Dear Jean-Michel,
Thank you very much for your explanations. I am relieved. In a case when 566 is used, I have not entered PRESCRIBED VELOCITIES into cas file and did not cancel the diffusion steps. So it is fine then. I was just afraid that values from the boundary conditions file dictate 0 velocities even I did not enter it in the cas file. I am delighted that it works well. So the case with the wind forcing on a stratified tank with one open boundary (566 +Thompson or 555+Thompson as a boundary conditions) is working well, I think. The surface elevation and velocities are in normal range for 3 months sumulation run. I probably should not call it a tank experiment, as it has one open boundary.
However, when I look back to the real fjord bathymetry case with wind forcing on it, the surface elevation is getting higher after 3 months run. I have tried boundary cond 544/or566+Thompson, it works fine but at the end of the third month the elevation is nearly 1.8m. I would expect some elevation due to the wind activities depending on its direction but not as high. This was the case with constant wind speed 10m/s. I thought that it is because of the unrealistic physical scenario, but the case for 6 months run with the real wind data gave me high elevation as well, up to 4.5m. In a case when OPTION FOR LIQUID BOUNDARY = 1 ( with 566 or 544 in cli file) gave errors with high velocities and depths at the very first steps. I have attached the plots of surface elevations for a "tank case" for 3 months run and one month result for a case with the real bathymetry. Even when I reused the steering file from the tank experiments to the real fjord bathymetry case, it still gave high elevation as well.
The closed fjord or tank wind cases are fine. I have attached the real fjord bathymetry files. Sorry to be a pain. Thank you very much. I appreciate your help.
Kind Regards!
Violeta