“Sea Ice Rheology Experiment (SIREx): 1. Scaling and Statistical Properties of Sea-Ice Deformation Fields”
This is basically an ad-hoc “MIP” for sea ice rheology. Interestingly for COSIMA it includes models with both EVP and EAP (both options within CICE).
I haven’t yet digested it but this sentence stuck out: “The improved spatial localization for RASM-WRF (EAP) nonetheless suggests that a more detailed analysis of the potential advantages of using the EAP rheology compared to the classic (E)VP rheology would be a welcome contribution in the future.”
I know there was some consideration of an EAP run at some stage which is why I bring it up here
Thanks @adfaser for the paper, I have seen it presented at conferences a few times whilst I have been listening online. I haven’t seen EAP used for Antarctic but it might be worth trying, we should discuss to try it when we make progress in ACCESS-OM3 (CICE6.4) though probably need to be at high resolution.
CICE C-grid implementation doesn’t include EAP (see Lemiuex preprint). I am not sure if there are plans to include it.
There may be limited Antarctic records to compare to? i.e. ice buoys, although maybe the are SAR records that could be examined and would need to be fairly high resolution.
The SIREX paper suggests reducing the shear-to-compressive ice strength parameters, (i.e. e_yieldcurve/e_plasticpot and Pstar) would improve landfast ice and reduce the thickness bias (although Arctic focussed).
I admit that the topic is a bit cryptic (for me at least). It’s just two acronyms that I have no idea. Could we add a bit more info in the title? Sorry for bringing this up…
EAP and EVP are models of rheology within sea-ice. I think ‘rheology’ is supposed to capture the way that sea-ice can have characteristics of both solid and a fluid. So it should capture the way that sea ice can have both/either elastic or plastic response to stress (and maybe can also have some fluid like properties?).
