Add additional products for GEFS v13 to replace SREF

WenMeng-NOAA commented 2 months ago

Jun Du compare with GEFS v13 products with operational SREF products and summarized a list of missing SREF products at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jGdN3lJsn_NS8aKUKyq-E4ftvIkXLfur/edit He suggests the following products available for GEFS v13:

[x] Vorticity at 6 levels (850 700 600 500 300 250)
[x] Td at 4 levels (850 700 500 300)
[x] Composite reflectivity
[x] Echo top
[x] U, V, H at 275 and 225hPa levels (or I change to other levels 250 and 100hPa?) (GEFS outputs every 25 or 50hPa in vertical?)
[x] Total cloud cover (%)
[x] Cloud top height (use pressure instead of height?)

WenMeng-NOAA commented 2 months ago

Jason suggested that Chris takes on this task to practice adding UPP variables.

WenMeng-NOAA commented 2 months ago

On 08/13/2024, Huiya, Bing, Jun, Chris and Wen has a discussion about generating SREF products in GEFS v13. See meeting note for the follow-up actions.

WenMeng-NOAA commented 2 months ago

@ChristopherHill-NOAA I set up an UPP standalone test case for your development work at /u/wen.meng/ptmp/chris/UPP on Cactus: 1) UPP version: the latest UPP develop branch 2) model data: GEFS v13 EP4 3) driver script: submit_run_gefsv13_wcoss2.sh

My test results: /u/wen.meng/ptmp/post_gefs_2019030600

WenMeng-NOAA commented 2 months ago

@JunDu-NOAA It appears to me the vorticity at 850, 700, 600, 500, 300 250 Pha are already included in the GEFS control file Also you may look into my GEFS v13 UPP output baseline at /u/wen.meng/ptmp/post_gefs_2019030600 on Cactus:

wen.meng@clogin06 post_gefs_2019030600$ wgrib2 GFSPRS.GrbF18 -match ABSV
73:57244427:d=2019030600:ABSV:10 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
83:64320402:d=2019030600:ABSV:20 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
93:72225692:d=2019030600:ABSV:30 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
103:80339386:d=2019030600:ABSV:50 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
113:88025551:d=2019030600:ABSV:70 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
123:96170742:d=2019030600:ABSV:100 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
134:105063368:d=2019030600:ABSV:150 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
144:112320462:d=2019030600:ABSV:200 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
154:120018325:d=2019030600:ABSV:250 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
164:127919615:d=2019030600:ABSV:300 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
174:135911265:d=2019030600:ABSV:350 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
184:144086824:d=2019030600:ABSV:400 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
194:152383531:d=2019030600:ABSV:450 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
204:159568449:d=2019030600:ABSV:500 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
213:167006144:d=2019030600:ABSV:550 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
222:174071391:d=2019030600:ABSV:600 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
231:181623410:d=2019030600:ABSV:650 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
240:189235961:d=2019030600:ABSV:700 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
249:196958773:d=2019030600:ABSV:750 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
258:204831771:d=2019030600:ABSV:800 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
267:212850562:d=2019030600:ABSV:850 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
276:220941024:d=2019030600:ABSV:900 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
285:229318990:d=2019030600:ABSV:925 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
294:237574645:d=2019030600:ABSV:950 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
304:245907915:d=2019030600:ABSV:975 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
312:252519131:d=2019030600:ABSV:1000 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1

JunDu-NOAA commented 2 months ago

Ok, I checked your file and saw the absolute vorticity there. That's a good news. I must have overlooked this field. I will include it to my ensemble post test now. I will let you how it goes.

