analytical

[jafar1979]

dear Kate
I have 2 questions about options which they are conflict with each other.
First one: should not those options be defined in header file simultaneously? If yes why in your branch ((https://github.com/kshedstrom/roms/tree ... ps/Caspian) ana_ssflux and EMINUSP defined in caspian.h file simultaneously? is it because of, EMINUSP given as a part of bulk-flux?

Code: Select all

#define ana_ssflux
.
.
#define BULK_FLUXES
ifdef BULK_FLUXES
.
.
# define EMINUSP
.
endif

Second one: (base on https://www.myroms.org/wiki/index.php/Options)why when option a is option b's conflict, option a is not b's conflict . For example UV_QDRAG is UV_PSOURCE's conflict but UV_PSOURCE is not UV_QDRAG 's conflict. Same thing happen for UV_SADVECTION and UV_C2ADVECTION,UV_C4ADVECTION

Cheers
jafar

[kate]

For the first one, setting ANA_SSFLUX sets stflx for salt in set_data.F. Setting BULK_FLUXES and EMINUSP sets stflx for salt in bulk_flux.F. I expect if you examine stflx, you see it get set one way, then the other way, then used, with the bulk_flux value winning. The Caspian is one of Paul Budgell's domains so I don't know why it is set that way.

[jafar1979]

Dear kate
thanks for your answer. but about second question.
i have seen (in https://www.myroms.org/wiki/index.php/Options) for some options: when a is b's conflict, b is a's conflict, too. but for others it doesn't happen.
For example uv_LDRAG and uv_QDARG are each other conflict. But for UV_QDRAG and UV_PSOURCE: UV_QDRAG introduced as a UV_PSOURCE's conflict but UV_PSOURCE doesn't introduced as a UV_QDRAG 's conflict. would you please tell me what its reason is.
thanks for your reply

jafar