Skip to content

GitLab

MEDUSA DOCU : Rivers · Changes

Page history
Update MEDUSA DOCU : Rivers authored by julpal's avatar julpal
Show whitespace changes
Inline Side-by-side
Showing with 33 additions and 32 deletions
MEDUSA-DOCU-:-Rivers.md
View page @ f137ebb9
......@@ -13,39 +13,39 @@ First, the code itself does what we want. just fixed 3 bugs :
first runs did not work because of something in the newly made river input files.
* tested 1 by 1 seems to come from the N river inputs. but all fields show high values in some specific river mouth, of which some in the Arctic look present very high values (here some example after 5month):
![image](uploads/4ae4a88ef9ea50f48bcf9726ae1cc339/image.png)
![image](uploads/8365eb8f996f74a54eba4e5779ccc533/image.png)
![image](uploads/301596b4def888b749645a80b1ad8be0/image.png)
![image](uploads/12c9d88b32ea1aeb96e4fa5baa5ca232/image.png)
<img src="uploads/4ae4a88ef9ea50f48bcf9726ae1cc339/image.png" width=49%>
<img src="uploads/8365eb8f996f74a54eba4e5779ccc533/image.png" width=49%>
<img src="uploads/301596b4def888b749645a80b1ad8be0/image.png" width=49%>
<img src="uploads/12c9d88b32ea1aeb96e4fa5baa5ca232/image.png" width=49%>
those results are when using the files :
* river42_total_ALK_flux_LS200km_SP10_OBfix_ORCA025.nc
* river42_total_DIC_flux_LS200km_SP10_OBfix_ORCA025.nc
* river42_tot_N_flux_LS200km_SP10_OBfix_ORCA025.nc
* river42_tot_Si_flux_LS200km_SP10_OBfix_ORCA025.nc
* maybe the we can try with LS 400? here a diff:
![image](uploads/d3e2a8d4d01e79c10c74ae66dd379eae/image.png)
<img src="uploads/d3e2a8d4d01e79c10c74ae66dd379eae/image.png" width=49%>
Running the LS 400 river nutrients did not solve the problem.
* Andrew added made some special treatment to the Ob fjord in the Russian Arctic. (diff with - without Ob special treatment)
![image](uploads/62f3d916bf9f95a7df77d6fb66d155b7/image.png)
it didn't Solve the problem.
<img src="uploads/62f3d916bf9f95a7df77d6fb66d155b7/image.png" width=49%>
It didn't Solve the problem.
* I've them re-run the last rivers, spreading the nutrients down to 70m deep (max) instead of 10m earlier (see DIN between 2 and 102 mmol/m3 -- max go up to 155mmol/m3 in around the Ob).
![image](uploads/b0865550336663aae5a6aa3f711f510b/image.png)
<img src="uploads/b0865550336663aae5a6aa3f711f510b/image.png" width=49%>
Still no Luck.
* Looking at the bathy, spreading the river nutrients down to 70m won't make a difference in the Arctic...
![image](uploads/95144a1ef30abdeb77be433d63cf03f1/image.png)
<img src="uploads/95144a1ef30abdeb77be433d63cf03f1/image.png" width=49%>
As the sea-floor stands between 8 and 15m deep around there...
* Last hope LS400 with special Ob treatment.
This test ran longer than the 200km version (7month compared to 2) but still, it eventually failed. same problem around the Ob :
![image](uploads/c21513423d741d6ff0251f1c15116183/image.png)
![image](uploads/9f9ef204baee4095bd9536d18a712813/image.png)
![image](uploads/f95e4b982c97f0209fd2a5a862e1d7c8/image.png)
![image](uploads/a26ced6fb1cdcf471fe15601ea9a151a/image.png)
<img src="uploads/c21513423d741d6ff0251f1c15116183/image.png" width=49%>
<img src="uploads/9f9ef204baee4095bd9536d18a712813/image.png" width=49%>
<img src="uploads/f95e4b982c97f0209fd2a5a862e1d7c8/image.png" width=49%>
<img src="uploads/a26ced6fb1cdcf471fe15601ea9a151a/image.png" width=49%>
And Here LS400 just before it failed
![image](uploads/07bff8f8c1bd16cebc983a1ead597f16/image.png)
<img src="uploads/07bff8f8c1bd16cebc983a1ead597f16/image.png" width=49%>
A solution would be to fill (on top of the Ob river mouth) the other problematic fjords, circled in the last plot. The "filling" is only for the river nutrient flux file creation, not at run time. This way, the nutrients would be released in a better mixed location and avoid the accumulation we see in those fjords. Best would be to use the 200km files made this way.
* New Test with more Fjords filled :
Here is the new modified river input (for N and Si) in the Arctic:
![image](uploads/3487de80cc21bf074f45c1f2347ca13d/image.png)
<img src="uploads/3487de80cc21bf074f45c1f2347ca13d/image.png" width=49%>
Unfortunately, it failed... again...
Here are some plots :
The usual suspects look OK-ish
......@@ -54,7 +54,8 @@ first runs did not work because of something in the newly made river input files
<img src="uploads/43f5d08cded6f7f56869b064fb2e7ac6/image.png" width=49%>
<img src="uploads/c858feaceb0cf8493379f59a01a8dc0a/image.png" width=49%>
The DIN values are not insane, but this is after 1 month... we might want to fill a tiny bit more in the circled areas
Further East another beast : This one looks nasty... it's in the middle of probably quite still waters. would be good to fill this part.
![image](uploads/af5a9c44dd4919ab58b577b414aa7ea6/image.png)
Further East another beast : This one looks nasty... it's in the middle of probably quite still waters. would be good to fill the suggested part (narrow, and no freshwater).
<img src="uploads/af5a9c44dd4919ab58b577b414aa7ea6/image.png" width=49%>
<img src="uploads/c1092d371588232c303fe36a4290a605/image.png" width=49%>
last bit of the Arctic looks OK
![image](uploads/a8a5cea74a2ea9eb279b43c3ec2ddb50/image.png)
\ No newline at end of file
<img src="uploads/a8a5cea74a2ea9eb279b43c3ec2ddb50/image.png" width=49%>
\ No newline at end of file