Thanks Jun

On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 11:21 AM WenMeng-NOAA @.***> wrote:

@JunDu-NOAA https://github.com/JunDu-NOAA It appears to me the vorticity at 850, 700, 600, 500, 300 250 Pha are already included in the GEFS control file https://github.com/NOAA-EMC/UPP/blob/develop/parm/gefs/postcntrl_gefs.xml Also you may look into my GEFS v13 UPP output baseline at /u/wen.meng/ptmp/post_gefs_2019030600 on Cactus:

@.*** post_gefs_2019030600$ wgrib2 GFSPRS.GrbF18 -match ABSV 73:57244427:d=2019030600:ABSV:10 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 83:64320402:d=2019030600:ABSV:20 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 93:72225692:d=2019030600:ABSV:30 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 103:80339386:d=2019030600:ABSV:50 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 113:88025551:d=2019030600:ABSV:70 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 123:96170742:d=2019030600:ABSV:100 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 134:105063368:d=2019030600:ABSV:150 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 144:112320462:d=2019030600:ABSV:200 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 154:120018325:d=2019030600:ABSV:250 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 164:127919615:d=2019030600:ABSV:300 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 174:135911265:d=2019030600:ABSV:350 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 184:144086824:d=2019030600:ABSV:400 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 194:152383531:d=2019030600:ABSV:450 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 204:159568449:d=2019030600:ABSV:500 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 213:167006144:d=2019030600:ABSV:550 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 222:174071391:d=2019030600:ABSV:600 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 231:181623410:d=2019030600:ABSV:650 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 240:189235961:d=2019030600:ABSV:700 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 249:196958773:d=2019030600:ABSV:750 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 258:204831771:d=2019030600:ABSV:800 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 267:212850562:d=2019030600:ABSV:850 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 276:220941024:d=2019030600:ABSV:900 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 285:229318990:d=2019030600:ABSV:925 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 294:237574645:d=2019030600:ABSV:950 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 304:245907915:d=2019030600:ABSV:975 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 312:252519131:d=2019030600:ABSV:1000 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/NOAA-EMC/UPP/issues/1013#issuecomment-2291510109, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ARJHBVHFNSONOF74FDIRRCLZRTBOJAVCNFSM6AAAAABMPNNRA6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDEOJRGUYTAMJQHE . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

JunDu-NOAA commented 2 months ago

FYI: I can produce ensemble products for vorticity ok now.

Jun

On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 11:37 AM Jun Du - NOAA Federal @.***> wrote:

Ok, I checked your file and saw the absolute vorticity there. That's a good news. I must have overlooked this field. I will include it to my ensemble post test now. I will let you how it goes.

Thanks Jun

On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 11:21 AM WenMeng-NOAA @.***> wrote:

@JunDu-NOAA https://github.com/JunDu-NOAA It appears to me the vorticity at 850, 700, 600, 500, 300 250 Pha are already included in the GEFS control file https://github.com/NOAA-EMC/UPP/blob/develop/parm/gefs/postcntrl_gefs.xml Also you may look into my GEFS v13 UPP output baseline at /u/wen.meng/ptmp/post_gefs_2019030600 on Cactus:

@.*** post_gefs_2019030600$ wgrib2 GFSPRS.GrbF18 -match ABSV 73:57244427:d=2019030600:ABSV:10 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 83:64320402:d=2019030600:ABSV:20 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 93:72225692:d=2019030600:ABSV:30 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 103:80339386:d=2019030600:ABSV:50 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 113:88025551:d=2019030600:ABSV:70 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 123:96170742:d=2019030600:ABSV:100 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 134:105063368:d=2019030600:ABSV:150 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 144:112320462:d=2019030600:ABSV:200 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 154:120018325:d=2019030600:ABSV:250 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 164:127919615:d=2019030600:ABSV:300 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 174:135911265:d=2019030600:ABSV:350 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 184:144086824:d=2019030600:ABSV:400 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 194:152383531:d=2019030600:ABSV:450 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 204:159568449:d=2019030600:ABSV:500 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 213:167006144:d=2019030600:ABSV:550 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 222:174071391:d=2019030600:ABSV:600 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 231:181623410:d=2019030600:ABSV:650 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 240:189235961:d=2019030600:ABSV:700 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 249:196958773:d=2019030600:ABSV:750 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 258:204831771:d=2019030600:ABSV:800 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 267:212850562:d=2019030600:ABSV:850 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 276:220941024:d=2019030600:ABSV:900 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 285:229318990:d=2019030600:ABSV:925 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 294:237574645:d=2019030600:ABSV:950 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 304:245907915:d=2019030600:ABSV:975 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 312:252519131:d=2019030600:ABSV:1000 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/NOAA-EMC/UPP/issues/1013#issuecomment-2291510109, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ARJHBVHFNSONOF74FDIRRCLZRTBOJAVCNFSM6AAAAABMPNNRA6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDEOJRGUYTAMJQHE . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

