose flux-limited schemes |
296 |
|
|
\citep[multidimensional 2nd and 3rd-order advection scheme with flux |
297 |
|
|
limiter][]{roe85, hundsdorfer94} to preserve sharp gradients and edges |
298 |
|
|
that are typical of sea ice distributions and to rule out unphysical |
299 |
|
|
over- and undershoots (negative thickness or concentration). These |
300 |
|
|
scheme conserve volume and horizontal area and are unconditionally |
301 |
|
|
stable, so that we can set $D_{X}=0$. \ml{[do we need to proove that? |
302 |
|
|
can we proove that? citation?]} |
303 |
dimitri |
1.1 |
|
304 |
|
|
There is considerable doubt about the reliability of such a simple |
305 |
|
|
thermodynamic model---\citet{semtner84} found significant errors in |
306 |
|
|
phase (one month lead) and amplitude ($\approx$50\%\,overestimate) in |
307 |
|
|
such models---, so that today many sea ice models employ more complex |
308 |
|
|
thermodynamics. A popular thermodynamics model of \citet{winton00} is |
309 |
|
|
based on the 3-layer model of \citet{semtner76} and treats brine |
310 |
|
|
content by means of enthalphy conservation. This model requires in |
311 |
|
|
addition to ice-thickness and compactness (fractional area) additional |
312 |
|
|
state variables to be advected by ice velocities, namely enthalphy of |
313 |
|
|
the two ice layers and the thickness of the overlying snow layer. |
314 |
|
|
\ml{[Jean-Michel, your turf: ]Care must be taken in advecting these |
315 |
|
|
quantities in order to ensure conservation of enthalphy. Currently |
316 |
|
|
this can only be accomplished with a 2nd-order advection scheme with |
317 |
|
|
flux limiter \citep{roe85}.} |
318 |
|
|
|
319 |
|
|
|
320 |
|
|
\subsection{C-grid} |
321 |
|
|
\begin{itemize} |
322 |
|
|
\item no-slip vs. free-slip for both lsr and evp; |
323 |
|
|
"diagnostics" to look at and use for comparison |
324 |
|
|
\begin{itemize} |
325 |
|
|
\item ice transport through Fram Strait/Denmark Strait/Davis |
326 |
|
|
Strait/Bering strait (these are general) |
327 |
|
|
\item ice transport through narrow passages, e.g.\ Nares-Strait |
328 |
|
|
\end{itemize} |
329 |
|
|
\item compare different advection schemes (if lsr turns out to be more |
330 |
|
|
effective, then with lsr otherwise I prefer evp), eg. |
331 |
|
|
\begin{itemize} |
332 |
|
|
\item default 2nd-order with diff1=0.002 |
333 |
|
|
\item 1st-order upwind with diff1=0. |
334 |
|
|
\item DST3FL (SEAICEadvScheme=33 with diff1=0., should work, works for me) |
335 |
|
|
\item 2nd-order wit flux limiter (SEAICEadvScheme=77 with diff1=0.) |
336 |
|
|
\end{itemize} |
337 |
|
|
That should be enough. Here, total ice mass and location of ice edge |
338 |
|
|
is interesting. However, this comparison can be done in an idealized |
339 |
|
|
domain, may not require full Arctic Domain? |
340 |
|
|
\item |
341 |
|
|
Do a little study on the parameters of LSR and EVP |
342 |
|
|
\begin{enumerate} |
343 |
|
|
\item convergence of LSR, how many iterations do you need to get a |
344 |
|
|
true elliptic yield curve |
345 |
|
|
\item vary deltaTevp and the relaxation parameter for EVP and see when |
346 |
|
|
the EVP solution breaks down (relative to the forcing time scale). |
347 |
|
|
For this, it is essential that the evp solver gives use "stripeless" |
348 |
|
|
solutions, that is your dtevp = 1sec solutions/or 10sec solutions |
349 |
|
|
with SEAICE\_evpDampC = 615. |
350 |
|
|
\end{enumerate} |
351 |
dimitri |
1.2 |
|
352 |
dimitri |
1.1 |
\end{itemize} |
353 |
mlosch |
1.3 |
|
354 |
|
|
%%% Local Variables: |
355 |
|
|
%%% mode: latex |
356 |
|
|
%%% TeX-master: "ceaice" |
357 |
|
|
%%% End: |