Closed penguian closed 2 years ago
@mgk576@nci.org.au commented
The two key elements that are wrong with the existing logic ...
First, you need to first recalculate casaflux%cnpp(:) before you check if it is negative, i.e. above the where statement. Otherwise it may very well be negative but not be corrected.
Second, Cnpp can still be negative after the correction because SUM(casaflux%crmplant(:,:),2) can be a tiny value 0.0000000000001, so you need the final correction.
@mgk576@nci.org.au changed _comment0 which not transferred by tractive
@mgk576@nci.org.au _uploaded file spinup_carbon_pools_single_file_5.pdf
(180.4 KiB)_
Proof the fix works
@jxs599@nci.org.au changed status from new
to closed
@jxs599@nci.org.au set resolution to fixed
@jxs599@nci.org.au set milestone to 1. Closed
@jxs599@nci.org.au commented
pushed @8686
@ccc561@nci.org.au set keywords to nogit
keyword_nogit
owner:yxw599@nci.org.au
resolution_fixed
type_defect
| by mgk576The trunk is missing a correction for negative NPP and the fix, which is in Vanessa's call_climate block still does not guard against negative NPP. The solution is as follows:
https://trac.nci.org.au/trac/cable/browser/trunk/core/biogeochem/casa_cnp.F90
Issue migrated from trac:241 at 2023-11-27 11:31:24 +1100