incorporate csawMG update and pass both intel and GNU RT tests #181
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
grantfirl
requested review from
Qingfu-Liu,
dustinswales and
mzhangw
as code owners
grantfirl
commented
Mar 7, 2024
grantfirl
commented
Mar 7, 2024
grantfirl
commented
Mar 7, 2024
|
@dustinswales @Qingfu-Liu Please review this again when you get a minute. It should be easier to follow now. |
This was referenced Mar 7, 2024
|
@grant Firl ***@***.***> please add back.
…On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 2:35 PM Grant Firl ***@***.***> wrote:
***@***.**** commented on this pull request.
------------------------------
In physics/CONV/Chikira_Sugiyama/cs_conv.F90
<#181 (comment)>
:
> ISTS, IENS ) ! input
!
IMPLICIT NONE
- INTEGER, INTENT(IN) :: IM, IJSDIM, KMAX, NTR !! DD, for GFS, pass in
+ INTEGER, INTENT(IN) :: IM, IJSDIM, KMAX, NTR, nctp !! DD, for GFS, pass in
!
! [MODIFY]
REAL(kind_phys) GTR (IJSDIM, KMAX, NTR) !! tracer tendency
@AnningCheng-NOAA <https://github.com/AnningCheng-NOAA> The code in #171
<#171> wouldn't compile
without adding the NTR dimension back to GTR since the third dimension of
GTR is used in this subroutine. Please double-check that this is OK. This
is the only *CODE* change in #171
<#171> that was
reverted.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#181 (review)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQPMILHVKKX3X4TAPNCMILYXC6RPAVCNFSM6AAAAABELTBAW2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMYTSMRTGM3DKMZRHE>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
|
Either way is fine with me. Those variables are for MG usage and have been
tuned for best performance. It seems like w_upi=0 and not using cf_upi had
been chosen although I tend to keep the code by uncommenting cf_upi in
case for future reference.
…On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 2:39 PM Grant Firl ***@***.***> wrote:
***@***.**** commented on this pull request.
------------------------------
In physics/CONV/Chikira_Sugiyama/cs_conv.F90
<#181 (comment)>
:
> @@ -458,8 +466,8 @@ subroutine cs_conv_run( IJSDIM , KMAX , ntracp1 , NN, &
! CNV_PRC3(i,k) = 0.0
CNV_NDROP(i,k) = 0.0
CNV_NICE(i,k) = 0.0
- cf_upi(i,k) = max(0.0, min(1.0, 0.5*(sigma(i,k)+sigma(i,kp1))))
- CLCN(i,k) = cf_upi(i,k) !downdraft is below updraft
+! cf_upi(i,k) = max(0.0,min(0.01*log(1.0+500*ud_mf(i,k)),0.1))
One of the CCPP rules is that all intent(OUT) variables are given values.
These comments prevent cf_upi from being given a value. If cf_upi is no
longer needed, we can remove it from the argument list and CCPP metadata,
although see the comment below about the calculation of w_upi when do_aw
= F.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#181 (review)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQPMIKZM5JHHD2F5AA6IK3YXC67RAVCNFSM6AAAAABELTBAW2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMYTSMRTGM3TEOJRGQ>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
AnningCheng-NOAA
approved these changes
Mar 7, 2024
Qingfu-Liu
reviewed
Mar 11, 2024
| ! gciz(i,k) = tem1 * gciz(i,k) | ||
| ! enddo | ||
| ! endif | ||
| ! enddo |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Lines 1245-1277 can be removed
Qingfu-Liu
reviewed
Mar 11, 2024
| ! END DO | ||
| ! print *,'precip1',pr_tot*86400.,gprcp(1,1)*86400.,gsnwp(1,1)*86400. | ||
| ! print *,'precip2',pr_tot*86400.,pr_liq*86400.,pr_ice*86400. | ||
| ! endif |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
lines 1779-1796 can be removed
Qingfu-Liu
reviewed
Mar 11, 2024
| ! dtrdwn(i,k,n) = zero | ||
| ! enddo | ||
| ! enddo | ||
| ! enddo |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
lines 3315-3330 can be removed
Qingfu-Liu
reviewed
Mar 11, 2024
| ! gtt(i,k) = gtt(i,k) + fsigma(i,k)*(dtmelt(i,k) + dtevap(i,k)) + condtermt(i,k) | ||
| ! gtq(i,k,1) = gtq(i,k,1) + fsigma(i,k)*dqevap(i,k) + condtermq(i,k) | ||
| ! gtq(i,k,itl) = gtq(i,k,itl) - (condtermq(i,k) + prectermq(i,k) + tem) | ||
| ! gtq(i,k,iti) = gtq(i,k,iti) + tem |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
lines 1586-1589 can be removed
Qingfu-Liu
reviewed
Mar 11, 2024
| ! | ||
| ! sigmai(i,k,ctp) = lamdai(i,k,ctp) / lamdaprod(i,k) | ||
| ! sigma(i,k) = max(zero, min(one, sigma(i,k) + sigmai(i,k,ctp))) | ||
| ! vverti(i,k,ctp) = sigmai(i,k,ctp) * wcv(i,k,ctp) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
lines 1132-1142 can be removed.
Qingfu-Liu
reviewed
Mar 11, 2024
| ! do i=ISTS,IENS | ||
| ! GPRCC( I,1 ) = GPRCP( I,1 ) | ||
| ! GSNWC( I ) = GSNWP( I,1 ) | ||
| ! enddo |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
lines 1806-1809 can be removed
|
@Qingfu-Liu @dustinswales @mzhangw regression testing is complete on UFS-WM PR #2180 , and ready for final review. |
|
@Qingfu-Liu Please let me know if you feel strongly about removing the commented lines in this PR and I'll do that before merge. |
dustinswales
approved these changes
Mar 14, 2024
|
Ok, I think we have enough approvals to merge at this time. @grantfirl |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This replaces #171. This version started from the top of ufs/dev and only added necessary changes. I've verified that this gives bit-for-bit answers compared to #171 in the SCM.
Description from @AnningCheng-NOAA:
Major updated CSAW deep convective scheme: considering sigma vertical veriantion and reduction on fluxes instead of tendency etc.
• Regression tests are performed on the new version of CSAW for GNU and intel compilers
Here is a EMail from Don describe the changes:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 3:01 PM Donald Dazlich - NOAA Affiliate <donald.dazlich@noaa.gov> wrote:
Hi Moorthi, Anning,
Dave and I have been using the GFS version of CS to redo our implementation of AW more completely and consistently. Now, you will find that the fix_form implemetation of the tendencies match up very closely with the traditional form. Also you will notice that it is the fluxes for each cloud type (and the downdraft) that are saved and the reduction is done on the fluxes, not the tendency computed from the flux divergence. Since sigma is a function of height the latter approach is incorrect. I’ve also dimensioned several cloud type variables nctp+1 - the nctp+1 slot has downdraft output. Another addition is the sorting of the lamdas after they are computed for all cloud types, then computing the sigma. This approach is detailed in a manuscript Dave is working on. Also, sigma is not applied to the inputs to the downdraft routine, but to the outputs, which are now mass fluxes not tendencies. The water and thermodynamic budgets remain satisfied now.
I’ve attached my version below. It should be pretty close to your version with regards to the interface so you shouldn’t have to do much work with it.
Regards,
Don