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

Prep some things for using OrdinaryDiffEq.jl #461

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 28, 2021
Merged

Prep some things for using OrdinaryDiffEq.jl #461

merged 1 commit into from
Oct 28, 2021

Conversation

charleskawczynski
Copy link
Member

@charleskawczynski charleskawczynski commented Oct 27, 2021

This PR preps some things for using OrdinaryDiffEq.jl.

@charleskawczynski
Copy link
Member Author

All of the cases look great, but GABLS has some noticeable changes. Is this tune-able? See any issues with these changes, @yairchn?

@yairchn
Copy link
Member

yairchn commented Oct 28, 2021

All of the cases look great, but GABLS has some noticeable changes. Is this tune-able? See any issues with these changes, @yairchn?

what is happening is that you remove the condition on the sign of surface buoyancy flux in the updraft BC, it was here

but its not there anymore

function set_updraft_surface_bc(edmf::EDMF_PrognosticTKE, grid, state, up)

so now you are getting an updraft in the first grid point (that never grows) and disrupts the surface BC for GABLS

for all other cases bflux>0 and this is not an issue

@charleskawczynski
Copy link
Member Author

charleskawczynski commented Oct 28, 2021

but its not there anymore

It's still there, I renamed it to compute_updraft_surface_bc-- to differentiate between that and a new function I added, set_updraft_surface_bc, which acts on the state and is needed in multiple places.

@charleskawczynski
Copy link
Member Author

bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors bot commented Oct 28, 2021

Build succeeded:

@bors bors bot merged commit 1f1c5ac into main Oct 28, 2021
@bors bors bot deleted the ck/prep_ode branch October 28, 2021 20:33
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants