HWRF RRTMG #30

mzhangw · 2020-03-24T17:32:14Z

HWRF RRTMG configuration

… into HWRF_RRTMG

…odel into HWRF_RRTMG

… into HWRF_RRTMG

climbfuji

Again, no need to make changes, but please look at the comments. The new test also need to be added to an existing regression test config (e.g. rt.conf) - will do.

climbfuji · 2020-04-07T14:41:25Z

parm/ccpp_regional_c768_FA_HRRTMG.nml.IN

+/
+
+ &fv_core_nml
+       layout   = 24,20


This will need to be changed to 20,24 to avoid non-uniform block sizes (we should also check all other regional_c768 tests that we set up recently).

climbfuji · 2020-04-07T14:42:29Z

tests/fv3_conf/ccpp_regional_FA_HRRTMG_run.IN

@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
+rsync -arv @[RTPWD]/FV3_regional_input_data/. .
+rsync -arv @[RTPWD]/@[INPUT_DIR]/model_configure .


This will not work - need to change @INPUT_DIR to fv3_regional_c768

climbfuji · 2020-04-07T14:42:33Z

tests/fv3_conf/ccpp_regional_FA_HRRTMG_run.IN

+rm -rf INPUT RESTART
+mkdir  INPUT RESTART
+
+rsync -arv @[RTPWD]/@[INPUT_DIR]/INPUT/. INPUT/.


This will not work - need to change @INPUT_DIR to fv3_regional_c768

climbfuji · 2020-04-07T14:43:15Z

tests/tests/fv3_ccpp_hwrf_rrtmg

@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
+###############################################################################
+#
+#  FV3 CCPP GFS v15.2 compiled with 32-bit dynamics test


Update description

climbfuji · 2020-04-07T14:43:30Z

tests/tests/fv3_ccpp_hwrf_rrtmg

+#
+###############################################################################
+
+export TEST_DESCR="Compare FV3 32bit CCPP GFS HWRF RRTMG results with previous trunk version"


Is the test really compiled with 32-bit dynamics?

no. I copied a old template.

climbfuji · 2020-04-07T14:44:11Z

tests/tests/fv3_ccpp_regional_c768_FA_HRRTMG

+
+export TEST_DESCR="Compare FV3 CCPP regional c768 with Ferrier-Aligo MP scheme results with previous trunk version"
+
+export CNTL_DIR=fv3_regional_c768


This needs to be renamed to fv3_regional_c768_fa_hwrf_rrtmg

climbfuji · 2020-04-07T16:42:29Z

@mzhangw Please copy file /home/Man.Zhang/diag_table_HWRF to a place somewhere on scratch so that I can add it to the regression test input directories. Thank you!

mzhangw · 2020-04-07T16:45:22Z

/scratch1/BMC/gmtb/Man.Zhang/diag_table_HWRF

…

On Apr 7, 2020, at 10:42 AM, Dom Heinzeller ***@***.***> wrote: @mzhangw <https://github.com/mzhangw> Please copy file /home/Man.Zhang/diag_table_HWRF to a place somewhere on scratch so that I can add it to the regression test input directories. Thank you! — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#30 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2QWSFSDYN54G245XLDRLNJYJANCNFSM4LS3JCXA>.

climbfuji · 2020-04-07T16:51:33Z

/scratch1/BMC/gmtb/Man.Zhang/diag_table_HWRF
…

Thanks, copied it - you can delete the file.

climbfuji · 2020-04-07T17:26:41Z

Why does the ccpp_hwrf_rrtmg.nml.IN not have the HWRF RRTMG switches?

...
       icloud         = 3
       iovr_lw        = 4
       iovr_sw        = 4
       spec_adv       = .true.
       RHGRD            = 0.98
...

climbfuji · 2020-04-07T17:30:48Z

Which run should I be comparing the test fv3_ccpp_HWRF_RRTMG to, i.e., which existing regression test did you take and modify for this test? Thanks.

mzhangw · 2020-04-07T17:40:59Z

those are a previous test with GFDL mp. For HWRF physics, we need a bundle of FA and HWRF RRTMG, so we only need to keep parm/ccpp_regional_c768_FA_HRRTMG.nml.IN tests/fv3_conf/ccpp_regional_FA_HRRTMG_run.IN tests/tests/fv3_ccpp_regional_c768_FA_HRRTMG

…

On Apr 7, 2020, at 11:29 AM, Dom Heinzeller ***@***.***> wrote: Why does the ccpp_hwrf_rrtmg.nml.IN not have the HWRF RRTMG switches? ... icloud = 3 iovr_lw = 4 iovr_sw = 4 spec_adv = .true. RHGRD = 0.98 ... — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#30 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2UXACAVHIIRGYJFU5TRLNPJBANCNFSM4LS3JCXA>.

climbfuji · 2020-04-07T17:42:04Z

those are a previous test with GFDL mp. For HWRF physics, we need a bundle of FA and HWRF RRTMG, so we only need to keep parm/ccpp_regional_c768_FA_HRRTMG.nml.IN tests/fv3_conf/ccpp_regional_FA_HRRTMG_run.IN tests/tests/fv3_ccpp_regional_c768_FA_HRRTMG
…
On Apr 7, 2020, at 11:29 AM, Dom Heinzeller @.***> wrote: Why does the ccpp_hwrf_rrtmg.nml.IN not have the HWRF RRTMG switches? ... icloud = 3 iovr_lw = 4 iovr_sw = 4 spec_adv = .true. RHGRD = 0.98 ... — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#30 (comment)>, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2UXACAVHIIRGYJFU5TRLNPJBANCNFSM4LS3JCXA.

Ok, thanks for the clarification. Will remove the leftover stuff from your PR.

climbfuji · 2020-04-07T19:42:38Z

@mzhangw @grantfirl @ligiabernardet @llpcarson I ran the regression test fv3_ccpp_regional_c768_FA_HWRF_RRTMG (you had it called fv3_ccpp_regional_c768_FA_HRRTMG, I renamed it to be consistent with other regression test names), a 3-hour forecast based on the existing test fv3_ccpp_regional_c768_FA_update_moist.

The forecast completed successfully, but I am seeing the following errors/warnings in file err. Have you seen those as well? Do you have a run directory from your testing left somewhere on hera that I can compare it against? Want to make sure I didn't mess up something when bringing these changes into the dtc/hwrf-physics branch. Thanks!

...
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          49
447:  WARN1: Water saturation T<180K; I,J,L,TC,P=           2           1          41
447:   -94.1270137911525        94.4262416204095
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          50
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          51
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          52
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          53
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          54
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          55
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          56
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          57
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          58
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          59
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          60
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          61
276:  WARN1: Water saturation T<180K; I,J,L,TC,P=          23           1          42
276:   -94.4161021448688        83.1934236233858
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          62
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          63
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          64
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          65
276:  WARN4: >1 g/kg condensate in stratosphere; I,J,L,TC,P,QT=          15
276:            1          43  -80.4139682881720        72.3767671146126
276:    1.61092510605561
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          66
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          67
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          68
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          69
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          70
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          71
447:  WARN4: >1 g/kg condensate in stratosphere; I,J,L,TC,P,QT=           5
447:            1          43  -90.4327821045412        72.5925492916066
447:    1.19413381602571
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          72
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          73
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          74
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          75
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          76
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          77
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          78
423:  WARN1: Water saturation T<180K; I,J,L,TC,P=           2           1          42
423:   -94.4251017411914        82.6621017193984
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          79
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          80
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          81
470:  WARN1: Water saturation T<180K; I,J,L,TC,P=          30           1          41
470:   -93.5285406635257        94.5245793143107
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          82
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          83
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          84
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          85
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          86
444:  WARN1: Water saturation T<180K; I,J,L,TC,P=           1           1          41
444:   -93.4622014423057        94.4651424850556
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          87
470:  WARN4: >1 g/kg condensate in stratosphere; I,J,L,TC,P,QT=           7
470:            1          43  -86.0366341082189        72.4297446969478
470:    1.02946881695548
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          88
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          89
399:  WARN1: Water saturation T<180K; I,J,L,TC,P=          24           1          41
399:   -93.2956035351266        94.6118214231446
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          90
251:  WARN1: Water saturation T<180K; I,J,L,TC,P=          14           1          42
251:   -94.2278519699444        82.7741335172461
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          91
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          92
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          93
467:  WARN1: Water saturation T<180K; I,J,L,TC,P=          30           1          42
467:   -94.1604823961271        82.6369889373354
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          94
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          95
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          96
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          97
467:  WARN4: >1 g/kg condensate in stratosphere; I,J,L,TC,P,QT=           6
467:            1          43  -93.7260047574753        72.5773267216639
467:    1.45061607212500
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          98
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=          99
422:  WARN1: Water saturation T<180K; I,J,L,TC,P=          18           1          41
422:   -93.3674595738861        94.4190626092976
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=         100
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=         101
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=         102
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=         103
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=         104
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=         105
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=         106
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=         107
442:  WARN1: Water saturation T<180K; I,J,L,TC,P=          24           1          42
442:   -95.0095998443237        82.8305209536572
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=         108
417:  WARN1: Water saturation T<180K; I,J,L,TC,P=          27           1          41
417:   -93.6542042110420        94.6467680757830
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=         109
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=         110
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=         111
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=         112
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=         113
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=         114
465:  WARN1: Water saturation T<180K; I,J,L,TC,P=          22           1          42
465:   -95.0437164809461        82.9355855365396
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=         115
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=         116
251:  WARN4: >1 g/kg condensate in stratosphere; I,J,L,TC,P,QT=          17
251:            1          43  -77.5998632982595        72.6101260069564
251:    1.56564929027934
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=         117
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=         118
441:  WARN1: Water saturation T<180K; I,J,L,TC,P=           3           1          42
441:   -93.4590869912701        82.4954254867502
  0:  in fcst run phase 2, na=         119
...
++ date
+ echo 'Model ended:    ' Tue Apr 7 18:39:24 UTC 2020
+ exit

mzhangw · 2020-04-07T19:47:12Z

This WARN message is harmless per email communication with @ericaligo-NOAA @ChunxiZhang-NOAA
I do not have previous run currently.

climbfuji · 2020-04-07T19:51:33Z

This WARN message is harmless per email communication with @ericaligo-NOAA @ChunxiZhang-NOAA

I do not have previous run currently.

Ok thanks. But you did see this error messages?

mzhangw · 2020-04-07T19:53:43Z

Yes

…

On Apr 7, 2020, at 1:51 PM, Dom Heinzeller ***@***.***> wrote: This WARN message is harmless per email communication with @ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> @ChunxiZhang-NOAA <https://github.com/ChunxiZhang-NOAA> I do not have previous run currently. Ok thanks. But you did see this error messages? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#30 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2TXBJCFCNUP6VOPF4LRLN75HANCNFSM4LS3JCXA>.

mzhangw · 2020-04-07T20:22:00Z

well, I found one previous run in my march sandbox:
/scratch1/BMC/gmtb/Man.Zhang/FV3_RT/rt_sandbox_March/fv3_ccpp_regional_c768_FA_HRRTMG_repro

climbfuji · 2020-04-07T20:40:15Z

well, I found one previous run in my march sandbox:
/scratch1/BMC/gmtb/Man.Zhang/FV3_RT/rt_sandbox_March/fv3_ccpp_regional_c768_FA_HRRTMG_repro

Thanks, I copied this over as well so that I can do a comparison with the "normal" FA run.

dtc/hwrf-physics: HWRF RRTMG (based on #30)

climbfuji · 2020-04-09T19:40:09Z

This PR was merged into dtc/hwrf-physics, see #36. Keeping this PR open until dtc/hwrf-physics is merged into EMC develop.

climbfuji · 2020-07-10T21:18:39Z

@mzhangw Please confirm that this PR can be closed. Thanks!

mzhangw · 2020-07-10T21:37:35Z

This PR can be deleted.

