Fix bug on sea ice fluxes

[navidcy]

From #456

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 14.25%. Comparing base (09edc1f) to head (a0109a3).
⚠️ Report is 31 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...odels/InterfaceComputations/assemble_net_fluxes.jl	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #561      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   14.35%   14.25%   -0.11%     
==========================================
  Files          48       48              
  Lines        2835     2835              
==========================================
- Hits          407      404       -3     
- Misses       2428     2431       +3     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[glwagner]

Not sure if kᴺ is right (unless we have a 1-layer sea ice model that is using the same grid as the ocean model?)

[navidcy]

Not sure if kᴺ is right (unless we have a 1-layer sea ice model that is using the same grid as the ocean model?)

@simone-silvestri?

[simone-silvestri]

Right, I guess for now it is irrelevant because we have a zero-layer model, and concentration is a reduced field in z. I think we haven't decided yet how a multi-layer model will look, but I guess the concentration will always remain two-dimensional?

[glwagner]

Right, I guess for now it is irrelevant because we have a zero-layer model, and concentration is a reduced field in z. I think we haven't decided yet how a multi-layer model will look, but I guess the concentration will always remain two-dimensional?

Correct, concentration, velocity, and total thickness are two-dimensional

[navidcy]

Why is this needed in the #456 then? I’m bit confused

[glwagner]

Why is this needed in the #456 then? I’m bit confused

What is "this" ?

[navidcy]

Sorry. “This” referred to the changes proposed in this PR. I extracted them from the #456 and was thinking that if it’s a bugfix it deserves to be fixed for all the package, not only when we merge the #456.

[glwagner]

Sorry. “This” referred to the changes proposed in this PR. I extracted them from the #456 and was thinking that if it’s a bugfix it deserves to be fixed for all the package, not only when we merge the #456.

Ah ok. It's impossible to say for sure what these changes do specifically without knowing what grid the sea ice model is using. I believe, if ice_concentration has Nothing location in the vertical, this change is irrelevant (and will remain so in the future). The situation in which it could have an effect is if ice_concentration has a non-nothing vertical location, and is built using indices = (:, :, Nz) or something.

You need to have all of the details in order to understand the impact of this PR.

[navidcy]

Totally. Thanks! 🙏🏼