-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
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
CICE C-grid runs using 0.25deg #230
Comments
I reported the shortage of info in the stack trace here: ACCESS-NRI/ACCESS-OM3#13 |
I will set the DT_THERM back to 1350s and try again :) |
With DT_THERM set to the default, the Bgrid configuration is still running (almost 2 years). With the Cgrid (https://github.com/ACCESS-NRI/access-om3-configs/compare/34e2136cab181fd38068d9e35bbc85f3f9de9db9...anton-seaice:MOM6-CICE6:dev-025deg_jra55do_ryf-cgrid?expand=1), I get the errors with The errors are :
and
It doesn't say which extreme sfc_state detected is causing the issue, but presumably SSH. There is a bit of a "shelf?" in the crash location (a nameless bay, western bering sea): But nothing else obvious going on - I looked at daily mean of SSH, and sea-ice concentration. I can't see how turning on C-grid in CICE has impacted this ? Should I turn on time-step output for SSH and re-run (or is |
|
From the messages it looks like the error might originate in the barotropic solver, so you could try reducing the magnitude of |
I ran with DTBT of 0.5 and found CICE crashed with negative area. I raised CICE-Consortium/CICE#992 Config is anton-seaice/MOM6-CICE6@e450508 Analysis is https://github.com/anton-seaice/sandbox/blob/main/025deg_cgrid_neg_ice_area.ipynb |
This might be unrelated, but does the crash occur with the 1-degree config? My understanding is that the logic behind the C-grid in CICE6 is the same for both 1 deg and 0.25 deg configs. If the 1 deg config runs without issues, it might suggest that the problem is still related to the bathymetry. |
Its possible - but there have been other reports / questions about excessive ice velocities and the new scheme being possibly unstable, so I thought it was worth raising. And the patterning in sea ice concentration looks more like an issue with boundary conditions at the edge of the land mask or similar ? The 1 degree config did run, but I am not convinced there wasn't a problem with the velocities at the ice edge. e.g. see the last plot in #39 (comment) where the c grid velocities at the ice edge are higher than b grid I think the idea of running with the short barotropic timestep was to improve ocean stability ? I'm a bit out of my depth with that though. An issue with bathymetry typically shows in the baroclinic timestep doesn't it ? |
I think the greater velocities at the ice edge is sensible, because Cgrid configurations allow for a more accurate representation of velocity gradients, which can lead to hgiher velocities at the ice edge, especially when resolving finer details compared to Bgrid. A better way to debug this issue could be reducing both barotropic and baroclinic timesteps further or increasing the coupling frequency to ensure more data exchange between mom and cice. |
Following recent discussions , I ran the 025deg ryf with
Diabatic_first=True
Dt_therm = 5400s (1.5 hours)
and otherwise the default configuration (the om2 grid / bathymetry / initial conditions / cice b-grid)
It ran until the 18th March in the second year
And crashed with too many truncations :
Is this consistent with your work @minghangli-uni - should I increase the number of allowable truncations and see if they stabilise?
Config is here: ACCESS-NRI/access-om3-configs@34e2136...51fbffa
Output is in:
/g/data/tm70/as2285/payu/dev-025deg_jra55do_ryf-bgrid/work
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: