-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 65
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
Fix to dumbbell initialization in layer mode #160
Fix to dumbbell initialization in layer mode #160
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## dev/gfdl #160 +/- ##
============================================
- Coverage 34.01% 33.99% -0.02%
============================================
Files 259 259
Lines 70218 70248 +30
Branches 13011 13016 +5
============================================
Hits 23884 23884
- Misses 41835 41865 +30
Partials 4499 4499
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Overall this is a useful contribution that is moving in the right direction, but there is a dimensionally incorrect expression (noted in the line-specific comments) that will need to be corrected before this PR can be accept. As written, this would fail the dimensional consistency testing if Z_RESCALE_POWER is not set equal to H_RESCALE_POWER.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Some of the issues with this code have now been addressed, but the dimensionally inconsistent expression on line 454 of dumbbell_initialization.F90 still needs to be corrected by multiplying h_in by GV%H_to_Z. I would also request that after this change is made, that this contribution should be tested for dimensional consistency by running it with various settings for H_RESCALE_POWER and Z_RESCALE_POWER; the answers should be identical for any values between about -140 and 140 for these factors. For completeness of testing these two parameters should NOT use the same value.
All of my concerns with this PR have now been addressed, and I see this as a valuable new contribution. I am, however, recommending that we handle this PR via a squash merge, as it has a relatively high number of commits (9) for a straightforward new contribution, and several of the commits are partial or full reversions of the earlier commits. |
Gaea regression: https://gitlab.gfdl.noaa.gov/ogrp/MOM6/-/pipelines/16147 ✔️ (NOTE: There were multiple errors from the CI, but appear to be network-related and not to do with this PR.) |
This PR fixes the initialization of the dumbbell test to run with the layer mode.