UFS-dev PR#98 #1035
UFS-dev PR#98 #1035
Conversation
Changes to Logging and Initialization of the CLM Lake Model
grantfirl
requested review from
JongilHan66,
Qingfu-Liu,
dustinswales,
gthompsnWRF,
RuiyuSun,
AndersJensen-NOAA,
tanyasmirnova,
haiqinli,
SamuelTrahanNOAA and
mzhangw
as code owners
grantfirl
requested review from
mkavulich
and removed request for
dustinswales,
mzhangw,
gthompsnWRF,
haiqinli,
tanyasmirnova,
SamuelTrahanNOAA,
RuiyuSun,
JongilHan66 and
AndersJensen-NOAA
| <subcycle loop="2"> | ||
| <scheme>mynnsfc_wrapper</scheme> | ||
| <scheme>GFS_surface_loop_control_part1</scheme> | ||
| <scheme>sfc_nst_pre</scheme> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please, removed lines 45-47 related to nsst: RAP suite similar to HRRR suite does not use the NSST physics.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd rather not modify the RAP suite. Even if it doesn't match the actual RAP, people have a dozen or so variants of the "FV3_RAP" using nsst with only one or two tweaks.
| <scheme>sfc_nst_pre</scheme> | ||
| <scheme>sfc_nst</scheme> | ||
| <scheme>sfc_nst_post</scheme> | ||
| <scheme>lsm_ruc</scheme> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should clm_lake be also added to RAP suite similar to HRRR?
| <scheme>sfc_nst_post</scheme> | ||
| <scheme>noahmpdrv</scheme> | ||
| <scheme>sfc_sice</scheme> | ||
| <scheme>GFS_surface_loop_control_part2</scheme> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should CLM lake model be added to RRFS_v1beta suite?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should not modify the RRFS_v1beta. It matches a released version of CCPP (theoretically).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@SamuelTrahanNOAA Ok, sounds good.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@SamuelTrahanNOAA I agree. Let's keep it as is.
|
@tanyasmirnova The changes to the documentation were already reviewed by you in ufs-community#91. This PR is bringing changes that were already approved/merged into the ufs/dev branch back to the ncar/main branch. If there are changes that need to get into the documentation, we should notify @mkavulich and @mzhangw who worked on ufs-community#91. |
|
@grantfirl Grant, sounds good. In terms of RUC LSM everything looks good to me. |
Identical to ufs-community#98
Contains changes from #1034 until it is merged.