Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

add_MARBL: process MARBL-specified parameters #3

Closed
mnlevy1981 opened this issue Jul 22, 2019 · 2 comments
Closed

add_MARBL: process MARBL-specified parameters #3

mnlevy1981 opened this issue Jul 22, 2019 · 2 comments

Comments

@mnlevy1981
Copy link
Owner

  1. Call MARBL scripts to generate marbl_in

    • Requires a way to override default MARBL parameter values

  2. Read marbl_in in MOM6 and pass to MARBL with marbl_instance%put_setting()
@mnlevy1981
Copy link
Owner Author

I split this into two tickets, so step one is #8

@mnlevy1981
Copy link
Owner Author

Step (2) is done in 4ace7c9

mnlevy1981 pushed a commit that referenced this issue Apr 19, 2021
@Hallberg-NOAA
Merge pull request #3 from marshallward/pass_through_doc
3226f1b 
MOM_domain_infra: Document FMS passthroughs
mnlevy1981 pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 2, 2022
@sditkovsky
(+) porous topography implementation (#3)
8b5e10a 
* reads in porous topography parameters from CHANNEL_LIST_FILE

*new module to compute curve fit for porous topography

*porous constraints used to modify continuity_PPM, CoriolisAdv, and Rayleigh bottom channel drag
mnlevy1981 pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 2, 2022
@Hallberg-NOAA
Merge pull request #3 from sditkovsky/porous_topo_sjd
2087e05 
(+) porous topography implementation
mnlevy1981 pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 2, 2022
@Hallberg-NOAA @marshallward
(*)Use por_face_area in zonal_face_thickness
2b2214d 
  Use the por_face_area[UV] in the effective thickness calculations in
zonal_face_thickness and merid_face_thickness, so that they are more consistent
with their use elsewhere in the code for the relative weights in calculating the
barotropic accelerations.  Because these por_face_area arrays are still 1 in all
test cases, the answers are unchanged in any test cases from before a few weeks
ago, but there could be answer changes in cases that are using the very recently
added capability (in PR #3) to set fractional face areas.  This change was
discussed with Sam Ditkovsky, and agreed that there is no reason to keep the
ability to recover the previous answers in any cases that use the recently added
partial face width option.

  This commit also expanded the comments describing the h_u and h_v arguments to
btcalc(), zonal_face_thickness(), and merid_face_thickness() routines, the
diag_h[uv] elements of the accel_diag_ptrs type and the h_u and h_v elements of
the BT_cont_type.

  All answers and output are bitwise identical in the MOM6-examples test suite
and TC tests, but answer changes are possible in cases using a very recently
added code option.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@mnlevy1981