ice history files are not being produced

[DeniseWorthen]

Description

The 6-hourly ice output is not being produced. The regression tests do not compare history files so this was not noticed at the time of the CICE update PR #610

Noted by @jiandewang when running mini-p7.

To Reproduce:

Run the current cpld_control regression test. It will pass the baselines but it does not produce 6 hourly history files as expected.

Additional context

Output

[DeniseWorthen]

@jiandewang @JessicaMeixner-NOAA @junwang-noaa I have identified the issue, but Tony will need to make some changes to the underlying time-manager. I currently have a PR at the Consortium for updating the CICE nuopc driver; the fix can come back when I bring those changes back to emc/develop (I've tested the cap changes and no changes to baselines will result). The fix to the time-manager should only impact the history output triggers.

In the meantime, I can make a PR to P7b which will produce hourly output if required for the mini-Ps.

[jiandewang]

@DeniseWorthen we will stick to current 6hr increment for ice output

[DeniseWorthen]

@jiandewang The model is not capable of producing 6hourly output w/o a fix that Tony will make. I can make a fix which will produce hourly output (this fix needs to be made anyway but is b4b w/ current baselines).

[jiandewang]

@DeniseWorthen I assume it will take some time for Tony to fix, then sometime to get into ufs, so we will use your temporal fixing in P7b. The good part for ice output is that they are highly compressible, so if I zip them the total disk usage will be reduced to 10% as the original file size.

[DeniseWorthen]

Is anyone making use of the 6hrly ice output for the mini-P's? Hourly output will be 840 files and seems to be overkill for the evaluation of the mini-Ps.

Also, most of the evaluation I've seen is based ATM output over some averaging period--first week etc. Wouldn't daily mean output for ice be sufficient ?

[SMoorthi-emc]

I wonder why there wasn't any regression test that caught this before committing to the master repository!

On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 6:47 PM jiandewang @.***> wrote:

@DeniseWorthen https://github.com/DeniseWorthen I assume it will take some time for Tony to fix, then sometime to get into ufs, so we will use your temporal fixing in P7b

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ufs-community/ufs-weather-model/issues/647#issuecomment-862779929, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALLVRYR7LDMLOSFSXETS2HTTTESWBANCNFSM46XX5T4A .

-- Dr. Shrinivas Moorthi Research Meteorologist Modeling and Data Assimilation Branch Environmental Modeling Center / National Centers for Environmental Prediction 5830 University Research Court - (W/NP23), College Park MD 20740 USA Tel: (301)683-3718

e-mail: @.*** Phone: (301) 683-3718 Fax: (301) 683-3718

[LydiaStefanova-NOAA]

@DeniseWorthen I don't know of anyone using the sub-daily ice output for the evaluations. For the benchmark evaluations of threat scores, the 6hourly is first converted to daily anyway, so I think daily output would be adequate. As far as hourly ice output - it may be of interest to have the capability in case someone wants to look at the sub-daily impact of nsst on ice, but I think it would be overkill to run the mini-prototypes with hourly ice output.

[yangfanglin]

This leads to the question: what will be the output frequency from different components of the coupled system for different applications in future operation ? Should a uniform output frequency be used ? As a reference, the ATM in current medium-range weather forecast operation writes out hourly history files for the first 120 hours then 3 hourly for forecast up to 16 days.

[junwang-noaa]

I hope we don't need to have uniform output frequency for different components unless those files are required. It's good that we have the flexibility to output fields at frequencies that satisfy our needs. Redundant files do take extra resources (computer time and disk space).

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 10:42 AM Fanglin Yang @.***> wrote:

This leads to the question: what will be output frequency from different components of the coupled system for different applications in future operation ? Should a uniform output frequency be used ? As a reference, the ATM in current operation writes out hourly history files for the first 120 hours then 3 hourly for forecast up to 16 days.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ufs-community/ufs-weather-model/issues/647#issuecomment-863300178, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TMCUDQTAIVB3KGQAYLTTICVXANCNFSM46XX5T4A .

[DeniseWorthen]

I wonder why there wasn't any regression test that caught this before committing to the master repository! … On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 6:47 PM jiandewang @.> wrote: @DeniseWorthen https://github.com/DeniseWorthen I assume it will take some time for Tony to fix, then sometime to get into ufs, so we will use your temporal fixing in P7b — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#647 (comment)>, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALLVRYR7LDMLOSFSXETS2HTTTESWBANCNFSM46XX5T4A . -- Dr. Shrinivas Moorthi Research Meteorologist Modeling and Data Assimilation Branch Environmental Modeling Center / National Centers for Environmental Prediction 5830 University Research Court - (W/NP23), College Park MD 20740 USA Tel: (301)683-3718 e-mail: @. Phone: (301) 683-3718 Fax: (301) 683-3718

No RT for the coupled model checks either MOM6 or CICE6 "history" files. Only restart files are checked.

If you're looking for someone to blame, I take full responsibility. It was an issue that arose on the CICE Consortium after the time manager was updated but they hadn't fully resolved how to deal w/ some of the issues raised so it had not yet been fixed.

[DeniseWorthen]

@yangfanglin I don't know of any capability in CICE6 or MOM6 to write output at varying frequencies during a run.

[jiandewang]

MOM6 doesn't have this kind of capability as it is controlled by FMS. I think in current ATM it is done through restart style of runs (Fanglin: correct me if I am wrong). By doing restart style of runs we can reset output frequency in diag_table.

[yangfanglin]

FMS allows one to specify a list of output at specified forecast hours. ATM using that feature.

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 1:30 PM jiandewang @.***> wrote:

MOM6 doesn't have this kind of capability as it is controlled by FMS. I think in current ATM it is done through restart style of runs (Fanglin: correct me if I am wrong). By doing restart style of runs we can reset output frequency in diag_table.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ufs-community/ufs-weather-model/issues/647#issuecomment-863427740, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AKY5N2IU57QGI5MI53MFSW3TTIWLLANCNFSM46XX5T4A .

-- Fanglin Yang, Ph.D. Chief, Model Physics Group Modeling and Data Assimilation Branch

NOAA/NWS/NCEP Environmental Modeling Center

https://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/gmb/wx24fy/fyang/ https://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/gmb/wx24fy/fyang/

[junwang-noaa]

Fanglin, the feature is set up in fv3atm, not in FMS.

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 2:09 PM Fanglin Yang @.***> wrote:

FMS allows one to specify a list of output at specified forecast hours. ATM using that feature.

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 1:30 PM jiandewang @.***> wrote:

MOM6 doesn't have this kind of capability as it is controlled by FMS. I think in current ATM it is done through restart style of runs (Fanglin: correct me if I am wrong). By doing restart style of runs we can reset output frequency in diag_table.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub < https://github.com/ufs-community/ufs-weather-model/issues/647#issuecomment-863427740 , or unsubscribe < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AKY5N2IU57QGI5MI53MFSW3TTIWLLANCNFSM46XX5T4A

.

-- Fanglin Yang, Ph.D. Chief, Model Physics Group Modeling and Data Assimilation Branch

NOAA/NWS/NCEP Environmental Modeling Center

https://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/gmb/wx24fy/fyang/ https://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/gmb/wx24fy/fyang/

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ufs-community/ufs-weather-model/issues/647#issuecomment-863452991, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AI7D6TKWK3WPDHUP72LOASTTTI23PANCNFSM46XX5T4A .

[DeniseWorthen]

A fix for the history output in the time manager is in a PR at the Consortium. The EMC PR for the cice cap updates has already been merged so I should be able to bring the fix back relatively soon. No baselines will change for ufs-weather.