search

ufs-community / ccpp-physics

UFS fork for CCPP
Other
3 stars 32 forks source link

Add fire coupling into ccpp physics including heat flux, upward specific humidity flux, and smoke tracer #193

Open danrosen25 opened 3 months ago

danrosen25 commented 3 months ago

Add heat flux from fire, upward specific humidity flux from fire and the smoke tracer from fire into the ccpp physics package. Use the cpl_fire flag to enable coupling these values.

cpl_fire hflx_fire evap_fire smoke_fire

Co-author: @masih-e

Resolves Issue #192

Testing One of each compile line in the rt.conf tests was successfully executed on derecho. A new regression test for coupling atm and fire behavior (fbh) was added to rt.conf https://github.com/esmf-org/ufs-weather-model/tree/feature/ufs_fire_cpl

This is a draft pull request until the physics coupling for the community fire behavior model and ccpp physics is complete.

grantfirl commented 2 months ago

@danrosen25 Any updates on this draft PR?

danrosen25 commented 2 months ago

@grantfirl We're running through the RTs after some minor changes to make sure everything works. If we get clean results then we'll mark this as ready. The RTs take a long time to run, is there a recommended subset?

grantfirl commented 1 month ago

@grantfirl We're running through the RTs after some minor changes to make sure everything works. If we get clean results then we'll mark this as ready. The RTs take a long time to run, is there a recommended subset?

@grantfirl We're running through the RTs after some minor changes to make sure everything works. If we get clean results then we'll mark this as ready. The RTs take a long time to run, is there a recommended subset?

@danrosen25 No, unfortunately, they need to pass all of them. Be sure to turn ecflow on and they should run faster. E.g. set -e when running rt.sh.

mkavulich commented 1 month ago

@danrosen25 Just checking in to see what the status of this PR is, let me know if there's anything I can do to help things along.

masih-e commented 2 weeks ago

Hi, following up with the status of this PR. Please let me know if there is anything I can help with to move things along.

danrosen25 commented 1 week ago

@mkavulich @masih-e Although the tests passed after the recent sync the "Files Changed" Look wrong. We only touched a few files. I think we'll need to sync using a squash or rebase onto the ufs/dev branch.

mkavulich commented 1 week ago

Dan, the problem seems to be because the fork was created from https://github.com/NCAR/ccpp-physics, but the PR was opened to https://github.com/ufs-community/ccpp-physics/. These repositories are synced up regularly but they are not identical, and their histories are not necessarily consistent, which is why we're seeing these odd diffs.

If you'd like me to rebase the changes from the old branch (from the NCAR org) onto the ufs-dev branch in the ufs-community org I can do that, just let me know. I have a bit of experience dealing with these two repos.

Michael Kavulich, Jr. Associate Scientist, National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) Joint Numerical Testbed (JNT), Research Applications Laboratory (RAL) @. @.>*

On Tue, Jul 9, 2024 at 10:01 AM Daniel Rosen @.***> wrote:

@mkavulich https://github.com/mkavulich @masih-e https://github.com/masih-e Although the tests passed after the recent sync the "Files Changed" Look wrong. We only touched a few files. I think we'll need to sync using a squash or rebase onto the ufs/dev branch.

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ufs-community/ccpp-physics/pull/193#issuecomment-2218087355, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADA56AVD64NGFPGAHJSJFE3ZLQCNTAVCNFSM6AAAAABFR6EGB2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDEMJYGA4DOMZVGU . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

masih-e commented 1 week ago

Michael, would you be able to help with fixing the changes? Please let me know if I can help.

The files that we changed are the following: GFS_surface_composites_post. GFS_surface_generic_post. rrfs_smoke_wrapper.*

Thank you both for helping this moving forward

mkavulich commented 1 week ago

@masih-e @danrosen25 Sorry it took so long to get to this, I cherry-picked the appropriate commits and resolved the differences on my branch here: https://github.com/ufs-community/ccpp-physics/compare/ufs/dev...mkavulich:ccpp-physics:feature/ufs_fire_cpl_rebase?expand=1

Apparenly I don't have permission to push to the esmf-org/ccpp-physics repository, so if those changes are correct one of you will have to force-push that branch to this one. Or just open a new PR from a different branch if that's more desirable.

masih-e commented 5 days ago

Hi Michael,

Thank you for doing this. It looks good to me. Should we do the RT again?

Masih

On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 4:07 PM Michael Kavulich @.***> wrote:

@masih-e https://github.com/masih-e @danrosen25 https://github.com/danrosen25 Sorry it took so long to get to this, I cherry-picked the appropriate commits and resolved the differences on my branch here: https://github.com/ufs-community/ccpp-physics/compare/ufs/dev...mkavulich:ccpp-physics:feature/ufs_fire_cpl_rebase?expand=1

Apparenly I don't have permission to push to the esmf-org/ccpp-physics repository, so if those changes are correct one of you will have to force-push that branch to this one. Or just open a new PR from a different branch if that's more desirable.

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ufs-community/ccpp-physics/pull/193#issuecomment-2226416843, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AHFC3YSCGH7ZXCRTTQ3ANWLZMBHTBAVCNFSM6AAAAABFR6EGB2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDEMRWGQYTMOBUGM . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

danrosen25 commented 5 days ago

Let's bring this into the existing pull request branch if it's passing the tests. https://github.com/esmf-org/ccpp-physics/tree/feature/ufs_fire_cpl

On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 10:20 AM Masih @.***> wrote:

Hi Michael,

Thank you for doing this. It looks good to me. Should we do the RT again?

Masih

On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 4:07 PM Michael Kavulich @.***> wrote:

@masih-e https://github.com/masih-e @danrosen25 https://github.com/danrosen25 Sorry it took so long to get to this, I cherry-picked the appropriate commits and resolved the differences on my branch here:

https://github.com/ufs-community/ccpp-physics/compare/ufs/dev...mkavulich:ccpp-physics:feature/ufs_fire_cpl_rebase?expand=1

Apparenly I don't have permission to push to the esmf-org/ccpp-physics repository, so if those changes are correct one of you will have to force-push that branch to this one. Or just open a new PR from a different branch if that's more desirable.

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub < https://github.com/ufs-community/ccpp-physics/pull/193#issuecomment-2226416843>,

or unsubscribe < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AHFC3YSCGH7ZXCRTTQ3ANWLZMBHTBAVCNFSM6AAAAABFR6EGB2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDEMRWGQYTMOBUGM>

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

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ufs-community/ccpp-physics/pull/193#issuecomment-2228897943, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACJPO74TAWULDA47Q2CIWDLZMPZFBAVCNFSM6AAAAABFR6EGB2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDEMRYHA4TOOJUGM . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

mkavulich commented 4 days ago

Hi Michael, Thank you for doing this. It looks good to me. Should we do the RT again? Masih

I think we should re-run the RTs just to be sure, if that's the last step before opening these PRs for review. Be sure to incorporate this change before running the RTs, since there are some known failures before this point: https://github.com/ufs-community/ufs-weather-model/pull/2362

If you would like help with the RTs just let me know