Skip to content
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

[PULL REQUEST] Add PM10 diagnostic according to suggestions from Aerosols WG (Closes #958) #992

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Nov 23, 2021

Conversation

yantosca
Copy link
Contributor

@yantosca yantosca commented Nov 4, 2021

This is the corresponding PR to #958. We have added a PM10 diagnostic following the recommendations of the GEOS-Chem Aerosols Working Group. For more information, please see http://wiki.geos-chem.org/Particulate_matter_in_GEOS-Chem.

zsx-GitHub and others added 3 commits November 3, 2021 14:32
aerosol_mod.F90
- Point users to the GEOS-Chem wiki for the most up-to-date
  definition of PM2.5 and PM10
- Make sure that numerical constants use "_fp", i.e. change 0.3, 0.7,
  and 0.9 to 0.3_fp, 0.7_fp, 0.9_fp
- Cosmetic changes, trimmed trailing whitespace

Signed-off-by: Bob Yantosca <yantosca@seas.harvard.edu>
run/GCClassic/HISTORY.rc.templates/HISTORY.rc.fullchem
run/GCClassic/HISTORY.rc.templates/HISTORY.rc.aerosol
run/GCHP/HISTORY.rc.templates/HISTORY.rc.fullchem
- Add PM10 to the AerosolMass collection

GeosCore/aerosol_mod.F90
- Updated comment

Signed-off-by: Bob Yantosca <yantosca@seas.harvard.edu>
@yantosca yantosca added category: Feature Request New feature or request topic: Diagnostics Related to output diagnostic data labels Nov 4, 2021
@yantosca yantosca added this to the 13.4.0 milestone Nov 4, 2021
@yantosca yantosca self-assigned this Nov 4, 2021
@yantosca yantosca linked an issue Nov 4, 2021 that may be closed by this pull request
@yantosca
Copy link
Contributor Author

Integration tests are in progress.

@yantosca
Copy link
Contributor Author

GCHP integration tests passed

==============================================================================
GCHP: Execution Test Results

Number of execution tests: 3
==============================================================================
 
Execution tests:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
gchp_fullchem_benchmark_merra2_c48...............Execute Simulation.....PASS
gchp_fullchem_standard_merra2_c24................Execute Simulation.....PASS
gchp_TransportTracers_geosfp_c24.................Execute Simulation.....PASS
 
Summary of execution test results:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Execution tests passed:        3
Execution tests failed:        0
Execution tests not completed: 0

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%  All execution tests passed!  %%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

@yantosca
Copy link
Contributor Author

yantosca commented Nov 18, 2021

I re-ran the GC-Classic integration tests and they all passed. Several jobs had failed previously but this was an issue with our scratch disk and nothing to do with GEOS-Chem.

Summary of test results:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Execution tests passed: 80
Execution tests failed: 0
Execution tests not yet completed: 0

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%  All execution tests passed!  %%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

@yantosca yantosca merged commit 67c8995 into dev Nov 23, 2021
@yantosca yantosca deleted the feature/PM10_diagnostic branch November 23, 2021 18:52
@ycyeongi ycyeongi mentioned this pull request May 9, 2024
4 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
category: Feature Request New feature or request topic: Diagnostics Related to output diagnostic data
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[QUESTION]calculation of PM10 concentration
2 participants