Update stress12T calculation for C-grid #802
Conversation
stress12T was zero. Compute stress12T in subroutine stressC_T after computing estimate of shearT by averaging shearU. minor updates to some indentation and variable names.
|
FYI, the main changes are in stressC_T at line 1814 and 1841 and passing stress12T into the subroutine. Everything else is just formatting. |
| + shearU(i ,j-1) * uarea(i ,j-1) & | ||
| + shearU(i-1,j-1) * uarea(i-1,j-1) & | ||
| + shearU(i-1,j ) * uarea(i-1,j )) & | ||
| / (uarea(i,j)+uarea(i,j-1)+uarea(i-1,j-1)+uarea(i-1,j)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This isn't terribly important, but to reduce the number of flops and potentially also paging associated with strides, I'd save the denominator in a temporary scalar and reuse it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The compiler may do this for us, but I'll update it just to make sure.
|
So, pulling the denominator out of the equation changes answers because it affects both shearT (diagnostic) and shearTsqr (not diagnostic). It changes answers for most C-grid cases, B and CD cases are bit-for-bit, as expected. Answer differences seem to be roundoff at first then grow. Should I commit/push the change? I'm fine doing that and think it's a good time to do so, just wanted to check. |
|
Yes, I recommend doing it now. |
PR checklist
Update stress12T calculation for C-grid
apcraig
All bit-for-bit on cheyenne full test suites, https://github.com/CICE-Consortium/Test-Results/wiki/cice_by_hash_forks#8a45b97c1d4bb49fe7cdad98ecb7ea39dbc4b30c
stress12T was zero. Compute stress12T in subroutine stressC_T after computing estimate of shearT by averaging shearU. See #707 for additional discussion and results. This is just a diagnostic.
minor updates to some indentation and variable names.
closes #707