add a teos-10 version of frazil formation+melt

[alicebarthel]

This draft PR is to provide a space to review/discuss the implementation of a new frazil code.
The frazil is meant to be thermodynamically consistent with the teos-10 ocean in omega.
We calculate the (cell, layer) tendencies and store 3 column-accumulated frazil fields that will be passed to the coupler.
For conservation, we keep track of pure (fresh) ice mass, brine water mass, and brine salt mass separately within the ocean to allow melt to be energetically-consistent.
I added a vertical conservation check and a vertical depth limit.

The tests currently rely on a verbose log that only work on CPU. This will be removed before merge/production.
The eos functions rely on the module, which require CPU. Later port of eos features will allow portability.

I haven't gotten to type up a clean omega frazil documentation yet, but the existing overleaf should be roughly in line with this implementation. Happy to discuss.

Checklist

• Documentation:
  • Design document has been generated and added to the docs
  • User's Guide has been updated
  • Developer's Guide has been updated
  • Documentation has been built locally and changes look as expected
• Linting
  • Pre-commit run locally
• Building
  • CMake build does not produce any new warnings from changes in this PR
• Testing
  • CTest unit tests all pass on pm-cpu
  • The Polaris omega_pr test suite
    has passed, using the Polaris e3sm_submodules/Omega baseline
    • Document machine(s), compiler(s), and the build path(s) used for -p for both the baseline (Polaris e3sm_submodules/Omega) and the PR build
    • Indicate "All tests passed" or document failing tests
  • New tests:
    • a new CTest unit test has been implemented. It tests the single cell value for frazil formation and the full-column in a hacky single column test (manual toggle for kernel logging).
    • Polaris tests: --> the frazil tests should be further tested in new single-column tests.

[alicebarthel]

@njeffery the key simplification that I have left in at this stage is that formation/melt is calculated based on the per-layer characteristics (i.e. would this layer freeze? --> adds to the frazil formed). The better way that we agreed to try is to mix the frazil (energy, mass, salt) first before assessing whether the layer would freeze.
I wanted to be confident with this version before adding further complexity.

[alicebarthel]

@njeffery, thanks for your feedback! I updated the code accordingly: massLimit on melt tendency, and refactoring the melt terms using a common factor fractionFrazilMelted, which simplifies the implementation.