WenMeng-NOAA commented 2 months ago

FYI: I can produce ensemble products for vorticity ok now. Jun On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 11:37 AM Jun Du - NOAA Federal @.> wrote: … Ok, I checked your file and saw the absolute vorticity there. That's a good news. I must have overlooked this field. I will include it to my ensemble post test now. I will let you how it goes. Thanks Jun On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 11:21 AM WenMeng-NOAA @.> wrote: > @JunDu-NOAA https://github.com/JunDu-NOAA It appears to me the > vorticity at 850, 700, 600, 500, 300 250 Pha are already included in the GEFS > control file > https://github.com/NOAA-EMC/UPP/blob/develop/parm/gefs/postcntrl_gefs.xml > Also you may look into my GEFS v13 UPP output baseline at > /u/wen.meng/ptmp/post_gefs_2019030600 on Cactus: > > @. post_gefs_2019030600$ wgrib2 GFSPRS.GrbF18 -match ABSV > 73:57244427:d=2019030600:ABSV:10 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 83:64320402:d=2019030600:ABSV:20 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 93:72225692:d=2019030600:ABSV:30 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 103:80339386:d=2019030600:ABSV:50 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 113:88025551:d=2019030600:ABSV:70 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 123:96170742:d=2019030600:ABSV:100 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 134:105063368:d=2019030600:ABSV:150 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 144:112320462:d=2019030600:ABSV:200 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 154:120018325:d=2019030600:ABSV:250 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 164:127919615:d=2019030600:ABSV:300 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 174:135911265:d=2019030600:ABSV:350 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 184:144086824:d=2019030600:ABSV:400 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 194:152383531:d=2019030600:ABSV:450 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 204:159568449:d=2019030600:ABSV:500 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 213:167006144:d=2019030600:ABSV:550 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 222:174071391:d=2019030600:ABSV:600 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 231:181623410:d=2019030600:ABSV:650 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 240:189235961:d=2019030600:ABSV:700 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 249:196958773:d=2019030600:ABSV:750 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 258:204831771:d=2019030600:ABSV:800 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 267:212850562:d=2019030600:ABSV:850 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 276:220941024:d=2019030600:ABSV:900 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 285:229318990:d=2019030600:ABSV:925 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 294:237574645:d=2019030600:ABSV:950 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 304:245907915:d=2019030600:ABSV:975 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > 312:252519131:d=2019030600:ABSV:1000 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 > > — > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <#1013 (comment)>, > or unsubscribe > https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ARJHBVHFNSONOF74FDIRRCLZRTBOJAVCNFSM6AAAAABMPNNRA6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDEOJRGUYTAMJQHE > . > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: > @.> >

@JunDu-NOAA Thanks for verifying. I will set the request of vorticity products as solved.

ChristopherHill-NOAA commented 2 months ago

Within each of the files post_avblflds_raphrrr.xml and post_avblflds.xml, the following equivalent GRIB2 variables were identified for the respective SREF fields:

composite reflectivity REFC_ON_ENTIRE_ATMOS (REFC)

reflectivity echo top a. RETOP_ON_ENTIRE_ATMOS_SINGLE_LYR (RETOP) b. GSD_ECHOTOP_ON_CLOUD_TOP (RETOP)

cloud top height a. PRES_ON_CLOUD_TOP (PRES) b. HGT_ON_CLOUD_TOP (HGT)

total cloud cover a. AVE_TCDC_ON_ENTIRE_ATMOS (TCDC) b. INST_TCDC_ON_ENTIRE_ATMOS (TCDC)

For those SREF fields with multiple possible GRIB2 matches, a singular appropriate match will be identified through content review or otherwise through testing of each GRIB2 variable through the UPP.

WenMeng-NOAA commented 2 months ago

@ChristopherHill-NOAA You might look into post_avblflds.xml to find appropriate UPP IDs to add in the GEFS control files. The post_avblflds_raphrrr.xml is used for legacy rap/hrrr products only.

ChristopherHill-NOAA commented 2 months ago

In development mode, each of the following GRIB2 variables were added to the GEFS control file postcntrl_gefs.xml, and subsequently to the file postxconfig-NT-gefs.txt:

composite reflectivity REFC_ON_ENTIRE_ATMOS

reflectivity echo top RETOP_ON_ENTIRE_ATMOS_SINGLE_LYR

cloud top height HGT_ON_CLOUD_TOP

total cloud cover INST_TCDC_ON_ENTIRE_ATMOS

dewpoint temperature for 300, 500, 700, and 850 hPa DPT_ON_ISOBARIC_SURACE

It was found that AVE_TCDC_ON_ENTIRE_ATMOS was already available within the GEFS control file.

With the added variables, a test run of the UPP was performed. Invocation of the command "wgrib2 [grib output file] -match [var]" to the resulting grib output file, GFSPRS.GrbF18, appears to confirm the inclusion of each of the variables:

26:24377124:d=2019030600:REFC:entire atmosphere (considered as a single layer):18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 32:27203582:d=2019030600:RETOP:entire atmosphere (considered as a single layer):18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 395:305354662:d=2019030600:HGT:cloud top:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1 388:298394529:d=2019030600:TCDC:entire atmosphere (considered as a single layer):18 hour fcst:ENS=+1

162:126522573:d=2019030600:DPT:300 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
203:159624748:d=2019030600:DPT:500 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
240:190211788:d=2019030600:DPT:700 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1
268:215150322:d=2019030600:DPT:850 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1

Results of the UPP test run were saved here: /lfs/h2/emc/ptmp/Chris.Hill/post_gefs_2019030600

WenMeng-NOAA commented 2 months ago

@JunDu-NOAA Could you validate Chris's data file above?

JunDu-NOAA commented 2 months ago

I have checked the sample output and found these fields exist in the file. But the grib2 parameters are somewhat different for some fields. See below for the details:

(1) Reflectivity field REFC: 0, 16, 5 should be 0, 16, 196 26:24377124:d=2019030600:REFC:entire atmosphere (considered as a single layer):18 hour fcst:ENS=+1

Record 26 Reference Time = 2019-03-06 00:00:00 (Start of Forecast) Field 1 GDT=40 (Gaussian Lat/Lon) nx*ny=1179648 PDT=1 18 Hour Forecast Valid Time = 2019-03-06 18:00 Parameter: disc,cat,num = 0,16,5 Level: ltype,lval = 200,0 Ens: type,pert = 3,1 ctl: var26.1 0,200,0 0,16,5 description

(2) Echo top RETOP: 0, 16, 3 should be 0, 16, 197 32:27203582:d=2019030600:RETOP:entire atmosphere (considered as a single layer):18 hour fcst:ENS=+1

Record 32 Reference Time = 2019-03-06 00:00:00 (Start of Forecast) Field 1 GDT=40 (Gaussian Lat/Lon) nx*ny=1179648 PDT=1 18 Hour Forecast Valid Time = 2019-03-06 18:00 Parameter: disc,cat,num = 0,16,3 Level: ltype,lval = 200,0 Ens: type,pert = 3,1 ctl: var32.1 0,200,0 0,16,3 description

(3) Cloud top height HGT: all correct 395:305354662:vt=2019030618:cloud top:18 hour fcst:HGT Geopotential Height

Record 395 Reference Time = 2019-03-06 00:00:00 (Start of Forecast) Field 1 GDT=40 (Gaussian Lat/Lon) nx*ny=1179648 PDT=1 18 Hour Forecast Valid Time = 2019-03-06 18:00 Parameter: disc,cat,num = 0,3,5 Level: ltype = 3 Ens: type,pert = 3,1 ctl: var395.1 0,3 0,3,5 description

