Martin Losch

Dan, I have pushed more code to my fork showing how I would include the extra mass implied by a moving (not melting) ice shelf. So far this does not...

and I also meant to say that it would be nice @jm-c could have a look at this, too.

@dngoldberg @jm-c I think that with the most recent commits (May08) I have now a working version of what I have outlined above. I think it is in a state...

Hi @dngoldberg , this is how to get the branch from my fork: `git clone -b obcs_balance_surface https://github.com/mjlosch/MITgcm.git` (or you can just go to my fork https://github.com/mjlosch/MITgcm.git and select the...

I just added a new verification/isomip.obcs to my branch, that can also be used for long tests. Currently the initial ice mass is not hydrostatically balanced, I am afraid, but...

hi @timothyas the ice shelf has two contributions: 1. the mass flux due to advancing ice; this ice mass will, by Archimedes's principle, displace ocean mass and raise the sea...

@jm-c The changes will not give me the same results, because the update is applied to different: tracer fields: - old way: compute `tendency` based on old `T/S` (called from...

@jm-c OK, you got me, I used to be smarter ... In the original Steven (1990) paper, e.g. here: https://archive.uea.ac.uk/~dps/publications/S90.pdf, the diffusion is retained along the boundary (eq 11-13 and...

Further, if I interpret `gad_calc_rhs.F` correctly then the horizontal diffusive fluxes are masked by `maskInC`, but the vertical ones are not, and again, the Stevens BCs are held responsible, same...

A third option (rather option 2a): we leave this PR open and I'll try to add the vertical diffusion part to it, so that the old results can be reproduced.