icepack: optionally compute 'dragio' using under-ice roughness length #612
Conversation
In CICE-Consortium/Icepack@a80472b (icepack_parameters: optionally compute 'dragio' from under-ice roughness (CICE-Consortium/Icepack#366), 2021-06-22), Icepack was updated to optionally compute the ice-ocean drag coefficicent 'dragio' using an under-ice roughness length and the thickness of the first ocean level. Leverage this new feature in CICE by adding 'calc_dragio' and 'iceruf_ocn' to the CICE namelist. Add the new variables to the index in the documentation and add a test with the new feature (using default values for 'iceruf_ocn' and 'thickness_ocn_layer1'). As this new feature will mostly be useful in a coupled context, we do not add 'thickness_ocn_layer1' to the namelist as it is expected that the ocean model will pass this information to CICE.
In the previous commit we updated Icepack to allow computing the ice-ocean drag coefficient 'dragio' using an under-ice roughness length and the thickness of the first ocean layer, 'thickness_ocean_layer1', a new Icepack parameter. In some situations, we have access in CICE to the thicknesses of the ocean levels, either hard-coded (use_bathymetry = false, bathymetry_format = default), read from a file (use_bathymetry = true, bathymetry_format = pop), or generated from the kmt_file (use_bathymetry = false, bathymetry_format = pop). In these situations, for consistency set 'thickness_ocean_layer1' in Icepack to the thickness of the first ocean level, 'thick(1)' if 'calc_dragio' is active.
|
cc @JFLemieux73 |
|
I think this is ready to merge? @phil-blain, I assume this is pointing to a804 in icepack, current head of Icepack master in CICE-Consortium? Is there anyway to tell that in the PR? How do we know it's pointing to something on the CICE-Consortium master versus something on a branch in another fork? |
|
Yes, it is ready to merge, if you feel we don't need to wait for the base_suite results. I will add them today. We can wait for the tests. Re Icepack, if you go to the "Files changed" tab of the PR, scroll to the bottom where Icepack is listed, and click on the "9 files" link, you see that the URL of the "Comparing changes" pages that this links to ends with One way to check on GtiHub if the Icepack commit this PR points to is indeed merged to the Consortium's Icepack |
|
Thanks @apcraig. The test results are as expected: 322 measured results of 322 total results
320 of 322 tests PASSED
0 of 322 tests PENDING
2 of 322 tests MISSING data
0 of 322 tests FAILED
$ ./results.csh | \grep MISS
MISS daley_intel_smoke_gx3_4x1_calcdragio complog ff88891 missing-data
MISS daley_intel_smoke_gx3_4x1_calcdragio compare ff88891 -1 -1 -1 missing-dataThe missing data is for the test I'm adding in this PR. I've updated the PR description with this info. |
PR checklist
See title.
P Blain.
I'm running the base_suite now and will update with the results.
EDIT 25/06 Here are the results:
So everything is as expected (the missing data is for the test I'm adding in this PR).
How much do the PR code changes differ from the unmodified code?
Does this PR create or have dependencies on Icepack or any other models?
Does this PR add any new test cases?
Is the documentation being updated? ("Documentation" includes information on the wiki or in the .rst files from doc/source/, which are used to create the online technical docs at https://readthedocs.org/projects/cice-consortium-cice/. A test build of the technical docs will be performed as part of the PR testing.)
Please provide any additional information or relevant details below:
The first commit just updates Icepack to the latest version, adds
calc_dragioandiceruf_ocnto the CICE namelist and adds a test with ̀calc_dragio=T`. I added both variables to the index in the doc and I felt that was enough in terms of documentaiton; the Roy et al 2015 paper is already referenced in the Icepack doc.The second commit is not absolutely necessary, but I think that it's more consistent to use the 1st ocean level thickness if we have access to it internally, so that's why I added that change.