[ecco-support] [EXTERNAL] Calculation of ice-ocean freshwater flux from ECCO v4r4

[Dimitris Menemenlis]

Hi Alex, a document that I find useful (I hope that it is still mostly accurate) is:
https://github.com/MITgcm/MITgcm/blob/master/doc/old_doc/diags_changes.txt <https://github.com/MITgcm/MITgcm/blob/master/doc/old_doc/diags_changes.txt>
SFLUX does not depend on oceFWflx, EXFempmr, nor SIempmr.
In ECCO v4r4, the only source of SFLUX is melting or freezing sea ice, absorbing or returning salt to the ocean.

Dimitris


> On Mar 17, 2021, at 3:21 AM, Alexander Haumann <haumann at princeton.edu> wrote:
> 
> Dear ECCO support,
> 
> I am trying to estimate the different components of the surface freshwater flux balance from ECCO v4r4 and I am wondering if you could maybe help me with clarifying some issues that I have.
> 
> A colleague of mine estimated the total surface salt flux variations from SFLUX and I am trying to explain its variability from the different components of the surface freshwater fluxes. However, the sum of the ocean freshwater fluxes does not match the interannual variability in the salt flux. My main problems are (1) that I am not quite sure which freshwater flux is being used to obtain SFLUX and would be the equivalent and (2) how to estimate the sea-ice--ocean flux component.
> 
> In terms of (1) there are three variables in the documentation that are referred to as total ocean freshwater flux: oceFWflx, EXFempmr, SIempmr. Which one should I use to match SFLUX? How is SFLUX in the model being calculated from the surface freshwater flux? SIempmr seems to be missing from the output files (nctiles_monthly) on the ECCO Drive in v4r4.
> 
> In terms of (2), a colleague of mine recommended me to calculate the sea-ice--ocean flux as  -SIempmr- (SIatmFW-SIsnPrcp). However, for this calculation I would missing the SIempmr from the output. Would that in principal be correct? I have tried to calculate it as oceFWflx-SIatmFW, which looks reasonable in terms of spatial pattern but the variability does not match the SFLUX variability. So, I am skeptical that this is the correct approach.
> 
> Thank you very much for your time and help.
> 
> Best wishes,
> Alex
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Dr. F. Alexander Haumann, Associate Research Scholar
> Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, Princeton University
> & British Antarctic Survey Honorary Researcher
> https://www.ahaumann.net <https://urldefense.us/v3/__https://www.ahaumann.net__;!!PvBDto6Hs4WbVuu7!ZrhOnousa8Gzk96Di9aBv1_A9vAPtU16KgH5Vbgp4E9Fz4-UmO0KAf-fwpPcXZt5j1Yy$>
> _______________________________________________
> ecco-support mailing list
> ecco-support at mit.edu
> https://urldefense.us/v3/__http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/ecco-support__;!!PvBDto6Hs4WbVuu7!ZrhOnousa8Gzk96Di9aBv1_A9vAPtU16KgH5Vbgp4E9Fz4-UmO0KAf-fwpPcXRP_yxys$ 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/ecco-support/attachments/20210317/58eb06a0/attachment.html