-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
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
dtc/hwrf-physics: HWRF RRTMG (based on #30) #36
dtc/hwrf-physics: HWRF RRTMG (based on #30) #36
Conversation
…irst three hours, not just the first one
Attached is a screenshot of the 2m temperature differences after three hours of integration using the tests This is by no means a full evaluation of the newly added code, just a poor man's attempt to show that the implementation of HWRF RRTMG produces reasonably looking results. |
Regression testing on hera.intel against the original/official EMC baseline located in rt_full_against_existing_baseline.log
|
Description of final regression testingBased on the results above (#36 (comment)), a new baseline is generated and the location of the regression test baseline ( The contents of Individual stepsCreating new HWRF physics baseline in Syncing Adding a subdirectory Verifying against new HWRF physics baseline using |
…est namelist templates and run scripts, use own HWRF regression test baseline
All completed, PR is ready to merge! |
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.
I recommend we get this PR approved and onto dtc/hwrf-physics so work can proceed with the work. After that we can ask Mike Iacono to take a look.
Ok, thank you. I will wait for approval from one of the CODEOWNERs to start the merge process. Once this is in, I will look at the Noah LSM PRs from Grant. |
@@ -129,6 +129,9 @@ | |||
pre_rad = .false. | |||
ncld = 5 | |||
imp_physics = 15 |
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.
I've been doing the same thing as @mzhangw, editing this namelist for my HWRF physics schemes. Should we consider changing the name since it will be valid for many (all?) HWRF schemes (and not just the FA scheme)?
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.
we can consolidate all HWRF namelist options once all schemes are ready.
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.
@grantfirl if you like, please do that as part of the Noah LSM PR (when you pull in the updates from these PRs before the final testing). Thanks!
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.
Looks good to me. Approved.
* Updated fv3atm (see fv3atm PR NCAR#48 NOAA-EMC/fv3atm#48) * Updated WW3
Add tracer sanitizer
This PR is based on #30 by @mzhangw, but for branch dtc/hwrf-physics instead of dtc/develop. It also contains several bug fixes and updates to the original PR.
The following commits were cherry-picked from #30 (all from @mzhangw):
5ab446f
1cbc515
c6f51f5
2a43ab1
73f5dcb
The additional commits apply changes necessary for switching the target branch (e.g., add the new regression tests to the correct
rt.sh
configuration filert.conf
). In addition, several files that were added as part of the original PR #30 for testing purposes only are removed.Associated PRs:
NCAR/ccpp-physics#430
NCAR/fv3atm#38
#36
For regression testing information, see below (in progress).