Express rheology term as a function of viscous coefficients for EVP and rEVP #639
Conversation
JFLemieux73
changed the title
| @@ -640,9 +642,10 @@ subroutine stress (nx_block, ny_block, & | |||
| tensionne, tensionnw, tensionse, tensionsw, & ! tension | |||
| shearne, shearnw, shearse, shearsw , & ! shearing | |||
| Deltane, Deltanw, Deltase, Deltasw , & ! Delt | |||
| zetane, zetanw, zetase, zetasw , & ! zeta viscous coeff | |||
| etane, etanw, etase, etasw , & ! eta viscous coeff | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it would be nicer if this line was aligned correctly
doc/source/cice_index.rst
Outdated
| @@ -202,6 +202,7 @@ either Celsius or Kelvin units). | |||
| "eps13", "a small number", "10\ :math:`^{-13}`" | |||
| "eps16", "a small number", "10\ :math:`^{-16}`" | |||
| "esno(n)", "energy of melting of snow per unit area (in category n)", "J/m\ :math:`^2`" | |||
| "eta", "viscous coefficient (shear)", "kg/s" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we also want to point out here that this is actually 2*eta ? (and same for zeta below)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I will think about it a bit more and might correct it later in another PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it's confusing to use eta and zeta, especially if they are different from the 'classic' definitions. Maybe etax2 and zetax2? Or eta2 and zeta2, although those could also be ^2 rather than x2. The code isn't consistent with this kind of thing.
|
The formatted doc changes can be seen here: https://cice-consortium-cice--639.org.readthedocs.build/en/639/science_guide/sg_dynamics.html#stress-evp |
|
Also (not really related), I'm noticing this link: https://github.com/CICE-Consortium/CICE/pull/639/files#diff-11d70aaccc7bcc5a2940f34bce5510966aa84c7cedbb6d59df0a1f61f1945d28R387-R388 does not work, which could be corrected while we're at it... |
|
oups my link does not work (GitHub bug it seems when linking to an expanded portion of the diff). I'm talking about the link to the Icepack doc at the end of https://github.com/CICE-Consortium/CICE/blob/85d7b71840cfecb6d12fd1d74270a340ac2c23f6/doc/source/science_guide/sg_dynamics.rst#internal-stress |
It looks/works OK in the readthedocs to me. Maybe we're looking at different things? |
doc/source/cice_index.rst
Outdated
| @@ -202,6 +202,7 @@ either Celsius or Kelvin units). | |||
| "eps13", "a small number", "10\ :math:`^{-13}`" | |||
| "eps16", "a small number", "10\ :math:`^{-16}`" | |||
| "esno(n)", "energy of melting of snow per unit area (in category n)", "J/m\ :math:`^2`" | |||
| "eta", "viscous coefficient (shear)", "kg/s" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it's confusing to use eta and zeta, especially if they are different from the 'classic' definitions. Maybe etax2 and zetax2? Or eta2 and zeta2, although those could also be ^2 rather than x2. The code isn't consistent with this kind of thing.
|
I like etax2 and zetax2...I will make these changes. |
|
So I just changed eta,zeta to etax2,zetax2. I have verified that I did not break anything. I ran gx3 for 1 day and the result with etax2,zetax2 is BFB with respect to the result with eta,zeta (for both evp and revised evp). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I realize that I'm not being consistent in my complaints about variable names. I usually ask not to use greek letters, preferring something more descriptive. In this case, that would be something like viscoshearx2, but eta and zeta are so entrenched from the Hibler79 VP model, I don't mind in this case. Just saying. Happy to entertain other opinions but will approve for now. If we don't hear anything by end-of-day tomorrow, we'll merge for weekend testing.
|
Philippe also asked me to confirm that all the tests that "failed" in the end-to-end procedure are the ones with EVP and revised EVP. It is the case: the tests with VP, EAP and 1d-EVP (eta and zeta are not used yet for 1d-EVP) are BFB. |
For detailed information about submitting Pull Requests (PRs) to the CICE-Consortium,
please refer to: https://github.com/CICE-Consortium/About-Us/wiki/Resource-Index#information-for-developers
PR checklist
Express rheology term as a function of viscous coefficients for EVP and rEVP
@JFLemieux73
see Express rheology term as a function of viscous coefficients for EVP and rEVP #634