Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Phase 2: Stabilizing long runs #485

Closed
13 tasks done
Tracked by #389
LenkaNovak opened this issue Nov 1, 2023 · 13 comments
Closed
13 tasks done
Tracked by #389

Phase 2: Stabilizing long runs #485

LenkaNovak opened this issue Nov 1, 2023 · 13 comments

Comments

@LenkaNovak
Copy link
Collaborator

LenkaNovak commented Nov 1, 2023

Current problems

Screen Shot 2023-11-02 at 5 31 00 PM Screen Shot 2023-11-02 at 6 54 10 PM

ClimaAtmos specs / debug

ClimaCoupler specs / debug

Arising issues to fix

@akshaysridhar
Copy link
Member

akshaysridhar commented Nov 3, 2023

Build 312: Standalone atmos run (clearsky, monin-obukhov surface scheme, time varying insolation) Averaged over days (100-300) at 10-day output frequency.
Build312_Standalone_Atmos_AP_Clearsky_TVInsolation

@akshaysridhar
Copy link
Member

Build 312: Coupled atmos run (clearsky, monin-obukhov surface scheme, time varying insolation) Averaged over days (100-200) at 5-day output frequency.
Build312_NewTarget_ClearskyTVInsolation

@szy21
Copy link
Member

szy21 commented Nov 4, 2023

What is the difference in the standalone and coupled atmosphere run, and what is the albedo in these simulations?

@LenkaNovak
Copy link
Collaborator Author

standa

What is the difference in the standalone and coupled atmosphere run, and what is the albedo in these simulations?

standalone = ClimaAtmos does the stepping and flux calculation (no coupler)
coupler = full AMIP (except topography and EDMF)

Albedo for standalone is 0.38 I believe, and AMIP reads this from a file. We get similar results for idealized albedo as a function of latitude.

@LenkaNovak
Copy link
Collaborator Author

LenkaNovak commented Nov 9, 2023

Standalone only

Here are results from the build with exponential decrease of CE from the sfc: build #1231) (similar results for runs where C_E is constant to 950hPa, then exponentially decreasing)
NB: C_E = CE_0 * exp(-((1e5 - p)/1e4)^2)

day 100 zonal-mean snapshot (similar for day 180):
Screen Shot 2023-11-08 at 4 44 06 PM
Screen Shot 2023-11-08 at 5 35 27 PM

data:

  • /central/scratch/esm/slurm-buildkite/climaatmos-longruns/1231/climaatmos-longruns/tvinsolation_diff1/day100.0.hdf5
  • /central/scratch/esm/slurm-buildkite/climaatmos-longruns/1231/climaatmos-longruns/tvinsolation_diff4/day100.0.hdf5

@akshaysridhar , would it be possible to output the above diagnostics for these please?

Next suggested steps:

  • try coupled runs with higher diffusivity (+ more granular analysis of sfc flux balance, why is the lw_up radiative flux so strong over the dynamic surface?) NB: diff of ~5m2/s is comparable to the axisymmetric experiments in Walker and Schneider 05
  • implement the FMS diffusivity that's dependent on Ri (less diffusion at poles, more diffusion at low latitudes) - as in Frierson et al 06
  • if still needed, try BM relaxation scheme

@akshaysridhar
Copy link
Member

@LenkaNovak See https://github.com/CliMA/ClimaAtmos.jl/tree/as/frierson-diff for the updates w.r.t Frierson et al. (2006) Ri dependent boundary layer parameterization.I'm having some local test run issues but I expect to be able to resolve these soon.

@szy21
Copy link
Member

szy21 commented Nov 9, 2023

This very old branch has an implementation of Betts-Miller that is ~85% done, in case you need it.

@LenkaNovak
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Perfect, thank you!

@akshaysridhar
Copy link
Member

akshaysridhar commented Nov 9, 2023

Standalone only

Here are results from the build with exponential decrease of CE from the sfc: build #1231) (similar results for runs where C_E is constant to 950hPa, then exponentially decreasing) NB: C_E = CE_0 * exp(-((1e5 - p)/1e4)^2)

day 100 zonal-mean snapshot (similar for day 180): Screen Shot 2023-11-08 at 4 44 06 PM Screen Shot 2023-11-08 at 5 35 27 PM

data:

* `/central/scratch/esm/slurm-buildkite/climaatmos-longruns/1231/climaatmos-longruns/tvinsolation_diff1/day100.0.hdf5`

* `/central/scratch/esm/slurm-buildkite/climaatmos-longruns/1231/climaatmos-longruns/tvinsolation_diff4/day100.0.hdf5`

@akshaysridhar , would it be possible to output the above diagnostics for these please?

Next suggested steps:

* try coupled runs with higher diffusivity (+ more granular analysis of sfc flux balance, why is the lw_up radiative flux so strong over the dynamic surface?) NB: diff of ~5m2/s is comparable to the axisymmetric experiments in [Walker and Schneider 05](https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1029/2004GL022304)

* implement the FMS diffusivity that's dependent on Ri (less diffusion at poles, more diffusion at low latitudes) - as in [Frierson et al 06](https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/atsc/63/10/jas3753.1.xml)

* if still needed, try BM relaxation scheme

Diff 1 (C_E=1) Directory (Build 1231) (Day 180 avg)
TV_Insolation_Diff1_180

Diff 4 (C_E=4) Directory (Build 1231) (Day 180 avg)
TV_Insolation_Diff4_180

Diff 4 (C_E=4) Directory (Build 1231) (Day 200-280 avg)
TV_Insolation_Diff4_200-280

@szy21
Copy link
Member

szy21 commented Nov 9, 2023

This recent paper uses an idealized model with RRTMG, no convection scheme, Frierson vertical diffusion, and slab ocean. It would be a good reference for us to compare. There are differences in details about insolation and greenhouse gases between our setup and theirs. Not sure if they are important, but even if they are, it should be straightforward to modify our setup. I'll check if I can get the data from the model.

@LenkaNovak
Copy link
Collaborator Author

LenkaNovak commented Nov 13, 2023

Constant diffusivity coupled runs (180d, start date 1 March):

  • AMIP

    • crashed after day 20 build
  • Slab ocean

    • large seasonal variations, unrealistic circulations (constant albedo), lagged thermal response (sfc T)
      Screen Shot 2023-11-13 at 9 52 52 AM
  • fixed SST, bucket

    • more realistic bucket
      Screen Shot 2023-11-13 at 9 52 23 AM
  • Diags:

Screen Shot 2023-11-13 at 11 03 13 AM

Next (+ summary of the above)

  • assess the long-term stability of the slab ocean build
  • run u-dependent diffusivity but 4x the value builds
  • implement the FMS diffusivity that's dependent on Ri (less diffusion at poles, more diffusion at low latitudes) - as in Frierson et al 06 PR
  • implement BM scheme branch

@LenkaNovak
Copy link
Collaborator Author

LenkaNovak commented Nov 15, 2023

AMIP with increased (u-dependent) diffusivity

  • K_E x 4 and K_E x 2 yielded similar results (more extreme for the former)
  • evolving surface too cold (and dry) at the poles and too warm (and wet) at the equator
  • lapse rate excessive in the tropics, very stable at the poles up to 1km (though not unrealistic)
  • both crash at day 120 (peak summer)
Screen Shot 2023-11-14 at 6 08 13 PM

@LenkaNovak
Copy link
Collaborator Author

LenkaNovak commented Nov 15, 2023

Slab ocean with increased (u-dependent) diffusivity

  • K_E x 4 crashed at 40d and K_E x 2 did not crash (ran to 320d)
  • higher diffusivity causes the high latitude temperature to be too warm, jets and eddies are more distorted / banded and also much stronger (less extreme lapse rate), superrotation
Screen Shot 2023-11-14 at 7 23 15 PM

Current status

  • higher diffusivity makes the tropic less unstable but the poles less stable. This points to the need for the Ri-dependent diffusivity, and potentially more extreme transport in the tropics
  • we also checked the surface fluxes (rad and turbulent) against observations and these seem to be reasonable, except that the latent heat release is too high over land (max: 150W/m2 v 75W/m2) and potentially too low over the ocean (max: 100W/m2 v 150W/m2)

Next

  • implement the FMS diffusivity that's dependent on Ri (less diffusion at poles, more diffusion at low latitudes) - as in Frierson et al 06 ClimaAtmos PR
  • reproduce existing diffusion only GCMs (e.g. Zurita-Gotor et al 23 - see above)
  • examine negative evaporation in coarse resol runs
  • BM relaxation scheme

@LenkaNovak LenkaNovak changed the title Stabilizing long runs Phase 2: Stabilizing long runs Nov 20, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants