Active crown fire

[slevis-lmwg]

This PR replaces and continues the active crown fire PR that I accidentally placed in @jkshuman 's space: jkshuman#5

This is ongoing work, not ready for integration to master.

This work is based off of @jkshuman 's passive_crown_fire PR #572 .

In summary:
Following @jkshuman's introduction of the Bessie and Johnson (1995)
formulation for determining the presence of passive crown fire (#572), I now add the same paper's formulation for determining the presence of active crown fire.

Collaborators:
@lmkueppers @pollybuotte @jkshuman @rgknox @rosiealice @xuchongang @ckoven

[slevis-lmwg]

@jkshuman I just completed the merge and pushed. I have not tried to build and run, yet, but I thought I'd make it available to look at.

[slevis-lmwg]

I had to remove the CG_strikes effect (cloud-to-ground coefficient) for fire to occur at the CZ2 site.

Now running simulations with and without active crown fire to confirm that there's a difference.

[jkshuman]

Just set CG to 1 and that will allow ignitions at that location.

On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 4:17 PM Samuel Levis ***@***.***> wrote: I had to remove the CG_strikes effect (cloud-to-ground coefficient) for fire to occur at the CZ2 site. Now running simulations with and without active crown fire to confirm that there's a difference. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#584?email_source=notifications&email_token=AFIUHBTDDIRS6TIPGWKYJR3QV35XTA5CNFSM4I75LZQKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEFK7SMA#issuecomment-559282480>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFIUHBVRNQQQL4GSCV5MGKTQV35XTANCNFSM4I75LZQA> .

-- Jacquelyn Shuman Terrestrial Sciences Section NCAR

[slevis-lmwg]

As far as I can tell, this PR is caught up with master now.
@ckoven I took your advice and git merged and then resolved conflicts rather than trying to reinsert my mods manually. It took much of the day, and I hope I caught all the conflicts that git didn't catch. I will begin testing with a 1x1 case as soon as I have the corresponding puzzle pieces from @pollybuotte.

[slevis-lmwg]

Currently testing with a test that I created using the existing testmod FatesFireLightningPopDens:
SMS_Lm12_D_Mmpi-serial.1x1_brazil.I2000Clm50FatesCruRsGs.izumi_intel.clm-FatesFireLightningPopDens

(I misspoke three commits back when I referred to the test as an "existing test.")

Compared output from this branch with active_crown_fire set to 0 versus output from master and got bit-for-bit same answers.

[slevis-lmwg]

After conversation with @jkshuman
I need to revert back to the scalar version of fates_fire_active_crown_fire as an on/off switch that doesn't vary by pft. Changes required in fates_params_default.cdl, EDPftvarcon, EDParamsMod, and SFMainMod.

[jkshuman]

I created a branch from @slevisconsulting on this to modify according to Scott and Reinhardt 2001, and address discussion with @lmkueppers and @pollybuotte. This more recent method addresses inconsistencies in Bessie and Johnson. Given the extensive amount of updates per Scott and Reinhardt (and complete departure from Bessie and Johnson), I suggest closing this PR and creating a new PR for further discussion. Those updates, which still need testing, are here and have been shared with @slevisconsulting : (https://github.com/jkshuman/fates/tree/active_crown_Scott_2001)

[slevis-lmwg]

This work continues in #857

(I placed it in slevis-lmwg/slevis_fates_work#1 for a moment accidentally.)