Regarding the option TIDENAME

Report or discuss software problems and other woes

Moderators: arango, robertson

Post Reply
Message
Author
aakashsane
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2017 2:14 pm
Location: Brown University

Regarding the option TIDENAME

#1 Post by aakashsane » Tue Feb 20, 2018 3:07 am

Hi,

I am a new user and I am confused about one option in the ocean.in file.
If I have to specify tidal forcing, should I specify it under
FRCNAME = ...... by switching off the options SSH_TIDES, UV_TIDES and RAMP_TIDES

OR switch on the options SSH_TIDES, UV_TIDES and RAMP_TIDES
and specify the tidal forcing file in the option ' TIDENAME '?

Best,
Aakash

User avatar
kate
Posts: 3757
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 5:29 pm
Location: IMS/UAF, USA

Re: Regarding the option TIDENAME

#2 Post by kate » Tue Feb 20, 2018 4:57 am

OR switch on the options SSH_TIDES, UV_TIDES and RAMP_TIDES
and specify the tidal forcing file in the option ' TIDENAME '?
Yes, this. Though I don't bother with RAMP_TIDES.

User avatar
wilkin
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 5:44 pm
Location: Rutgers University
Contact:

Re: Regarding the option TIDENAME

#3 Post by wilkin » Tue Feb 20, 2018 10:35 pm

There was a change made in July 2017 to remove tide forcing from the regular list of forcing files given in FRCNAME.

Here is the ticket:
https://www.myroms.org/projects/src/ticket/736

This was to facilitate using the same list of meteorological forcing files for every nest in nesting downscaling applications without repeating the whole list for each grid as was required previously. In such a situation only the parent grid needs tides, so logically the lists are not the same.

Note that the river source file was previously removed from the FRCNAME list for similar reasons.
John Wilkin: DMCS Rutgers University
71 Dudley Rd, New Brunswick, NJ 08901-8521, USA. ph: 609-630-0559 jwilkin@rutgers.edu

aakashsane
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2017 2:14 pm
Location: Brown University

Re: Regarding the option TIDENAME

#4 Post by aakashsane » Tue Feb 20, 2018 10:44 pm

Great, that clears things up.

Thanks!

-Aakash

User avatar
m.hadfield
Posts: 520
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2003 4:12 am
Location: NIWA

Re: Regarding the option TIDENAME

#5 Post by m.hadfield » Tue Feb 20, 2018 11:13 pm

kate wrote:Though I don't bother with RAMP_TIDES.
An aside: If you have shallow water in your domain and wetting and drying is not enabled, RAMP_TIDES can be useful to avoid transients that drop the water level below the bathymetry, hence crashing the model.

User avatar
kate
Posts: 3757
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 5:29 pm
Location: IMS/UAF, USA

Re: Regarding the option TIDENAME

#6 Post by kate » Tue Feb 20, 2018 11:19 pm

OK, interesting. It won't help with that storm surge two years into a run which caused things to blow up (and me to turn on WET_DRY).

johnluick
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 3:46 pm
Location: South Australian Research and Development Institute

Re: Regarding the option TIDENAME

#7 Post by johnluick » Thu Feb 22, 2018 12:43 pm

For some reason I was under the impression that RAMP_TIDES had been effectively hardwired in a few years back. From what you (Mark) are saying, I was wrong about that.

User avatar
m.hadfield
Posts: 520
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2003 4:12 am
Location: NIWA

Re: Regarding the option TIDENAME

#8 Post by m.hadfield » Thu Feb 22, 2018 7:17 pm


johnluick
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 3:46 pm
Location: South Australian Research and Development Institute

Re: Regarding the option TIDENAME

#9 Post by johnluick » Sat Feb 24, 2018 4:29 am

Thanks, Mark! I see that ramp is still there.

Post Reply