(4) Total cloud cover: the level type 100 should be 200 199:156743906:vt=2019030618:475 mb:18 hour fcst:TCDC Total Cloud Cover

Record 199 Reference Time = 2019-03-06 00:00:00 (Start of Forecast) Field 1 GDT=40 (Gaussian Lat/Lon) nx*ny=1179648 PDT=1 18 Hour Forecast Valid Time = 2019-03-06 18:00 Parameter: disc,cat,num = 0,6,1 Level: ltype,lval = 100,47500 Ens: type,pert = 3,1 ctl: var199.1 0,100,47500 0,6,1 description

(5) Dew Point temperature: all correct

162:126522573:d=2019030600:DPT:300 mb:18 hour fcst:ENS=+1

Record 162 Reference Time = 2019-03-06 00:00:00 (Start of Forecast) Field 1 GDT=40 (Gaussian Lat/Lon) nx*ny=1179648 PDT=1 18 Hour Forecast Valid Time = 2019-03-06 18:00 Parameter: disc,cat,num = 0,0,6 Level: ltype,lval = 100,30000 Ens: type,pert = 3,1 ctl: var162.1 0,100,30000 0,0,6 description

On Tue, Sep 3, 2024 at 8:12 AM WenMeng-NOAA @.***> wrote:

@JunDu-NOAA https://github.com/JunDu-NOAA Could you validate Chris's data file above?

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/NOAA-EMC/UPP/issues/1013#issuecomment-2326366111, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ARJHBVHLCR73QWVTETLYWWTZUWRQ5AVCNFSM6AAAAABMPNNRA6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDGMRWGM3DMMJRGE . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

ChristopherHill-NOAA commented 1 month ago

Within the file params_grib2_tbl_new.text, the following information is provided for table 4.2-0-16, which includes variables REFC and RETOP:

! GRIB2 - TABLE 4.2-0-16 PARAMETERS FOR DISCIPLINE 0 CATEGORY 16
!
   0  16     0   0 REFZR
   0  16     1   0 REFZI
   0  16     2   0 REFZC
   0  16     3   0 RETOP
   0  16     4   0 REFD
   0  16     5   0 REFC
!  NCEP Local use
   0  16   192   1 REFZR
   0  16   193   1 REFZI
   0  16   194   1 REFZC
   0  16   195   1 REFD
   0  16   196   1 REFC
   0  16   197   1 RETOP
   0  16   198   1 MAXREF
   0  16   201   1 RADARVIL

The addition of REFC and RETOP to the GEFS control file appears not to follow the NCEP local use parameters.

WenMeng-NOAA commented 1 month ago

Within the file params_grib2_tbl_new.text, the following information is provided for table 4.2-0-16, which includes variables REFC and RETOP:
! GRIB2 - TABLE 4.2-0-16 PARAMETERS FOR DISCIPLINE 0 CATEGORY 16
!
   0  16     0   0 REFZR
   0  16     1   0 REFZI
   0  16     2   0 REFZC
   0  16     3   0 RETOP
   0  16     4   0 REFD
   0  16     5   0 REFC
!  NCEP Local use
   0  16   192   1 REFZR
   0  16   193   1 REFZI
   0  16   194   1 REFZC
   0  16   195   1 REFD
   0  16   196   1 REFC
   0  16   197   1 RETOP
   0  16   198   1 MAXREF
   0  16   201   1 RADARVIL
The addition of REFC and RETOP to the GEFS control file appears not to follow the NCEP local use parameters.

@ChristopherHill-NOAA You may add a line "NCEP" in the entry of REFC to apply NCEP local use in the gefs xml control file. e.g.

<param>
       <shortname>REFC_ON_ENTIRE_ATMOS</shortname>
       <table_info>NCEP</table_info>
       <scale>4.0</scale>
    </param>

WenMeng-NOAA commented 1 month ago

(4) Total cloud cover: the level type 100 should be 200 199:156743906:vt=2019030618:475 mb:18 hour fcst:TCDC Total Cloud Cover

@JunDu-NOAA The record 199 is 'TCDC on 475 mb'. 100 is the correct surface type ID.

JunDu-NOAA commented 1 month ago

Ok, so I picked the wrong one. Yes, there is another TCDC for the single column atmosphere, which is correct in level type (200): Record 388 Reference Time = 2019-03-06 00:00:00 (Start of Forecast) Field 1 GDT=40 (Gaussian Lat/Lon) nx*ny=1179648 PDT=1 18 Hour Forecast Valid Time = 2019-03-06 18:00 Parameter: disc,cat,num = 0,6,1 Level: ltype,lval = 200,0 Ens: type,pert = 3,1 ctl: var388.1 0,200,0 0,6,1 description

On Wed, Sep 4, 2024 at 6:52 PM WenMeng-NOAA @.***> wrote:

(4) Total cloud cover: the level type 100 should be 200 199:156743906:vt=2019030618:475 mb:18 hour fcst:TCDC Total Cloud Cover

@JunDu-NOAA https://github.com/JunDu-NOAA The record 199 is 'TCDC on 475 mb'. 100 is the correct surface type ID.

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/NOAA-EMC/UPP/issues/1013#issuecomment-2330284642, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ARJHBVBAIJIMHTOY47MNZUTZU6FLHAVCNFSM6AAAAABMPNNRA6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDGMZQGI4DINRUGI . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

ChristopherHill-NOAA commented 1 month ago

The 'NCEP' attribution was added to variables REFC and RETOP within GEFS control file, which was used in a new run of UPP (on WCOSS Dogwood). The number associated with each variable should now reflect the NCEP value. The latest results are available on Dogwood at: /lfs/h2/emc/ptmp/Chris.Hill/post_gefs_2019030600

The variable INST_TCDC_ON_ENTIRE_ATMOS differs from the six other TCDC variables available in the GEFS control file, as it provides an instantaneous value of total cloud cover over a single layer of the entire modeled atmosphere.

JunDu-NOAA commented 1 month ago

Yes, they are correct now: 196 and 197. Now these need to go to pgrb2ap5 through prodgen

On Fri, Sep 6, 2024 at 8:48 PM Christopher Hill @.***> wrote:

The 'NCEP' attribution was added to variables REFC and RETOP within GEFS control file, which was used in a new run of UPP (on WCOSS Dogwood). The number associated with each variable should now reflect the NCEP value. The latest results are available on Dogwood at: /lfs/h2/emc/ptmp/Chris.Hill/post_gefs_2019030600

The variable INST_TCDC_ON_ENTIRE_ATMOS differs from the six other TCDC variables available in the GEFS control file, as it provides an instantaneous value of total cloud cover over a single layer of the entire modeled atmosphere.

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/NOAA-EMC/UPP/issues/1013#issuecomment-2334974419, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ARJHBVFY3IZX466CETQ7MPDZVJEMBAVCNFSM6AAAAABMPNNRA6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDGMZUHE3TINBRHE . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

WenMeng-NOAA commented 1 month ago

@JunDu-NOAA Thanks for validating. @ChristopherHill-NOAA You might submit a PR to the UPP develop branch.

WenMeng-NOAA commented 1 month ago

@JunDu-NOAA Are H/U/V at 275 and 225 hPa required?

JunDu-NOAA commented 1 month ago

Yes!

On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 2:39 PM WenMeng-NOAA @.***> wrote:

@JunDu-NOAA https://github.com/JunDu-NOAA Are H/U/V at 275 and 225 hPa required?

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/NOAA-EMC/UPP/issues/1013#issuecomment-2346989045, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ARJHBVFIW2CVZNSGLPU2LDLZWHNVJAVCNFSM6AAAAABMPNNRA6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDGNBWHE4DSMBUGU . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

WenMeng-NOAA commented 1 month ago

@ChristopherHill-NOAA Could you add H/U/V at 275 and 225 hPa in your PR #1042?

NOAA-EMC / UPP

Add additional products for GEFS v13 to replace SREF #1013