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

Adding more diagnostics for help with cloud fraction scheme(s) #283

Closed

Conversation

gthompsnWRF
Copy link
Contributor

Six new variables - 2D only - were added to support cloud fraction schemes to diagnose impacts of explicit cloud condensate versus impacts from cloud fraction. There is a corresponding branch with the same name in the ccpp-physics repo to include the new calculations together with a new/updated cloud fraction scheme.

…igned with Thompson-MP for GFSv17-prototype8
Copy link
Collaborator

@climbfuji climbfuji left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The changes add the required variables to the GFS data structure and the CCPP metadata, but I am wondering if there are additional steps needed to output these variables in the single column model? Or has this not been done, because you were using the UFS in your tests?

@@ -6893,7 +6911,7 @@ subroutine diag_phys_zero (Diag, Model, linit, iauwindow_center)
Diag%dku = zero

! max hourly diagnostics
Diag%refl_10cm = zero
Diag%refl_10cm = -35.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This change makes sense to me, but I want to check with @grantfirl if there was a particular reason to reset Diag%refl_10cm to zero instead of -35.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As FYI to this point. Many people think dbz=zero means no precip. That is not true. Very light drizzle occurs all the time with dbz of about -5 to -10 values. The -35 value is considered (approximately) the lowest sensitivity level of the USA's NEXRAD radars. Cloud radars are sensitive down to even smaller values, but the frequency/wavelength of NEXRAD is 10cm, hence why I was so specific in its name.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No, @gthompsnWRF reasoning makes perfect sense. This was only zero in the SCM version of GFS_typedefs to match FV3.

@gthompsnWRF
Copy link
Contributor Author

The changes add the required variables to the GFS data structure and the CCPP metadata, but I am wondering if there are additional steps needed to output these variables in the single column model? Or has this not been done, because you were using the UFS in your tests?

That's correct. I added these 6 new variables to GFS_diagnostics.F90 to get them for UFS and not really sure what/where to place them in SCM - unless they go in scm_output.F90.

@grantfirl
Copy link
Collaborator

The new variables need to be added to scm_output.F90 only. I can do this for you @gthompsnWRF (I'll branch off of your PR branch, make modifications, and submit a PR back into your branch so that it will be reflected here once accepted by you). It's pretty straightforward, but there could be a complication or two depending on what is being held in these variables. The Diag DDT in GFS_typedefs holds variables that can be instantaneous, accumulated, etc. and that needs to be accounted for in how they're written out in scm_output.F90.

@grantfirl
Copy link
Collaborator

This PR is superceded by #285, so closing this one.

@grantfirl grantfirl closed this Dec 28, 2021
grantfirl added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 28, 2021
Wrapper for #283, fix RT bug, add radiation output interval
mkavulich pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 12, 2022
Update #283 code to latest main + output of new variables
mkavulich pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 12, 2022
Wrapper for #283, fix RT bug, add radiation output interval
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants