HAFS_update_moist

[ericaligo-NOAA]

The last working version of the Ferrier-Aligo scheme that I have on disk has HAFS_update_moist in the SDF. The HAFS SDF now does not have this subroutine. Seems like a lot has changed with the initial implementation of the FA in FV3, and I'm thinking it might be best to return to the original working version that used HAFS_update_moist. Is this possible?

[mzhangw]

Eric, hafs_update_moist is a very early stage version of Ferrier-Aligo scheme at DTC. CCPP, the host model (UFS and SCM) and the scheme itself has been upgraded a lot since then. I'd suggest sticking to the latest code in repository.

[ericaligo-NOAA]

The early version is the version that was working for me.  I'm wondering if changes made after that introduced errors that are causing the failures with FA.

…

On 5/3/2021 12:24 PM, mzhangw wrote: Eric, hafs_update_moist is a very early stage version of Ferrier-Aligo scheme at DTC. CCPP, the host model (UFS and SCM) and the scheme itself has been upgraded a lot since then. I'd suggest sticking to the latest code in repository. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#646 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MILJDMKC52RNDTLEYLTL3E2TANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.

[mzhangw]

What errors do you get? It will be very helpful if you have a run directory with failure information.

[ligiabernardet]

@ericaligo-NOAA The only way to combine the current code base with the old hafs_update_moist would be for you to re-insert hafs_update_moist in the SDF. But note that the code base has marched ahead, so updates may be needed in the scheme and/or host to assure they are compatible. As @mzhangw said, a lot of development has happened in the F-A scheme since this old iteration, so you need to carefully consider if using this old code base will be an effective way forward.

[ericaligo-NOAA]

One of the potentially troubling differences I see between the HAFS SDF and suite_FV3_GFS_v15_thompson.xml is in the radiation section. The HAFS suite neglects the sgscloud_radpre and I believe has the lw listed before sw.  Should the HAFS suite be updated to match what we see below? The radiation group for HAFS is listed in blue.   <group name="radiation">     <subcycle loop="1"> <scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme> *<scheme>sgscloud_radpre</scheme>*       <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme>       <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme>       <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme>       <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme>       <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme>       <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme> *<scheme>sgscloud_radpost</scheme>*       <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme>       <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme>     </subcycle>   </group> *<group name="radiation">** **    <subcycle loop="1">** **<scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme>** **      <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme>** **      <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme>** **      <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme>** **      <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme>** **      <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme>** **      <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme>** **      <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme>** **      <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme>** **    </subcycle>** **  </group>** ** * *On 5/12/2021 4:55 PM, ligiabernardet wrote:*

…

@ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> The only way to combine the current code base with the old hafs_update_moist would be for you to re-insert hafs_update_moist in the SDF. But note that the code base has marched ahead, so updates may be needed in the scheme and/or host to assure they are compatible. As @mzhangw <https://github.com/mzhangw> said, a lot of development has happened in the F-A scheme since this old iteration, so you need to carefully consider if using this old code base will be an effective way forward. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#646 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MK4GXE5PLCB3AIMFFDTNLTNFANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.

[mzhangw]

SGS cloud is a thompson scheme specific interstitials. For FA scheme in HAFS, the thompson fraction cloud scheme is used (icloud=3).

…

On May 12, 2021, at 4:11 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote: One of the potentially troubling differences I see between the HAFS SDF and suite_FV3_GFS_v15_thompson.xml is in the radiation section. The HAFS suite neglects the sgscloud_radpre and I believe has the lw listed before sw. Should the HAFS suite be updated to match what we see below? The radiation group for HAFS is listed in blue. <group name="radiation"> <subcycle loop="1"> <scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme> *<scheme>sgscloud_radpre</scheme>* <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme> <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme> <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme> <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme> <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme> <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme> *<scheme>sgscloud_radpost</scheme>* <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme> <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme> </subcycle> </group> *<group name="radiation">** ** <subcycle loop="1">** **<scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme>** ** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme>** ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme>** ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme>** ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme>** ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme>** ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme>** ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme>** ** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme>** ** </subcycle>** ** </group>** ** * *On 5/12/2021 4:55 PM, ligiabernardet wrote:* > > @ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> The only way to > combine the current code base with the old hafs_update_moist would be > for you to re-insert hafs_update_moist in the SDF. But note that the > code base has marched ahead, so updates may be needed in the scheme > and/or host to assure they are compatible. As @mzhangw > <https://github.com/mzhangw> said, a lot of development has happened > in the F-A scheme since this old iteration, so you need to carefully > consider if using this old code base will be an effective way forward. > > — > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <#646 (comment)>, > or unsubscribe > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MK4GXE5PLCB3AIMFFDTNLTNFANCNFSM436MVIQQ>. > — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#646 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2TEUCHOZFL3AVZCPKTTNL4HPANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.

[ericaligo-NOAA]

Okay, I didn't realize that.  Thanks.

…

On 5/12/2021 6:15 PM, mzhangw wrote: SGS cloud is a thompson scheme specific interstitials. For FA scheme in HAFS, the thompson fraction cloud scheme is used (icloud=3). > On May 12, 2021, at 4:11 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote: > > > One of the potentially troubling differences I see between the HAFS SDF > and suite_FV3_GFS_v15_thompson.xml is in the radiation section. The HAFS > suite neglects the sgscloud_radpre and I believe has the lw listed > before sw. Should the HAFS suite be updated to match what we see below? > The radiation group for HAFS is listed in blue. > > <group name="radiation"> > <subcycle loop="1"> > <scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme> > *<scheme>sgscloud_radpre</scheme>* > <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme> > <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme> > <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme> > <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme> > <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme> > <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme> > *<scheme>sgscloud_radpost</scheme>* > <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme> > <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme> > </subcycle> > </group> > > *<group name="radiation">** > ** <subcycle loop="1">** > **<scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme>** > ** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme>** > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme>** > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme>** > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme>** > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme>** > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme>** > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme>** > ** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme>** > ** </subcycle>** > ** </group>** > ** > * > > *On 5/12/2021 4:55 PM, ligiabernardet wrote:* > > > > @ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> The only way to > > combine the current code base with the old hafs_update_moist would be > > for you to re-insert hafs_update_moist in the SDF. But note that the > > code base has marched ahead, so updates may be needed in the scheme > > and/or host to assure they are compatible. As @mzhangw > > <https://github.com/mzhangw> said, a lot of development has happened > > in the F-A scheme since this old iteration, so you need to carefully > > consider if using this old code base will be an effective way forward. > > > > — > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > > <#646 (comment)>, > > or unsubscribe > > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MK4GXE5PLCB3AIMFFDTNLTNFANCNFSM436MVIQQ>. > > > — > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#646 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2TEUCHOZFL3AVZCPKTTNL4HPANCNFSM436MVIQQ>. > — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#646 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MKG22TCK4A5PD6CVXTTNL4ZBANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.

[mzhangw]

Here is the developer’s note/documentation: https://dtcenter.ucar.edu/GMTB/v5.0.0/sci_doc/SGSCLOUD_page.html <https://dtcenter.ucar.edu/GMTB/v5.0.0/sci_doc/SGSCLOUD_page.html>

…

On May 12, 2021, at 4:16 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote: Okay, I didn't realize that. Thanks. On 5/12/2021 6:15 PM, mzhangw wrote: > SGS cloud is a thompson scheme specific interstitials. For FA scheme > in HAFS, the thompson fraction cloud scheme is used (icloud=3). > > > > On May 12, 2021, at 4:11 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote: > > > > > > One of the potentially troubling differences I see between the HAFS SDF > > and suite_FV3_GFS_v15_thompson.xml is in the radiation section. The > HAFS > > suite neglects the sgscloud_radpre and I believe has the lw listed > > before sw. Should the HAFS suite be updated to match what we see below? > > The radiation group for HAFS is listed in blue. > > > > <group name="radiation"> > > <subcycle loop="1"> > > <scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme> > > *<scheme>sgscloud_radpre</scheme>* > > <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme> > > <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme> > > <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme> > > <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme> > > <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme> > > <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme> > > *<scheme>sgscloud_radpost</scheme>* > > <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme> > > <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme> > > </subcycle> > > </group> > > > > *<group name="radiation">** > > ** <subcycle loop="1">** > > **<scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme>** > > ** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme>** > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme>** > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme>** > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme>** > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme>** > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme>** > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme>** > > ** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme>** > > ** </subcycle>** > > ** </group>** > > ** > > * > > > > *On 5/12/2021 4:55 PM, ligiabernardet wrote:* > > > > > > @ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> The only way to > > > combine the current code base with the old hafs_update_moist would be > > > for you to re-insert hafs_update_moist in the SDF. But note that the > > > code base has marched ahead, so updates may be needed in the scheme > > > and/or host to assure they are compatible. As @mzhangw > > > <https://github.com/mzhangw> said, a lot of development has happened > > > in the F-A scheme since this old iteration, so you need to carefully > > > consider if using this old code base will be an effective way forward. > > > > > > — > > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > > > > <#646 (comment)>, > > > > or unsubscribe > > > > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MK4GXE5PLCB3AIMFFDTNLTNFANCNFSM436MVIQQ>. > > > > > — > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <#646 (comment)>, > or unsubscribe > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2TEUCHOZFL3AVZCPKTTNL4HPANCNFSM436MVIQQ>. > > > > — > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <#646 (comment)>, > or unsubscribe > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MKG22TCK4A5PD6CVXTTNL4ZBANCNFSM436MVIQQ>. > — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#646 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2QUXPTC7VQC6OBIAILTNL45HANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.

[ericaligo-NOAA]

Thanks.  How about the order of the lw and sw.  I noticed it's reversed in the suites.

…

On 5/12/2021 6:19 PM, mzhangw wrote: Here is the developer’s note/documentation: https://dtcenter.ucar.edu/GMTB/v5.0.0/sci_doc/SGSCLOUD_page.html <https://dtcenter.ucar.edu/GMTB/v5.0.0/sci_doc/SGSCLOUD_page.html> > On May 12, 2021, at 4:16 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote: > > > Okay, I didn't realize that. Thanks. > > On 5/12/2021 6:15 PM, mzhangw wrote: > > SGS cloud is a thompson scheme specific interstitials. For FA scheme > > in HAFS, the thompson fraction cloud scheme is used (icloud=3). > > > > > > > On May 12, 2021, at 4:11 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote: > > > > > > > > > One of the potentially troubling differences I see between the HAFS SDF > > > and suite_FV3_GFS_v15_thompson.xml is in the radiation section. The > > HAFS > > > suite neglects the sgscloud_radpre and I believe has the lw listed > > > before sw. Should the HAFS suite be updated to match what we see below? > > > The radiation group for HAFS is listed in blue. > > > > > > <group name="radiation"> > > > <subcycle loop="1"> > > > <scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme> > > > *<scheme>sgscloud_radpre</scheme>* > > > <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme> > > > <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme> > > > <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme> > > > <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme> > > > <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme> > > > <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme> > > > *<scheme>sgscloud_radpost</scheme>* > > > <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme> > > > <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme> > > > </subcycle> > > > </group> > > > > > > *<group name="radiation">** > > > ** <subcycle loop="1">** > > > **<scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme>** > > > ** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme>** > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme>** > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme>** > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme>** > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme>** > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme>** > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme>** > > > ** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme>** > > > ** </subcycle>** > > > ** </group>** > > > ** > > > * > > > > > > *On 5/12/2021 4:55 PM, ligiabernardet wrote:* > > > > > > > > @ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> The only way to > > > > combine the current code base with the old hafs_update_moist would be > > > > for you to re-insert hafs_update_moist in the SDF. But note that the > > > > code base has marched ahead, so updates may be needed in the scheme > > > > and/or host to assure they are compatible. As @mzhangw > > > > <https://github.com/mzhangw> said, a lot of development has happened > > > > in the F-A scheme since this old iteration, so you need to carefully > > > > consider if using this old code base will be an effective way forward. > > > > > > > > — > > > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > > > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > > > > > > <#646 (comment)>, > > > > > > or unsubscribe > > > > > > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MK4GXE5PLCB3AIMFFDTNLTNFANCNFSM436MVIQQ>. > > > > > > > — > > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > > <#646 (comment)>, > > or unsubscribe > > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2TEUCHOZFL3AVZCPKTTNL4HPANCNFSM436MVIQQ>. > > > > > > > — > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > > <#646 (comment)>, > > or unsubscribe > > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MKG22TCK4A5PD6CVXTTNL4ZBANCNFSM436MVIQQ>. > > > — > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#646 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2QUXPTC7VQC6OBIAILTNL45HANCNFSM436MVIQQ>. > — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#646 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MPZQCS6CYNOGQPL373TNL5HNANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.

[mzhangw]

Yes. It followed what it is in HWRF/HWRF, which calls LW first. Actually, the sequence of LW and SW, which represents two “different”process, does not affect the results.

…

On May 12, 2021, at 4:26 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote: Thanks. How about the order of the lw and sw. I noticed it's reversed in the suites. On 5/12/2021 6:19 PM, mzhangw wrote: > Here is the developer’s note/documentation: > https://dtcenter.ucar.edu/GMTB/v5.0.0/sci_doc/SGSCLOUD_page.html > <https://dtcenter.ucar.edu/GMTB/v5.0.0/sci_doc/SGSCLOUD_page.html> > > > On May 12, 2021, at 4:16 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote: > > > > > > Okay, I didn't realize that. Thanks. > > > > On 5/12/2021 6:15 PM, mzhangw wrote: > > > SGS cloud is a thompson scheme specific interstitials. For FA scheme > > > in HAFS, the thompson fraction cloud scheme is used (icloud=3). > > > > > > > > > > On May 12, 2021, at 4:11 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > One of the potentially troubling differences I see between the > HAFS SDF > > > > and suite_FV3_GFS_v15_thompson.xml is in the radiation section. The > > > HAFS > > > > suite neglects the sgscloud_radpre and I believe has the lw listed > > > > before sw. Should the HAFS suite be updated to match what we see > below? > > > > The radiation group for HAFS is listed in blue. > > > > > > > > <group name="radiation"> > > > > <subcycle loop="1"> > > > > <scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme> > > > > *<scheme>sgscloud_radpre</scheme>* > > > > <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme> > > > > <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme> > > > > <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme> > > > > <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme> > > > > <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme> > > > > <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme> > > > > *<scheme>sgscloud_radpost</scheme>* > > > > <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme> > > > > <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme> > > > > </subcycle> > > > > </group> > > > > > > > > *<group name="radiation">** > > > > ** <subcycle loop="1">** > > > > **<scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme>** > > > > ** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme>** > > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme>** > > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme>** > > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme>** > > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme>** > > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme>** > > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme>** > > > > ** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme>** > > > > ** </subcycle>** > > > > ** </group>** > > > > ** > > > > * > > > > > > > > *On 5/12/2021 4:55 PM, ligiabernardet wrote:* > > > > > > > > > > @ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> The only > way to > > > > > combine the current code base with the old hafs_update_moist > would be > > > > > for you to re-insert hafs_update_moist in the SDF. But note > that the > > > > > code base has marched ahead, so updates may be needed in the > scheme > > > > > and/or host to assure they are compatible. As @mzhangw > > > > > <https://github.com/mzhangw> said, a lot of development has > happened > > > > > in the F-A scheme since this old iteration, so you need to > carefully > > > > > consider if using this old code base will be an effective way > forward. > > > > > > > > > > — > > > > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > > > > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > > > > > > > > > <#646 (comment)>, > > > > > > > > > or unsubscribe > > > > > > > > > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MK4GXE5PLCB3AIMFFDTNLTNFANCNFSM436MVIQQ>. > > > > > > > > > — > > > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > > > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > > > > <#646 (comment)>, > > > > or unsubscribe > > > > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2TEUCHOZFL3AVZCPKTTNL4HPANCNFSM436MVIQQ>. > > > > > > > > > > — > > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > > > > <#646 (comment)>, > > > > or unsubscribe > > > > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MKG22TCK4A5PD6CVXTTNL4ZBANCNFSM436MVIQQ>. > > > > > — > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <#646 (comment)>, > or unsubscribe > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2QUXPTC7VQC6OBIAILTNL45HANCNFSM436MVIQQ>. > > > > — > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <#646 (comment)>, > or unsubscribe > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MPZQCS6CYNOGQPL373TNL5HNANCNFSM436MVIQQ>. > — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#646 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2WMRBSAWSJUXICBP3LTNL6B7ANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.

[ericaligo-NOAA]

Okay, thanks.

…

On 5/12/2021 6:33 PM, mzhangw wrote: Yes. It followed what it is in HWRF/HWRF, which calls LW first. Actually, the sequence of LW and SW, which represents two “different”process, does not affect the results. > On May 12, 2021, at 4:26 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote: > > > Thanks. How about the order of the lw and sw. I noticed it's reversed > in the suites. > > On 5/12/2021 6:19 PM, mzhangw wrote: > > Here is the developer’s note/documentation: > > https://dtcenter.ucar.edu/GMTB/v5.0.0/sci_doc/SGSCLOUD_page.html > > <https://dtcenter.ucar.edu/GMTB/v5.0.0/sci_doc/SGSCLOUD_page.html> > > > > > On May 12, 2021, at 4:16 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Okay, I didn't realize that. Thanks. > > > > > > On 5/12/2021 6:15 PM, mzhangw wrote: > > > > SGS cloud is a thompson scheme specific interstitials. For FA scheme > > > > in HAFS, the thompson fraction cloud scheme is used (icloud=3). > > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 12, 2021, at 4:11 PM, ericaligo-NOAA ***@***.***> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One of the potentially troubling differences I see between the > > HAFS SDF > > > > > and suite_FV3_GFS_v15_thompson.xml is in the radiation section. The > > > > HAFS > > > > > suite neglects the sgscloud_radpre and I believe has the lw listed > > > > > before sw. Should the HAFS suite be updated to match what we see > > below? > > > > > The radiation group for HAFS is listed in blue. > > > > > > > > > > <group name="radiation"> > > > > > <subcycle loop="1"> > > > > > <scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme> > > > > > *<scheme>sgscloud_radpre</scheme>* > > > > > <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme> > > > > > <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme> > > > > > <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme> > > > > > <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme> > > > > > <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme> > > > > > <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme> > > > > > *<scheme>sgscloud_radpost</scheme>* > > > > > <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme> > > > > > <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme> > > > > > </subcycle> > > > > > </group> > > > > > > > > > > *<group name="radiation">** > > > > > ** <subcycle loop="1">** > > > > > **<scheme>GFS_suite_interstitial_rad_reset</scheme>** > > > > > ** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_pre</scheme>** > > > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_pre</scheme>** > > > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw</scheme>** > > > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_lw_post</scheme>** > > > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_pre</scheme>** > > > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw</scheme>** > > > > > ** <scheme>rrtmg_sw_post</scheme>** > > > > > ** <scheme>GFS_rrtmg_post</scheme>** > > > > > ** </subcycle>** > > > > > ** </group>** > > > > > ** > > > > > * > > > > > > > > > > *On 5/12/2021 4:55 PM, ligiabernardet wrote:* > > > > > > > > > > > > @ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> The only > > way to > > > > > > combine the current code base with the old hafs_update_moist > > would be > > > > > > for you to re-insert hafs_update_moist in the SDF. But note > > that the > > > > > > code base has marched ahead, so updates may be needed in the > > scheme > > > > > > and/or host to assure they are compatible. As @mzhangw > > > > > > <https://github.com/mzhangw> said, a lot of development has > > happened > > > > > > in the F-A scheme since this old iteration, so you need to > > carefully > > > > > > consider if using this old code base will be an effective way > > forward. > > > > > > > > > > > > — > > > > > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > > > > > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > > > > > > > > > > > > <#646 (comment)>, > > > > > > > > > > > > or unsubscribe > > > > > > > > > > > > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MK4GXE5PLCB3AIMFFDTNLTNFANCNFSM436MVIQQ>. > > > > > > > > > > > — > > > > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > > > > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > > > > > > <#646 (comment)>, > > > > > > or unsubscribe > > > > > > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2TEUCHOZFL3AVZCPKTTNL4HPANCNFSM436MVIQQ>. > > > > > > > > > > > > > — > > > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > > > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > > > > > > <#646 (comment)>, > > > > > > or unsubscribe > > > > > > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MKG22TCK4A5PD6CVXTTNL4ZBANCNFSM436MVIQQ>. > > > > > > > — > > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > > <#646 (comment)>, > > or unsubscribe > > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2QUXPTC7VQC6OBIAILTNL45HANCNFSM436MVIQQ>. > > > > > > > — > > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > > <#646 (comment)>, > > or unsubscribe > > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MPZQCS6CYNOGQPL373TNL5HNANCNFSM436MVIQQ>. > > > — > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#646 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG7TW2WMRBSAWSJUXICBP3LTNL6B7ANCNFSM436MVIQQ>. > — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#646 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MOCRCPI54CMB5XR5WLTNL6Z3ANCNFSM436MVIQQ>.