…_emc_20200625 Update gsd/develop from dev/emc 2020/06/25 and mods to MYNN sfc and PBL for fractional/coupled

… EARTH_GRID_COMP to UFSDriver (ufs-community#1239) * Require specific package version in top-level CMakeLists.txt * Rename EARTH_GRID_COMP to UFSDriver * Update s4 support (NCAR#31) * Updated S4 compiler versions ufs-community#1223 * Single dt output (NCAR#30)

mzhangw added 8 commits February 4, 2020 07:33

initialize HWRF_RRTMG branch

5ab446f

add FA+HRRTMG configuration

1cbc515

activate iovr_lw=4 for exponential cloud overlapping method

c6f51f5

enable iovr_lw only

2a43ab1

Merge branch 'dtc/develop' of https://github.com/NCAR/ufs-weather-model…

04b29d0

… into HWRF_RRTMG

update HWRF RRTMG configuration

73f5dcb

Merge branch 'HWRF_RRTMG' of https://github.com/mzhangw/ufs-weather-m…

45d44ba

…odel into HWRF_RRTMG

Merge branch 'dtc/develop' of https://github.com/NCAR/ufs-weather-model…

237578a

… into HWRF_RRTMG

mzhangw requested review from climbfuji, grantfirl and llpcarson as code owners March 24, 2020 17:32

mzhangw mentioned this pull request Mar 24, 2020

HWRF RRTMG NCAR/ccpp-physics#412

Closed

climbfuji reviewed Apr 7, 2020

View reviewed changes

climbfuji mentioned this pull request Apr 8, 2020

dtc/hwrf-physics: HWRF RRTMG (based on #30) #36

Merged

climbfuji added the do not merge do not merge label Apr 9, 2020

climbfuji added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 9, 2020

Merge pull request #36 from climbfuji/dtc_hwrf-physics_add_rrtmg

61b9443

dtc/hwrf-physics: HWRF RRTMG (based on #30)

climbfuji closed this Jul 10, 2020

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

HWRF RRTMG #30

HWRF RRTMG #30

mzhangw commented Mar 24, 2020

climbfuji left a comment

climbfuji Apr 7, 2020

climbfuji Apr 7, 2020

climbfuji Apr 7, 2020

climbfuji Apr 7, 2020

climbfuji Apr 7, 2020

mzhangw Apr 7, 2020

climbfuji Apr 7, 2020

climbfuji commented Apr 7, 2020

mzhangw commented Apr 7, 2020 via email

climbfuji commented Apr 7, 2020

climbfuji commented Apr 7, 2020

climbfuji commented Apr 7, 2020

mzhangw commented Apr 7, 2020 via email

climbfuji commented Apr 7, 2020

climbfuji commented Apr 7, 2020

mzhangw commented Apr 7, 2020 •

edited

Loading

climbfuji commented Apr 7, 2020

mzhangw commented Apr 7, 2020 via email

mzhangw commented Apr 7, 2020

climbfuji commented Apr 7, 2020

climbfuji commented Apr 9, 2020

climbfuji commented Jul 10, 2020

mzhangw commented Jul 10, 2020

		@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
		rsync -arv @[RTPWD]/FV3_regional_input_data/. .
		rsync -arv @[RTPWD]/@[INPUT_DIR]/model_configure .


		export TEST_DESCR="Compare FV3 CCPP regional c768 with Ferrier-Aligo MP scheme results with previous trunk version"

		export CNTL_DIR=fv3_regional_c768

HWRF RRTMG #30

HWRF RRTMG #30

Conversation

mzhangw commented Mar 24, 2020

climbfuji left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

climbfuji Apr 7, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

climbfuji Apr 7, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

climbfuji Apr 7, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

climbfuji Apr 7, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

climbfuji Apr 7, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mzhangw Apr 7, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

climbfuji Apr 7, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

climbfuji commented Apr 7, 2020

mzhangw commented Apr 7, 2020 via email

climbfuji commented Apr 7, 2020

climbfuji commented Apr 7, 2020

climbfuji commented Apr 7, 2020

mzhangw commented Apr 7, 2020 via email

climbfuji commented Apr 7, 2020

climbfuji commented Apr 7, 2020

mzhangw commented Apr 7, 2020 • edited Loading

climbfuji commented Apr 7, 2020

mzhangw commented Apr 7, 2020 via email

mzhangw commented Apr 7, 2020

climbfuji commented Apr 7, 2020

climbfuji commented Apr 9, 2020

climbfuji commented Jul 10, 2020

mzhangw commented Jul 10, 2020

mzhangw commented Apr 7, 2020 •

edited

Loading