-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
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
Non orographic gw parameterization for GCM configurations #983
Conversation
@charleskawczynski I know I allocate a lot here... Could you help take a look together to improve the performance? |
What's the difference between the sphere and column gravity wave parameterizations? |
examples/hybrid/gravitywave_parameterization/gravity_wave_parameterization.jl
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
examples/hybrid/gravitywave_parameterization/gravity_wave_parameterization.jl
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Would it be easier to revisit this after revisiting the existing GWP first? |
examples/hybrid/gravitywave_parameterization/gravity_wave_parameterization.jl
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
examples/hybrid/gravitywave_parameterization/gravity_wave_parameterization.jl
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
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.
examples/hybrid/gravitywave_parameterization/gravity_wave_parameterization.jl
Show resolved
Hide resolved
The two links do not seem to work ... I added it into the short ci runs to make sure the functionality works. We will need to add a longrun experiment to see if it stables the longrun (hundreds of days at least) |
Ahh, I was just linking the u plots of the sponge and GW runs on Buildkite. So if we don't have a physical validation case, it would be better to compare this run with a control run (i.e., hightop with no sponge). Otherwise it's difficult to see what difference it makes (unless the control is hidden somewhere in the Buildkite list and I'm not seeing it...). :) |
b1d18a1
to
e33b73a
Compare
0ac28fe
to
ef9e5d7
Compare
bors try |
bors try- |
ef9e5d7
to
80241b0
Compare
bors try |
bors try- |
80241b0
to
ca0d909
Compare
bors try |
tryBuild succeeded: |
bors r+ |
983: Non orographic gw parameterization for GCM configurations r=jiahe23 a=jiahe23 ## Purpose This PR integrates GW parameterization with GCM configuration, and adds an example into buildkite. Differences in its integration into single column (as described in the paper) vs gcm (as in GFDL codes) configurations: - source level identification: fixed height in single column vs fixed pressure in gcm; - source amplitude: fixed number in single column vs latitude dependency in gcm. These differences require different cache variables and forcing computations for the two setups. Closes #783 Co-authored-by: Jia He <[email protected]>
examples/hybrid/gravitywave_parameterization/gravity_wave_parameterization.jl
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
bors r- |
Canceled. |
ca0d909
to
94d2f9d
Compare
bors r+ |
Build succeeded: |
Purpose
This PR integrates GW parameterization with GCM configuration, and adds an example into buildkite.
Differences in its integration into single column (as described in the paper) vs gcm (as in GFDL codes) configurations:
These differences require different cache variables and forcing computations for the two setups.
Closes #783