Skip to content

Updating MYNN-SFC#2290

Merged
islas merged 5 commits intowrf-model:developfrom
joeolson42:mynnsfc_20260303
Mar 18, 2026
Merged

Updating MYNN-SFC#2290
islas merged 5 commits intowrf-model:developfrom
joeolson42:mynnsfc_20260303

Conversation

@joeolson42
Copy link
Contributor

@joeolson42 joeolson42 commented Mar 3, 2026

The purpose for this PR is to update the refactored MYNN surface layer scheme, which has now been more fully debugged and has been tested in both WRF and MPAS.

TYPE: enhancement

KEYWORDS: MYNN-SFC version 6.0.0 refactored HRRR

SOURCE: Joseph B. Olson

DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES:
The Main Problem:
This scheme was refactored starting from the CCPP version, which has a few distinctions from WRF/MPAS that required further work to fully integrate into both WRF and MPAS.

Solutions:

  1. Corrected the conversions of mixing ratio/specific humidity.
  2. added output of variables qgh and cqs, which are needed in some mode frameworks for some configurations
  3. Some tuning was done for sf_mynn_sfcflux_land = 1 to work better when initializing off of RAP/HRRR/RRFS and using RUC LSM. If using Noah LSM, it will default to the Chen et al. (variable Czil) approach.
  4. Added the infrastructure for bathymetry-dependent z0, which is expected to be compared with other approaches (possibly from WFIP3 data) and possibly tweaked in the near future.
  5. Added automated CI testing in "MYNN-SFC/tests", which further help check for code errors for every PR to the MYNN-SFC repository. This helped find a few bugs in relatively unused configurations.

LIST OF MODIFIED FILES: list of changed files (use git diff --name-status master to get formatted list)
M phys/MYNN-SFC
M phys/module_surface_driver.F

TESTS CONDUCTED:

  1. Do mods fix problem? Yes, case study testing with debug flags active.
  2. Are the Jenkins tests all passing?

@joeolson42 joeolson42 requested a review from a team as a code owner March 3, 2026 22:38
@joeolson42 joeolson42 requested a review from a team as a code owner March 4, 2026 12:08
@joeolson42
Copy link
Contributor Author

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
weiwangncar previously approved these changes Mar 5, 2026
@weiwangncar
Copy link
Collaborator

@joeolson42 Will do a separate PR for depend.common.

@dudhia
Copy link
Collaborator

dudhia commented Mar 5, 2026

Not sure the depend.common change is needed anyway. I think that is only for dependencies outside the phys directory. GFL is already listed in the phys/Makefile.

@islas
Copy link
Collaborator

islas commented Mar 5, 2026

Not sure the depend.common change is needed anyway. I think that is only for dependencies outside the phys directory. GFL is already listed in the phys/Makefile.

The GFL PR that went in did not properly set up the make dependencies. The depend.common has the object dependencies for the whole project. That said, the fixes to GFL should be done in a separate PR

@dudhia
Copy link
Collaborator

dudhia commented Mar 5, 2026

OK, I see depend.common may have some outdated gf files listed.

@joeolson42
Copy link
Contributor Author

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

dudhia
dudhia previously approved these changes Mar 11, 2026
weiwangncar
weiwangncar previously approved these changes Mar 13, 2026
@islas islas mentioned this pull request Mar 17, 2026
islas
islas previously requested changes Mar 18, 2026
Copy link
Collaborator

@islas islas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think the PR description TYPE section should also be updated to only select one thing.

remove duplicate change.
@weiwangncar weiwangncar dismissed stale reviews from dudhia and themself via 4785f36 March 18, 2026 16:57
@weiwangncar
Copy link
Collaborator

I think the PR description TYPE section should also be updated to only select one thing.

@joeolson42 @islas I have made the change.

@islas islas self-requested a review March 18, 2026 17:06
@islas islas dismissed their stale review March 18, 2026 17:06

addressed

@islas
Copy link
Collaborator

islas commented Mar 18, 2026

Updated PR description

@islas islas merged commit 8186cfc into wrf-model:develop Mar 18, 2026
4 checks passed
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.

4 participants