You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Note: the difference in the calculation of wb and wbliq in the ground water is in question, so this issue should be paused while the question is investigated.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
ccarouge
added
blocked
Issue that requires other work to be done first
GWH
Ground water hydrology integration work
labels
Mar 6, 2025
following the discussion in #558 , it is confirmed we will need to introduce a separate calculation for fupper_limit for GW and non-GW. It's probably best to introduce a ice_volume that is either wbice or wbice*den_rat and keep a single form of the fupper_limit calculation. This issue is then unblocked and can be implemented.
It is not sure if the frozen_limit should change in consequence to the change to the meaning of wb in GW. The only thing we can do is add a warning for the doc.
We also need to update the doc on the calculation of fupper_limit as the warning is outdated.
In the latent heat code, we calculate an upper limit using:
CABLE/src/science/canopy/cbl_latent_heat.F90
Line 214 in 630e2e1
Because the ground water uses a different calculation for
wb
, we need to introduce a specific case for the gw_model modifying the upper line to:Note: the difference in the calculation of
wb
andwbliq
in the ground water is in question, so this issue should be paused while the question is investigated.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: