HAFS_update_moist #646
Unanswered
ericaligo-NOAA
asked this question in
Q&A
HAFS_update_moist
#646
Replies: 10 comments 1 reply
-
|
Eric, hafs_update_moist is a very early stage version of Ferrier-Aligo scheme at DTC. CCPP, the host model (UFS and SCM) and the scheme itself has been upgraded a lot since then. I'd suggest sticking to the latest code in repository. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
-
|
The early version is the version that was working for me. I'm wondering
if changes made after that introduced errors that are causing the
failures with FA.
…On 5/3/2021 12:24 PM, mzhangw wrote:
Eric, hafs_update_moist is a very early stage version of Ferrier-Aligo
scheme at DTC. CCPP, the host model (UFS and SCM) and the scheme
itself has been upgraded a lot since then. I'd suggest sticking to the
latest code in repository.
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#646 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MILJDMKC52RNDTLEYLTL3E2TANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
1 reply
-
|
What errors do you get? It will be very helpful if you have a run directory with failure information. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@ericaligo-NOAA The only way to combine the current code base with the old hafs_update_moist would be for you to re-insert hafs_update_moist in the SDF. But note that the code base has marched ahead, so updates may be needed in the scheme and/or host to assure they are compatible. As @mzhangw said, a lot of development has happened in the F-A scheme since this old iteration, so you need to carefully consider if using this old code base will be an effective way forward. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
-
|
One of the potentially troubling differences I see between the HAFS SDF
and suite_FV3_GFS_v15_thompson.xml is in the radiation section. The HAFS
suite neglects the sgscloud_radpre and I believe has the lw listed
before sw. Should the HAFS suite be updated to match what we see below?
The radiation group for HAFS is listed in blue.
<group name="radiation">
<subcycle loop="1">
<scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme>
*<scheme>sgscloud_radpre</scheme>*
<scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme>
<scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme>
<scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme>
<scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme>
<scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme>
<scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme>
*<scheme>sgscloud_radpost</scheme>*
<scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme>
<scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme>
</subcycle>
</group>
*<group name="radiation">**
** <subcycle loop="1">**
**<scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme>**
** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme>**
** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme>**
** <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme>**
** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme>**
** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme>**
** <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme>**
** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme>**
** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme>**
** </subcycle>**
** </group>**
**
*
*On 5/12/2021 4:55 PM, ligiabernardet wrote:*
…
@ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> The only way to
combine the current code base with the old hafs_update_moist would be
for you to re-insert hafs_update_moist in the SDF. But note that the
code base has marched ahead, so updates may be needed in the scheme
and/or host to assure they are compatible. As @mzhangw
<https://github.com/mzhangw> said, a lot of development has happened
in the F-A scheme since this old iteration, so you need to carefully
consider if using this old code base will be an effective way forward.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#646 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MK4GXE5PLCB3AIMFFDTNLTNFANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
-
|
SGS cloud is a thompson scheme specific interstitials. For FA scheme in HAFS, the thompson fraction cloud scheme is used (icloud=3).
… On May 12, 2021, at 4:11 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote:
One of the potentially troubling differences I see between the HAFS SDF
and suite_FV3_GFS_v15_thompson.xml is in the radiation section. The HAFS
suite neglects the sgscloud_radpre and I believe has the lw listed
before sw. Should the HAFS suite be updated to match what we see below?
The radiation group for HAFS is listed in blue.
<group name="radiation">
<subcycle loop="1">
<scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme>
*<scheme>sgscloud_radpre</scheme>*
<scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme>
<scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme>
<scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme>
<scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme>
<scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme>
<scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme>
*<scheme>sgscloud_radpost</scheme>*
<scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme>
<scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme>
</subcycle>
</group>
*<group name="radiation">**
** <subcycle loop="1">**
**<scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme>**
** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme>**
** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme>**
** <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme>**
** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme>**
** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme>**
** <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme>**
** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme>**
** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme>**
** </subcycle>**
** </group>**
**
*
*On 5/12/2021 4:55 PM, ligiabernardet wrote:*
>
> @ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> The only way to
> combine the current code base with the old hafs_update_moist would be
> for you to re-insert hafs_update_moist in the SDF. But note that the
> code base has marched ahead, so updates may be needed in the scheme
> and/or host to assure they are compatible. As @mzhangw
> <https://github.com/mzhangw> said, a lot of development has happened
> in the F-A scheme since this old iteration, so you need to carefully
> consider if using this old code base will be an effective way forward.
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <#646 (comment)>,
> or unsubscribe
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MK4GXE5PLCB3AIMFFDTNLTNFANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
>
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#646 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2TEUCHOZFL3AVZCPKTTNL4HPANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
-
|
Okay, I didn't realize that. Thanks.
…On 5/12/2021 6:15 PM, mzhangw wrote:
SGS cloud is a thompson scheme specific interstitials. For FA scheme
in HAFS, the thompson fraction cloud scheme is used (icloud=3).
> On May 12, 2021, at 4:11 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote:
>
>
> One of the potentially troubling differences I see between the HAFS SDF
> and suite_FV3_GFS_v15_thompson.xml is in the radiation section. The
HAFS
> suite neglects the sgscloud_radpre and I believe has the lw listed
> before sw. Should the HAFS suite be updated to match what we see below?
> The radiation group for HAFS is listed in blue.
>
> <group name="radiation">
> <subcycle loop="1">
> <scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme>
> *<scheme>sgscloud_radpre</scheme>*
> <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme>
> <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme>
> <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme>
> <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme>
> <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme>
> <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme>
> *<scheme>sgscloud_radpost</scheme>*
> <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme>
> <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme>
> </subcycle>
> </group>
>
> *<group name="radiation">**
> ** <subcycle loop="1">**
> **<scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme>**
> ** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme>**
> ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme>**
> ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme>**
> ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme>**
> ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme>**
> ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme>**
> ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme>**
> ** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme>**
> ** </subcycle>**
> ** </group>**
> **
> *
>
> *On 5/12/2021 4:55 PM, ligiabernardet wrote:*
> >
> > @ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> The only way to
> > combine the current code base with the old hafs_update_moist would be
> > for you to re-insert hafs_update_moist in the SDF. But note that the
> > code base has marched ahead, so updates may be needed in the scheme
> > and/or host to assure they are compatible. As @mzhangw
> > <https://github.com/mzhangw> said, a lot of development has happened
> > in the F-A scheme since this old iteration, so you need to carefully
> > consider if using this old code base will be an effective way forward.
> >
> > —
> > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> >
<#646 (comment)>,
> > or unsubscribe
> >
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MK4GXE5PLCB3AIMFFDTNLTNFANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
> >
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#646 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2TEUCHOZFL3AVZCPKTTNL4HPANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
>
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#646 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MKG22TCK4A5PD6CVXTTNL4ZBANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
-
|
Here is the developer’s note/documentation:
https://dtcenter.ucar.edu/GMTB/v5.0.0/sci_doc/SGSCLOUD_page.html <https://dtcenter.ucar.edu/GMTB/v5.0.0/sci_doc/SGSCLOUD_page.html>
… On May 12, 2021, at 4:16 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote:
Okay, I didn't realize that. Thanks.
On 5/12/2021 6:15 PM, mzhangw wrote:
> SGS cloud is a thompson scheme specific interstitials. For FA scheme
> in HAFS, the thompson fraction cloud scheme is used (icloud=3).
>
>
> > On May 12, 2021, at 4:11 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote:
> >
> >
> > One of the potentially troubling differences I see between the HAFS SDF
> > and suite_FV3_GFS_v15_thompson.xml is in the radiation section. The
> HAFS
> > suite neglects the sgscloud_radpre and I believe has the lw listed
> > before sw. Should the HAFS suite be updated to match what we see below?
> > The radiation group for HAFS is listed in blue.
> >
> > <group name="radiation">
> > <subcycle loop="1">
> > <scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme>
> > *<scheme>sgscloud_radpre</scheme>*
> > <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme>
> > <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme>
> > <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme>
> > <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme>
> > <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme>
> > <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme>
> > *<scheme>sgscloud_radpost</scheme>*
> > <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme>
> > <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme>
> > </subcycle>
> > </group>
> >
> > *<group name="radiation">**
> > ** <subcycle loop="1">**
> > **<scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme>**
> > ** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme>**
> > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme>**
> > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme>**
> > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme>**
> > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme>**
> > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme>**
> > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme>**
> > ** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme>**
> > ** </subcycle>**
> > ** </group>**
> > **
> > *
> >
> > *On 5/12/2021 4:55 PM, ligiabernardet wrote:*
> > >
> > > @ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> The only way to
> > > combine the current code base with the old hafs_update_moist would be
> > > for you to re-insert hafs_update_moist in the SDF. But note that the
> > > code base has marched ahead, so updates may be needed in the scheme
> > > and/or host to assure they are compatible. As @mzhangw
> > > <https://github.com/mzhangw> said, a lot of development has happened
> > > in the F-A scheme since this old iteration, so you need to carefully
> > > consider if using this old code base will be an effective way forward.
> > >
> > > —
> > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > >
> <#646 (comment)>,
>
> > > or unsubscribe
> > >
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MK4GXE5PLCB3AIMFFDTNLTNFANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
> > >
> > —
> > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <#646 (comment)>,
> or unsubscribe
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2TEUCHOZFL3AVZCPKTTNL4HPANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
> >
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <#646 (comment)>,
> or unsubscribe
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MKG22TCK4A5PD6CVXTTNL4ZBANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
>
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#646 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2QUXPTC7VQC6OBIAILTNL45HANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
-
|
Thanks. How about the order of the lw and sw. I noticed it's reversed
in the suites.
…On 5/12/2021 6:19 PM, mzhangw wrote:
Here is the developer’s note/documentation:
https://dtcenter.ucar.edu/GMTB/v5.0.0/sci_doc/SGSCLOUD_page.html
<https://dtcenter.ucar.edu/GMTB/v5.0.0/sci_doc/SGSCLOUD_page.html>
> On May 12, 2021, at 4:16 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote:
>
>
> Okay, I didn't realize that. Thanks.
>
> On 5/12/2021 6:15 PM, mzhangw wrote:
> > SGS cloud is a thompson scheme specific interstitials. For FA scheme
> > in HAFS, the thompson fraction cloud scheme is used (icloud=3).
> >
> >
> > > On May 12, 2021, at 4:11 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > One of the potentially troubling differences I see between the
HAFS SDF
> > > and suite_FV3_GFS_v15_thompson.xml is in the radiation section. The
> > HAFS
> > > suite neglects the sgscloud_radpre and I believe has the lw listed
> > > before sw. Should the HAFS suite be updated to match what we see
below?
> > > The radiation group for HAFS is listed in blue.
> > >
> > > <group name="radiation">
> > > <subcycle loop="1">
> > > <scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme>
> > > *<scheme>sgscloud_radpre</scheme>*
> > > <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme>
> > > <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme>
> > > <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme>
> > > <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme>
> > > <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme>
> > > <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme>
> > > *<scheme>sgscloud_radpost</scheme>*
> > > <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme>
> > > <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme>
> > > </subcycle>
> > > </group>
> > >
> > > *<group name="radiation">**
> > > ** <subcycle loop="1">**
> > > **<scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme>**
> > > ** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme>**
> > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme>**
> > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme>**
> > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme>**
> > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme>**
> > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme>**
> > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme>**
> > > ** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme>**
> > > ** </subcycle>**
> > > ** </group>**
> > > **
> > > *
> > >
> > > *On 5/12/2021 4:55 PM, ligiabernardet wrote:*
> > > >
> > > > @ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> The only
way to
> > > > combine the current code base with the old hafs_update_moist
would be
> > > > for you to re-insert hafs_update_moist in the SDF. But note
that the
> > > > code base has marched ahead, so updates may be needed in the
scheme
> > > > and/or host to assure they are compatible. As @mzhangw
> > > > <https://github.com/mzhangw> said, a lot of development has
happened
> > > > in the F-A scheme since this old iteration, so you need to
carefully
> > > > consider if using this old code base will be an effective way
forward.
> > > >
> > > > —
> > > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > > >
> >
<#646 (comment)>,
> >
> > > > or unsubscribe
> > > >
> >
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MK4GXE5PLCB3AIMFFDTNLTNFANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
> > > >
> > > —
> > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> >
<#646 (comment)>,
> > or unsubscribe
> >
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2TEUCHOZFL3AVZCPKTTNL4HPANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
> > >
> >
> > —
> > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> >
<#646 (comment)>,
> > or unsubscribe
> >
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MKG22TCK4A5PD6CVXTTNL4ZBANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
> >
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#646 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2QUXPTC7VQC6OBIAILTNL45HANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
>
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#646 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MPZQCS6CYNOGQPL373TNL5HNANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
-
|
Yes. It followed what it is in HWRF/HWRF, which calls LW first. Actually, the sequence of LW and SW, which represents two “different”process, does not affect the results.
… On May 12, 2021, at 4:26 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote:
Thanks. How about the order of the lw and sw. I noticed it's reversed
in the suites.
On 5/12/2021 6:19 PM, mzhangw wrote:
> Here is the developer’s note/documentation:
> https://dtcenter.ucar.edu/GMTB/v5.0.0/sci_doc/SGSCLOUD_page.html
> <https://dtcenter.ucar.edu/GMTB/v5.0.0/sci_doc/SGSCLOUD_page.html>
>
> > On May 12, 2021, at 4:16 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Okay, I didn't realize that. Thanks.
> >
> > On 5/12/2021 6:15 PM, mzhangw wrote:
> > > SGS cloud is a thompson scheme specific interstitials. For FA scheme
> > > in HAFS, the thompson fraction cloud scheme is used (icloud=3).
> > >
> > >
> > > > On May 12, 2021, at 4:11 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > One of the potentially troubling differences I see between the
> HAFS SDF
> > > > and suite_FV3_GFS_v15_thompson.xml is in the radiation section. The
> > > HAFS
> > > > suite neglects the sgscloud_radpre and I believe has the lw listed
> > > > before sw. Should the HAFS suite be updated to match what we see
> below?
> > > > The radiation group for HAFS is listed in blue.
> > > >
> > > > <group name="radiation">
> > > > <subcycle loop="1">
> > > > <scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme>
> > > > *<scheme>sgscloud_radpre</scheme>*
> > > > <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme>
> > > > <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme>
> > > > <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme>
> > > > <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme>
> > > > <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme>
> > > > <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme>
> > > > *<scheme>sgscloud_radpost</scheme>*
> > > > <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme>
> > > > <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme>
> > > > </subcycle>
> > > > </group>
> > > >
> > > > *<group name="radiation">**
> > > > ** <subcycle loop="1">**
> > > > **<scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme>**
> > > > ** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme>**
> > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme>**
> > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme>**
> > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme>**
> > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme>**
> > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme>**
> > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme>**
> > > > ** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme>**
> > > > ** </subcycle>**
> > > > ** </group>**
> > > > **
> > > > *
> > > >
> > > > *On 5/12/2021 4:55 PM, ligiabernardet wrote:*
> > > > >
> > > > > @ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> The only
> way to
> > > > > combine the current code base with the old hafs_update_moist
> would be
> > > > > for you to re-insert hafs_update_moist in the SDF. But note
> that the
> > > > > code base has marched ahead, so updates may be needed in the
> scheme
> > > > > and/or host to assure they are compatible. As @mzhangw
> > > > > <https://github.com/mzhangw> said, a lot of development has
> happened
> > > > > in the F-A scheme since this old iteration, so you need to
> carefully
> > > > > consider if using this old code base will be an effective way
> forward.
> > > > >
> > > > > —
> > > > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > > > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > > > >
> > >
> <#646 (comment)>,
>
> > >
> > > > > or unsubscribe
> > > > >
> > >
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MK4GXE5PLCB3AIMFFDTNLTNFANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
> > > > >
> > > > —
> > > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > >
> <#646 (comment)>,
>
> > > or unsubscribe
> > >
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2TEUCHOZFL3AVZCPKTTNL4HPANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
> > > >
> > >
> > > —
> > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > >
> <#646 (comment)>,
>
> > > or unsubscribe
> > >
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MKG22TCK4A5PD6CVXTTNL4ZBANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
> > >
> > —
> > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <#646 (comment)>,
> or unsubscribe
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2QUXPTC7VQC6OBIAILTNL45HANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
> >
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <#646 (comment)>,
> or unsubscribe
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MPZQCS6CYNOGQPL373TNL5HNANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
>
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#646 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2WMRBSAWSJUXICBP3LTNL6B7ANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
-
|
Okay, thanks.
…On 5/12/2021 6:33 PM, mzhangw wrote:
Yes. It followed what it is in HWRF/HWRF, which calls LW first.
Actually, the sequence of LW and SW, which represents two
“different”process, does not affect the results.
> On May 12, 2021, at 4:26 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote:
>
>
> Thanks. How about the order of the lw and sw. I noticed it's reversed
> in the suites.
>
> On 5/12/2021 6:19 PM, mzhangw wrote:
> > Here is the developer’s note/documentation:
> > https://dtcenter.ucar.edu/GMTB/v5.0.0/sci_doc/SGSCLOUD_page.html
> > <https://dtcenter.ucar.edu/GMTB/v5.0.0/sci_doc/SGSCLOUD_page.html>
> >
> > > On May 12, 2021, at 4:16 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Okay, I didn't realize that. Thanks.
> > >
> > > On 5/12/2021 6:15 PM, mzhangw wrote:
> > > > SGS cloud is a thompson scheme specific interstitials. For FA
scheme
> > > > in HAFS, the thompson fraction cloud scheme is used (icloud=3).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > On May 12, 2021, at 4:11 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > One of the potentially troubling differences I see between the
> > HAFS SDF
> > > > > and suite_FV3_GFS_v15_thompson.xml is in the radiation
section. The
> > > > HAFS
> > > > > suite neglects the sgscloud_radpre and I believe has the lw
listed
> > > > > before sw. Should the HAFS suite be updated to match what we
see
> > below?
> > > > > The radiation group for HAFS is listed in blue.
> > > > >
> > > > > <group name="radiation">
> > > > > <subcycle loop="1">
> > > > > <scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme>
> > > > > *<scheme>sgscloud_radpre</scheme>*
> > > > > <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme>
> > > > > <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme>
> > > > > <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme>
> > > > > <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme>
> > > > > <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme>
> > > > > <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme>
> > > > > *<scheme>sgscloud_radpost</scheme>*
> > > > > <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme>
> > > > > <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme>
> > > > > </subcycle>
> > > > > </group>
> > > > >
> > > > > *<group name="radiation">**
> > > > > ** <subcycle loop="1">**
> > > > > **<scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme>**
> > > > > ** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme>**
> > > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme>**
> > > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme>**
> > > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme>**
> > > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme>**
> > > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme>**
> > > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme>**
> > > > > ** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme>**
> > > > > ** </subcycle>**
> > > > > ** </group>**
> > > > > **
> > > > > *
> > > > >
> > > > > *On 5/12/2021 4:55 PM, ligiabernardet wrote:*
> > > > > >
> > > > > > @ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> The only
> > way to
> > > > > > combine the current code base with the old hafs_update_moist
> > would be
> > > > > > for you to re-insert hafs_update_moist in the SDF. But note
> > that the
> > > > > > code base has marched ahead, so updates may be needed in the
> > scheme
> > > > > > and/or host to assure they are compatible. As @mzhangw
> > > > > > <https://github.com/mzhangw> said, a lot of development has
> > happened
> > > > > > in the F-A scheme since this old iteration, so you need to
> > carefully
> > > > > > consider if using this old code base will be an effective way
> > forward.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > —
> > > > > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > > > > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > > > > >
> > > >
> >
<#646 (comment)>,
> >
> > > >
> > > > > > or unsubscribe
> > > > > >
> > > >
> >
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MK4GXE5PLCB3AIMFFDTNLTNFANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
> > > > > >
> > > > > —
> > > > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > > > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > > >
> >
<#646 (comment)>,
> >
> > > > or unsubscribe
> > > >
> >
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2TEUCHOZFL3AVZCPKTTNL4HPANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > —
> > > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > > >
> >
<#646 (comment)>,
> >
> > > > or unsubscribe
> > > >
> >
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MKG22TCK4A5PD6CVXTTNL4ZBANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
> > > >
> > > —
> > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> >
<#646 (comment)>,
> > or unsubscribe
> >
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2QUXPTC7VQC6OBIAILTNL45HANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
> > >
> >
> > —
> > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> >
<#646 (comment)>,
> > or unsubscribe
> >
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MPZQCS6CYNOGQPL373TNL5HNANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
> >
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#646 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2WMRBSAWSJUXICBP3LTNL6B7ANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
>
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#646 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MOCRCPI54CMB5XR5WLTNL6Z3ANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
The last working version of the Ferrier-Aligo scheme that I have on disk has HAFS_update_moist in the SDF. The HAFS SDF now does not have this subroutine. Seems like a lot has changed with the initial implementation of the FA in FV3, and I'm thinking it might be best to return to the original working version that used HAFS_update_moist. Is this possible?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions