search

NCAR / amwg_dev

Repo to store model sandboxes and cases used for CAM development
9 stars 2 forks source link

f.e21.FWscHIST.ne30_L48_BL10_cam6_3_046_control.hf.001 #64

Open cecilehannay opened 2 years ago

cecilehannay commented 2 years ago

Description:

Identical to https://github.com/NCAR/amwg_dev/issues/53 but using latest tag cam6_3_046. This run invokes the new pumas microphysics provided you set -phys cam_dev.

Extra namelist setting: 

ncdata = '/glade/p/cesm/amwg_dev/juliob/FWsc_ne30pg3_58L_GRID_48_taperstart10km_lowtop_BL10_v3_beta1p75_Top_43km.nc'
micro_mg_precip_fall_corr = .true.
se_rsplit            = 3
se_nsplit           = 2
se_hypervis_subcycle =  4

Case directory: Locally (if still available): /glade/p/cesmdata/cseg/runs/cesm2_0/$f.e21.FWscHIST.ne30_L48_BL10_cam6_3_046_control.hf.001

On github (if available): https://github.com/NCAR/amwg_dev/tree/f.e21.FWscHIST.ne30_L48_BL10_cam6_3_046_control.hf.001

Sandbox: Locally (if still available): /glade/work/hannay/cesm_tags/cam6_3_046

On github (if available): https://github.com/ESCOMP/CAM/tree/cam6_3_046 hash: 332a90d

Diagnostics: AMWG diags (if available) https://webext.cgd.ucar.edu/FWscHIST/f.e21.FWscHIST.ne30_L48_BL10_cam6_3_046_control.hf.001/atm/

Contacts: @JulioTBacmeister @adamrher @PeterHjortLauritzen @andrewgettelman @cecilehannay

cecilehannay commented 2 years ago

I processed the diags on 5 years for the PUMAS run: https://webext.cgd.ucar.edu/FWscHIST/f.e21.FWscHIST.ne30_L48_BL10_cam6_3_046_control.hf.001/atm/f.e21.FWscHIST.ne30_L48_BL10_cam6_3_046_control.hf.001.1980_1984-f.e21.FWscHIST.ne30_L48_BL10_cam6_3_041_control.hf.001.1980_1989/

Given the large differences, I don't think we need more than 5 years to look at this run.

andrewgettelman commented 2 years ago

Yep, thinner clouds. Same as in my experiments. Now I suppose you are going to want me to tune them....

cecilehannay commented 2 years ago

Yep, thinner clouds. Same as in my experiments. Now I suppose you are going to want me to tune them.... You are reading my mind. ;)

But more seriously: I was just wondering if we need 10 years - given the differences. I thought 5 years could be enough. But I could do 10 years too.

JulioTBacmeister commented 2 years ago

Yes ... while preserving the positive impact on UTLS q ....

On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 5:42 PM Andrew Gettelman @.***> wrote:

Yep, thinner clouds. Same as in my experiments. Now I suppose you are going to want me to tune them....

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/NCAR/amwg_dev/issues/64#issuecomment-1029533911, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACGLMTX4XIMMMALU3254ETTUZMOFTANCNFSM5NNGPMEQ . Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675 or Android https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub.

You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

adamrher commented 2 years ago

@cecilehannay I wouldn't suggests stopping the simulation, but rather see it through to the end (10 years). This is our new control.

adamrher commented 2 years ago

ah OK I see the issue. So we want to try to crank up SWCF/LWCF a bit?