-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 195
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update several Docs sections + docstrings #2639
Conversation
Co-authored-by: Navid C. Constantinou <navidcy@users.noreply.github.com>
A preview of the docs will be available at https://clima.github.io/OceananigansDocumentation/previews/PR2639 (after the docs are build... it takes ~2hrs) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The change looks good to me but when I click on the two links I get 404 file not founds. Any idea why that might be?
@elise-palethorpe what do you think about 1b69908? |
I think eq 9 in https://clima.github.io/OceananigansDocumentation/previews/PR2639/numerical_implementation/poisson_solvers/ is correct; am I right? if so, I seem to have trouble deriving eq 10… |
OK, I see the derivation in pages 7-8 of https://www.overleaf.com/project/6042a885d8327860fae7cc5e. |
Ageed. It seems that we integrate the continuity equation from the bottom, z=-H, to the surface, z=0, exchange the order of integration and differentiation, and then substitute in the kinetmatic boundary conditions at the top and bottom. But maybe even more detail would be helpful? |
@elise-palethorpe is the pressure decomposition section done in 2423801 cleaner? |
src/Models/HydrostaticFreeSurfaceModels/matrix_implicit_free_surface_solver.jl
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
and ``M`` is some surface volume flux (e.g., terms such as precipitation, evaporation and runoff); currently the | ||
model takes ``M = 0``. | ||
|
||
To form a linear system that can be solved implicitly we recast the continuity equation into a discrete |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is really integrating over the volume. Can we say this explicitly?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can you elaborate a bit more?
But yes, these are the sort of things we'd like to clarify in the PR!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I added a bunch of clarifications. Hopefully I've addressed your concern @francispoulin?
@elise-palethorpe if you are happy with this PR merge when all tests pass ;) |
This PR updates several sections of the Docs to add clarity. In particular:
HydrostaticFreeSurfaceModel
docstringsAlso, closes #2653 and closes #2656.