-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 146
Improve flexibility of cloud diagnostics #3016
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
Conversation
|
Thanks for expanding your diagnostics @axel-lauer! I tested both recipes, both ran successfully! 🎉 However, there were a couple of warnings from the NCL scripts:
|
|
@axel-lauer this looks very useful indeed (to my untrained NCL and sciencey eye), you should add the Milestone 2.8 to it, I reckon! @ESMValGroup/tech-reviewers can we have one NCL expert look at this please? 🍺 |
|
Thanks @schlunma for taking a look! I found out that I made a mistake in the test recipes so only part of the functionality was actually tested. I updated the test recipes (sorry about this): I think the NCL warnings about entire input arrays containing missing values resulting in the This problem can be reprocuded with this test recipe: recipe_test_wap.yml.txt If you think this could indeed be a more general problem, I would open an issue. In any case, I think the empty ICON plot and the many related NCL warnings are not a problem of the changes introduced in this PR. |
|
Thanks for the update Axel! I will test this again with the new recipe versions. Regarding the preprocessor for |
schlunma
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The adapted recipes (additional coordinate: air_pressure) both ran fine now and I get plots for all CMIP models. However, the dyn_matrix plots for ICON look a bit weird and very different to the other models:
but this is probably related to the data itself, not the changes in this PR. I still get the NCL warnings though, even with the fixed wap field for ICON.
The recipe that failed before now also runs fine 👍 Thanks!!
I think there might be something strange going on with the unit conversion for ICON data. The first time step in the preprocessed files for ICON contains only very low values (in contrast to the other time steps). This seems wrong to me and might explain the "line" around wap=0 in the plot. Here an example of the first two time steps of the preprocessed files to illustrate what I mean (left = ERA5 and right = ICON). Btw, the other time steps also look strange. The values seem rather noisy and quite high compared to what I would expect. |
|
I don't think this is an issue with the This is the data for February 2004: The values differ by a factor of ~10e4! The February values look much more similar than the data from other models, although the maximum is considerably higher. The noise you describe is also in the raw input data: |
I agree. Thanks for checking! I think this is ready to be merged then. |





Description
This technical PR increases the flexibility of the cloud diagnostics stored in diag_script/clouds to allow for:
Test recipes
Checklist
It is the responsibility of the author to make sure the pull request is ready to review. The icons indicate whether the item will be subject to the 🛠 Technical or 🧪 Scientific review.
New or updated recipe/diagnostic