Open cecilehannay opened 1 year ago
@justin-richling: could you also run the ADF for f.cam6_3_100.FWscHIST.ne30_L58.ebudget.001
versus f.cam6_3_100.FWscHIST.ne30_L58.001
asap. Please use 5-year climos.
Just saw this, I'm on it
ADF diags are here
@justin-richling the FLNT values in the table are 0.2 W/m2 different, but the global mean in the lat-lon maps are 237.82 vs. 237.83, or a 0.01 W/m2 difference.
From Julio
FYI for Justin none of the FLNT numbers on the maps match with the table.
Just going to post some zonal mean plots here.
That T anomaly in the Northern high-latitude stratosphere is from the dynamics:
I have a hard time connecting that change to these new energy mods; it could alternatively be due to inter-annual variability, since there's a corresponding reduction in U winds in the same location (see ADF diags).
Moving on to the total physics tendency:
My understanding is that we should expect changes in this field as the physics tendencies will be a bit larger in regions with water species. But then I think there will also be a change in the global energy fixer, since phys and dyn energies are more consistent in the new run, and so potentially a smaller contribution from the energy fixer (?). Let me know if you can think of other variables for me to plot to get at these differences more directly.
Agreed that it is hard to interpret the results! Some thoughts below:
Temperature increment 1
For a fixed heating increment dQ the temperature increment with the new energy code should be smaller:
dT = dQ/(rho x cp_d). (control)
dT = dQ/(rho_d x cp_d+rho_wv x cp_wv+condensate terms). (new energy run)
where rho is density (incl. all forms of water), rho_wv is density of water vapor, cp_d specific heat at constant pressure for dry air and cp_wv specific heat at constant pressure for water vapor. Since cp_wv>cp_d the temeprature increment (all else being equal) should be smaller.
Temperature increment 2
I expect the energy fixer T tendency (uniform everywhere) to have changed mainly because the dry-mass adjustment has changed from ~0.3Wm/^2 to ~0.6W/m^2. The energy dissipitation of the dynamical core is ~ -0.08 W/m^2. (these numbers are 1 months average values from the last month of the run). Hence the energy fixer should remove around ~0.5W/m^2 compared to ~0.2W/m^2 in terms of a negative temperature tendency.
Sponge changes
The new energy run does not have frictional heating in the sponge.
@justin-richling the FLNT values in the table are 0.2 W/m2 different, but the global mean in the lat-lon maps are 237.82 vs. 237.83, or a 0.01 W/m2 difference.
@JulioTBacmeister @adamrher
I apologize, this has been an open Issue for the ADF but hasn't be resolved in a PR yet. I've put a current set of ADF diagnostics that should reflect the plot values in the tables:
Updated ADF diags for 1979-1991 are here
Description: Science evaluate "new energy" code (incl. condensates in pressure and having energy fixer use an energy consistent with the dynamical core) and compare to cam6_3_100 baseline (#227)
Case directory: Locally (if still available): /glade/p/cesmdata/cseg/runs/cesm2_0/f.cam6_3_100.FWscHIST.ne30_L58.ebudget.001
On github: https://github.com/NCAR/amwg_dev/tree/f.cam6_3_100.FWscHIST.ne30_L58.ebudget.001
SourceMods: Contains SourceMods for:
Sandbox: Locally (if still available): /glade/work/hannay/cesm_tags/f.cam6_3_100.FWscHIST.ne30_L58.ebudget.001
On github: hash: 80b076d
Diagnostics: AMWG diags (if available) https://webext.cgd.ucar.edu/FWscHIST/f.cam6_3_100.FWscHIST.ne30_L58.ebudget.001/atm/
Contacts: @PeterHjortLauritzen, @jtruesdal, @cecilehannay