Nonequilibrium in the parcel model #508
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #508 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 95.60% 95.60%
=======================================
Files 42 42
Lines 1615 1615
=======================================
Hits 1544 1544
Misses 71 71
|
parcel/ParcelParameters.jl
Outdated
| @@ -82,7 +82,29 @@ struct CondParams{FT} <: CMP.ParametersType{FT} | |||
| const_dt::FT | |||
| end | |||
|
|
|||
| struct NonEqCondParams_Anna{FT} <: CMP.ParametersType{FT} | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could we avoid my name? We could name it NonEqCondParams_simple (or stupid). Or just not include it alltogether and just show the MM2015 option.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Great -- I'm planning to just rename it "simple." I don't mind keeping it in the parcel just for testing reasons. But if we want to eventually get rid of it in the Noneq function all together, we can do that one day.
|
|
||
| cond_rate = MNE.conv_q_vap_to_q_liq_ice_MM2015(liquid, tps, q, ρ_air, T) | ||
|
|
||
| # using same limiter as ClimaAtmos for now |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would be good to do some testing and see if we need the limiter. Maybe we don't? Or if we do, maybe we can limit just by dt?
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| # solve ODE | ||
| local sol = run_parcel(IC, FT(0), t_max, params) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It would be neat to compare all two (or three depending on if you kick out the simple one) together. And it would be even neater to add a couple of words and the resulting plot to our docs, along with other parcel examples. This way at least your example will be run when we are building the docs during PRs.
Purpose
To-do
Content