forked from ESCOMP/CMEPS
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
Generalise rofi spreading #23
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
kieranricardo
wants to merge
14
commits into
cmeps1.1.35-x
Choose a base branch
from
generalise-rofi-spreading
base: cmeps1.1.35-x
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from 8 commits
Commits
Show all changes
14 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
18211b0
generalise rofi spreading to arbtitrary components, and add into post…
kieranricardo 17dd52b
add missing variable declarations and imports
kieranricardo 51a7084
update rofi field spreading name
kieranricardo 1b264eb
share more code between post rof and post atm, add in `spread_rofi_*h…
kieranricardo 1510809
remove uneccesary changes
kieranricardo 5797ecb
add subroutine argument comment
kieranricardo bc1e91b
declare variables
kieranricardo 85a2b4a
declare variables
kieranricardo 93501fc
Update mediator/med_phases_post_rof_mod.F90
kieranricardo effb2d7
Update mediator/med_phases_post_rof_mod.F90
kieranricardo 25aeed3
Update mediator/med_phases_post_atm_mod.F90
kieranricardo 8eff754
review response
kieranricardo acfb661
review response
kieranricardo 076447a
make spreading_initialized flag a local variable
kieranricardo File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
did rofi and rofl get seperated elsewhere ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In
access-esmroflonly contains the river runoff, androficontains both the iceberg basal and calving melt fluxes. The spreading here simultaneously does your calving flux spreading + a coastal distribution for the basal melt. Is that what you meant?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh - ah, I think it's better to have seperate steps in the mediator for basal and iceberg right ?
basal fraction, gets remapped with a fixed remapping weights file to put it along coastlines
and iceberg gets spread like this change
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It would be great if what was done was as close as possible consistent with OM3.
So that would mean splitting the iceberg and basal proportions before they leave the mediator. And having separate
rofi/roflfields to correspond to the MOM fields. It's relatively clear in the MOM diagnostics thatrofishould be for the iceberg fraction - e.g. https://github.com/ACCESS-NRI/access-om3-configs/blob/b14a2797812531d5b4728f04cd67dcee19bfe439/docs/available_diags.000000#L4548, although less clear about the liquid proportion (e.g. there arelrunoff_glcfields available which OM3 doesn't use). Having separate fields forrofiandroflmeans therofispreading input file can be the same across the two models. It also supports future/ongoing work to figure out how to spread the basal melt fraction verticallyThe proposal to put the basal melt component in
rofiby having a single pattern with 50% of the volume at the coastline will continue to give issues with supercooled water & excess sea ice from the large latent heat flux at the coastlines.