Skip to content

Add an option to use zero-gradient BC to reconstruct interface u/v for height advection; change dz_min as a input#53

Merged
junwang-noaa merged 4 commits into
NOAA-EMC:dev/emcfrom
XiaqiongZhou-NOAA:psmbc
Jan 25, 2021
Merged

Add an option to use zero-gradient BC to reconstruct interface u/v for height advection; change dz_min as a input#53
junwang-noaa merged 4 commits into
NOAA-EMC:dev/emcfrom
XiaqiongZhou-NOAA:psmbc

Conversation

@XiaqiongZhou-NOAA
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@XiaqiongZhou-NOAA XiaqiongZhou-NOAA commented Jan 13, 2021

1)Add an option to use original BC or zero-gradient BC to reconstruct interface u/v with PSM for height advection

2)Change dz_min as a namelist input

##Issue(s) addressed

This is used to solve some model crashes in GFSv16 and regional forecasts.

##Testing

This is tested for GFSv16, regional forecast and idealized mountain wave tests.
This new BC option is not changing forecast performance and results significantly.
It is not change regression test baseline since the default setting remains the same as the original

##Dependencies
ufs-community/ufs-weather-model#369
NOAA-EMC/ufsatm#232

… interface u/v with PSM for height advection

2)Change dz_min as a namelist input
@climbfuji
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@climbfuji
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@junwang-noaa @DusanJovic-NOAA Please assign reviewers when you get the chance. Thanks!

@lharris4
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

The diff makes it look like all of nh_utils.F90 has been re-written. What precisely are the differences in these two versions?

@XiaqiongZhou-NOAA
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

The diff makes it look like all of nh_utils.F90 has been re-written. What precisely are the differences in these two versions?
Lucas:
You can change the setting when reviewing the file "Hide whitespace changes" to see the differences. It seems there are some format changes

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@yangfanglin yangfanglin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The updates look fine for me. The dz_min adjustment now starts from the surface as SJ Lin coded . An option is added to apply non-slippery wind profile reconstruction.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@bensonr bensonr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These look good to me.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@lharris4 lharris4 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks fine to me, as the original behavior can be recovered by namelist options at runtime. Every FV3 user needs to tailor the dynamics to their own needs. The reduction in order at the lower boundary may change the behavior of orographic flows and needs to be closely monitored. Problems arising from the physics need to be fixed rather than relying on the dynamics to cover them up. But otherwise the change is OK.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants