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.

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

Plans for BLOM/iHAMOCC for NorESM2.5 #340

Open
10 of 23 tasks
TomasTorsvik opened this issue May 7, 2024 · 2 comments
Open
10 of 23 tasks

Plans for BLOM/iHAMOCC for NorESM2.5 #340

TomasTorsvik opened this issue May 7, 2024 · 2 comments
Assignees
Labels
code release Issues related to upcoming code release or tagging

Comments

@TomasTorsvik
Copy link
Contributor

TomasTorsvik commented May 7, 2024

Tentative plans for default (and optional) settings for BLOM/iHAMOCC towards NorESM2.5

  • We will keep the MCT support until the technical release of NorESM2.5

  • cgs units support will phase out - likely keep unit support for the restart files reading to enable restart from former restart files

BLOM-specific

  • only mks (default) (remove cgs dependencies)
  • Add 2 degree grid resolution
  • Test all model configurations with NUOPC coupler
  • Apply existing higher order vertical reconstruction for the remapping of diagnostic fields on to reference depths (hybrid coord. only, reconstruction does not exist for isopycnic coord.)

iHAMOCC-specific

Planning for release-1.7

Tasks under this heading can go into a new release-1.7, and will be carried forward into NorESM2.5.

BLOM-specific

  • BLOM code refactorization
  • hybrid coordinates (default) (isopycnal optional)
  • Add 1/2 degree grid resolution

iHAMOCC-specific

@TomasTorsvik
Copy link
Contributor Author

This should maybe go into the milestone description at some point. Just edit the first entry if you have more things to add.

@mvertens
Copy link
Contributor

@TomasTorsvik @matsbn @JorgSchwinger @jmaerz - some of these tasks will no longer be needed once we use the new stream functionality in BLOM. In particular you will not need separate datasets for 2 degree and 1/2 degree. I hope to start implementing this next week. We had decided to move ahead with the 1/2 degree using the older approach since simulations were going to being very soon and we did not want the new implementation holding up the science. However, I hope to have this in place so that we don't need to generate new datasets for 2 degrees and then hopefully move all the resolutions to just interpolation from the original source. At least that is what I think that @matsbn was leaning towards.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
code release Issues related to upcoming code release or tagging
Projects
Status: Todo
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants