RCON Microphysics

[rconrick]

Release of the RCON Microphysics package into WRF.

TYPE: new feature

KEYWORDS: microphysics, physics, rainfall, warm rain, cloud water

SOURCE: Robert Conrick (U. of Washington); robert.conrick@gmail.com

DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES:
This is the release of the RCON microphysics scheme, the intent of which is to improve warm rain representation within the Thompson-Eidhammer scheme.

LIST OF MODIFIED FILES:
modified: Registry/Registry.EM_COMMON
modified: Registry/registry.var
modified: dyn_em/solve_em.F
modified: phys/Makefile
modified: phys/module_microphysics_driver.F
new file: phys/module_mp_rcon.F
modified: phys/module_physics_init.F

The code has passed the regression tests.

RELEASE NOTE:
Release of the RCON Microphysics package into WRF, which improves upon the warm rain representation of the Thompson-Eidhammer scheme.

RCON is based heavily on the Thompson-Eidhammer scheme with a couple significant changes that improve upon the code in module_mp_rcon.F to generate more realistic rainfall during warm rain events with additional benefits for cold rain, especially warm processes during cold rain events.

Among the most significant changes for rain productions are 1) the use of a wider cloud water DSD of lognormal shape instead of the gamma DSD used by the Thompson-Eidhammer parameterization and 2) enhancement of the cloud-to-rain autoconversion parameterization to accommodate the new shape. The changes here also allow for sedimentation of cloud water within the lowest model layer, which effectively creates a drizzle mode in the scheme.

Accompanying published reference:
Conrick, R., C. F. Mass, and L. McMurdie, 2023: Improving Simulations of Warm Rain in a Bulk Microphysics Scheme. Mon. Wea. Rev., 152, 169-185, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-23-0035.1.

[weiwangncar]

The regression test results:

Test Type              | Expected  | Received |  Failed
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =  = = = =
Number of Tests        : 23           24
Number of Builds       : 60           57
Number of Simulations  : 158           150        0
Number of Comparisons  : 95           86        0

Failed Simulations are: 
None
Which comparisons are not bit-for-bit: 
None

[weiwangncar]

@rconrick You may also need to add some dependencies in main/depend.common file. Search for 'mp_thompson' and you can add a section for your scheme. Note that the second line and later begin with a tab.

[rconrick]

@rconrick You may also need to add some dependencies in main/depend.common file. Search for 'mp_thompson' and you can add a section for your scheme. Note that the second line and later begin with a tab.

Thank you for this information. I went through depend.common and made a few changes to add my scheme into it.

[dudhia]

@rconrick I see 8 3d diagnostic arrays that are optional inside the code. For general use can we just not have these outside the scheme, or at least add them to the package list. I am not sure many users would want this output.

[weiwangncar]

@rconrick I see 8 3d diagnostic arrays that are optional inside the code. For general use can we just not have these outside the scheme, or at least add them to the package list. I am not sure many users would want this output.

These extra diagnostic output variables are packaged.

[weiwangncar]

@rconrick See if you can address the latest comments by pushing up more changes. We need to get this merged to the repository soon. Thanks!

[rconrick]

No, it is already added in the module code. I see that you approved the PR, so I may remove this variable from output in the next release since like the other output arrays it’s not necessary.

…

On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 8:08 AM dudhia ***@***.***> wrote: ***@***.**** commented on this pull request. ------------------------------ In Registry/Registry.EM_COMMON <#2144 (comment)>: > @@ -3654,3 +3656,8 @@ rconfig integer windfarm_wake_model namelist,physics max_domai # wake overlap method, M1, M2, M3, M4 [1, 2, 3, 4] rconfig integer windfarm_overlap_method namelist,physics max_domains 4 rh "windfarm_overlap_method" "" "" rconfig real windfarm_deg namelist,physics max_domains 0 - "windfarm_deg" "for windfarm ideal case" "degree" + + +# outputs for RCON model. +state real CLOUDNC ij misc 1 - rh "CLOUDNC" "ACCUMULATED TOTAL GRID SCALE CLOUD PRECIPITATION" "mm" + Is this something that would have to be added to RAINNC to get the total? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2144 (review)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AHOYBHYJ7OEUCQTCNZ6EOW32K2BXPAVCNFSM6AAAAABTVLFPX2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMZDKNJTGIYTQOJSGY> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[dudhia]

It is fine if it is a subset of rainnc like snownc. What distinguishes it from the total? On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 1:20 PM Robert Conrick ***@***.***> wrote:

…

No, it is already added in the module code. I see that you approved the PR, so I may remove this variable from output in the next release since like the other output arrays it’s not necessary. On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 8:08 AM dudhia ***@***.***> wrote: > ***@***.**** commented on this pull request. > ------------------------------ > > In Registry/Registry.EM_COMMON > <#2144 (comment)>: > > > @@ -3654,3 +3656,8 @@ rconfig integer windfarm_wake_model namelist,physics max_domai > # wake overlap method, M1, M2, M3, M4 [1, 2, 3, 4] > rconfig integer windfarm_overlap_method namelist,physics max_domains 4 rh "windfarm_overlap_method" "" "" > rconfig real windfarm_deg namelist,physics max_domains 0 - "windfarm_deg" "for windfarm ideal case" "degree" > + > + > +# outputs for RCON model. > +state real CLOUDNC ij misc 1 - rh "CLOUDNC" "ACCUMULATED TOTAL GRID SCALE CLOUD PRECIPITATION" "mm" > + > > Is this something that would have to be added to RAINNC to get the total? > > — > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <#2144 (review)>, > or unsubscribe > < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AHOYBHYJ7OEUCQTCNZ6EOW32K2BXPAVCNFSM6AAAAABTVLFPX2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMZDKNJTGIYTQOJSGY> > . > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: > ***@***.***> > — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2144 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEIZ77GMTZ5F5M427AS3CK32LAICPAVCNFSM6AAAAABTVLFPX2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDKOJWHAYTONJYGY> . You are receiving this because your review was requested.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[weiwangncar]

@rconrick I have made one change to return the external/io_netcdf/makefile to the original state. Regarding Jimy's comment, you can make a change after the release branch is cut out and before 4.7 is officially released. The purpose of the release branch is to test and fix small things.
Another question for you: Can you run this scheme without climatological aerosols? The original Thompson scheme can be run without aerosols (mp_physics = 8), with aerosols (28) and with hail (38).

[rconrick]

Yes, it is a subset like snownc. It is the accumulation of cloud water from the scheme. Because the cloud droplets are larger, a portion of them fall out and accumulate as precipitation.

…

On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 12:58 PM dudhia ***@***.***> wrote: It is fine if it is a subset of rainnc like snownc. What distinguishes it from the total? On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 1:20 PM Robert Conrick ***@***.***> wrote: > No, it is already added in the module code. I see that you approved the > PR, > so I may remove this variable from output in the next release since like > the other output arrays it’s not necessary. > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 8:08 AM dudhia ***@***.***> wrote: > > > ***@***.**** commented on this pull request. > > ------------------------------ > > > > In Registry/Registry.EM_COMMON > > <#2144 (comment)>: > > > > > @@ -3654,3 +3656,8 @@ rconfig integer windfarm_wake_model > namelist,physics max_domai > > # wake overlap method, M1, M2, M3, M4 [1, 2, 3, 4] > > rconfig integer windfarm_overlap_method namelist,physics max_domains 4 > rh "windfarm_overlap_method" "" "" > > rconfig real windfarm_deg namelist,physics max_domains 0 - > "windfarm_deg" "for windfarm ideal case" "degree" > > + > > + > > +# outputs for RCON model. > > +state real CLOUDNC ij misc 1 - rh "CLOUDNC" "ACCUMULATED TOTAL GRID > SCALE CLOUD PRECIPITATION" "mm" > > + > > > > Is this something that would have to be added to RAINNC to get the > total? > > > > — > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > > < #2144 (review)>, > > > or unsubscribe > > < > https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AHOYBHYJ7OEUCQTCNZ6EOW32K2BXPAVCNFSM6AAAAABTVLFPX2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMZDKNJTGIYTQOJSGY> > > > . > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: > > ***@***.***> > > > > — > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <#2144 (comment)>, or > unsubscribe > < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEIZ77GMTZ5F5M427AS3CK32LAICPAVCNFSM6AAAAABTVLFPX2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDKOJWHAYTONJYGY> > . > You are receiving this because your review was requested.Message ID: > ***@***.***> > — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2144 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AHOYBHZFA5AHE3KSKYWKGMT2LAMQZAVCNFSM6AAAAABTVLFPX2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDKOJWHA3TMMBQGE> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[rconrick]

Thank you, Wei. I tried to revert that makefile back, but it must not have worked? Or perhaps I missed the file. In any case, thank you! To answer your other question, the scheme should run fine without aerosols and with hail enabled. Those portions of the original thompson scheme are unaffected. Thanks!

…

On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 6:01 PM weiwangncar ***@***.***> wrote: @rconrick <https://github.com/rconrick> I have made one change to return the external/io_netcdf/makefile to the original state. Regarding Jimy's comment, you can make a change after the release branch is cut out and before 4.7 is officially released. The purpose of the release branch is to test and fix small things. Another question for you: Can you run this scheme without climatological aerosols? The original Thompson scheme can be run without aerosols (mp_physics = 8), with aerosols (28) and with hail (38). — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2144 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AHOYBH2G2RYQ7QBHS2MQUFD2LBQBHAVCNFSM6AAAAABTVLFPX2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDKOJXGI3TQNJZG4> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[weiwangncar]

@rconrick What version of the Thompson scheme is yours based on? Is it the latest in, say, 4.6? If so, your package list is missing a few variables, such as qng, and qnbca (the latest aerosol input).

[dudhia]

I think it is OK to keep CLOUDNC as a diagnostic. it is only 2d.

[weiwangncar]

The last changes have passed the regression tests.

[dudhia]

Not seeing any problems.