Six new winter weather diags #600
Conversation
…w vrbs (3 of them), plus for continuous fields modify timestamp for FV3R and GFS and add fields to the GFS and fv3lam xml and flat files.
|
Hi,
ACSNOW is the water equivalent of snowfall from the microphysics. I
updated codes and changed the name of the fields read into the UPP. I
renamed ACSNOW to TSNOWP.
Eric
…On 12/12/2022 3:46 PM, HuiyaChuang-NOAA wrote:
***@***.**** commented on this pull request.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In sorc/ncep_post.fd/INITPOST_NETCDF.f
<#600 (comment)>:
> @@ -2260,6 +2261,35 @@ SUBROUTINE INITPOST_NETCDF(ncid2d,ncid3d)
call read_netcdf_2d_para(ncid2d,ista,ista_2l,iend,iend_2u,jsta,jsta_2l,jend,jend_2u, &
spval,VarName,SFCEXC)
+! accumulated snowfall
@ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> hoping you can
clarify for me.
UPP already reads in "snod" from FV3 model output which is supposed to
be snow depth.
What is the difference between snod and acsnow?
Also, I believe you said "acsnow" is water equivalent of snow fall, is
that correct?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#600 (review)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MIEBZAAWNYVECIKVWDWM6FKJANCNFSM6AAAAAASYSFTNM>.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
|
Done.
…On 12/18/2022 6:11 PM, WenMeng-NOAA wrote:
***@***.**** commented on this pull request.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In parm/POST_XML_Flat_File_processor_POST_FlatFile.log.20221208
<#600 (comment)>:
> @@ -0,0 +1,144 @@
+173403: [00138] Begin PostXMLPreprocessor
@ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> This log file is
not needed to be committed. Please remove it.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#600 (review)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MNWF3LQHTFSPCT4C5LWN6K2DANCNFSM6AAAAAASYSFTNM>.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
|
Yes, they will be calculated in the model. Do you think the three
continuous fields need to be in F00 for restart runs?
…On 12/19/2022 9:02 AM, WenMeng-NOAA wrote:
***@***.**** commented on this pull request.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In parm/postcntrl_gfs_f00.xml
<#600 (comment)>:
> @@ -907,6 +907,36 @@
<scale>3.0</scale>
</param>
+ <param>
@ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> Do you think these
six winter diag. variables will be calculated in model at F00? If not,
you don't need adding them in the control files with f00.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#600 (review)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MNY5ZAMD2STIXLG2ALWOBTIRANCNFSM6AAAAAASYSFTNM>.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
@ericaligo-NOAA Are you meaning the restart run for model side or UPP side? |
|
Restart for the model. If this has nothing to do with the
parm/postcntrl_gfs_f00.xml
<#600 (comment)> then I
can remove the six fields from that file.
…On 12/19/2022 9:23 AM, WenMeng-NOAA wrote:
Yes, they will be calculated in the model. Do you think the three
continuous fields need to be in F00 for restart runs?
… <#>
On 12/19/2022 9:02 AM, WenMeng-NOAA wrote: /*@*/.**** commented on
this pull request.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In parm/postcntrl_gfs_f00.xml <#600 (comment)
<#600 (comment)>>:
> @@ -907,6 +907,36 @@ 3.0 + @ericaligo-NOAA
<https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA>
https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA Do you think these six winter
diag. variables will be calculated in model at F00? If not, you
don't need adding them in the control files with f00. — Reply to
this email directly, view it on GitHub <#600 (review)
<#600 (review)>>,
or unsubscribe
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MNY5ZAMD2STIXLG2ALWOBTIRANCNFSM6AAAAAASYSFTNM.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
/*@*/.***>
@ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> Are you meaning
the restart run for model side or UPP side?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#600 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MJAX4RP27QEZRFTYCLWOBVVNANCNFSM6AAAAAASYSFTNM>.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
@ericaligo-NOAA I don't think the UPP grib2 file are needed for GFS restart run. You might confirm with GFS developers. |
|
Model restarts are unrelated to grib2 files according to GFS experts. I
removed the six winter weather diags from parm/postcntrl_gfs_f00.xml
…On 12/19/2022 9:37 AM, WenMeng-NOAA wrote:
Restart for the model. If this has nothing to do with the
parm/postcntrl_gfs_f00.xml <#600 (comment)
<#600 (comment)>>
then I can remove the six fields from that file.
… <#>
On 12/19/2022 9:23 AM, WenMeng-NOAA wrote: Yes, they will be
calculated in the model. Do you think the three continuous fields
need to be in F00 for restart runs? … <#> On 12/19/2022 9:02 AM,
WenMeng-NOAA wrote: //@//.**** commented on this pull request.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In parm/postcntrl_gfs_f00.xml <#600
<#600> (comment) <#600
(comment)
<#600 (comment)>>>:
> @@ -907,6 +907,36 @@ 3.0 + @ericaligo-NOAA
<https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA>
https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA
https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA Do you think these six winter
diag. variables will be calculated in model at F00? If not, you
don't need adding them in the control files with f00. — Reply to
this email directly, view it on GitHub <#600
<#600> (review) <#600 (review)
<#600 (review)>>>,
or unsubscribe
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MNY5ZAMD2STIXLG2ALWOBTIRANCNFSM6AAAAAASYSFTNM.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
//@//./*> @ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA>
https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA Are you meaning the restart run
for model side or UPP side? — Reply to this email directly, view
it on GitHub <#600 (comment)
<#600 (comment)>>,
or unsubscribe
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MJAX4RP27QEZRFTYCLWOBVVNANCNFSM6AAAAAASYSFTNM.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
/*@*/.*/>
@ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> I don't think the
UPP grib2 file are needed for GFS restart run. You might confirm with
GFS developers.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#600 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MKLIEGILWGHXGHJLQ3WOBXKJANCNFSM6AAAAAASYSFTNM>.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
|
@ericaligo-NOAA Can you sync your branch with upstream/develop? The procedure can be found at |
|
I tried but I get this error message:
Hera:/scratch1/NCEPDEV/stmp2/Eric.Aligo/UPP>git remote add upstream
***@***.***:NOAA-EMC/UPP.git
Hera:/scratch1/NCEPDEV/stmp2/Eric.Aligo/UPP>git fetch upstream
Permission denied (publickey).
fatal: Could not read from remote repository.
Please make sure you have the correct access rights
and the repository exists.
Hera:/scratch1/NCEPDEV/stmp2/Eric.Aligo/UPP>git remote -v
origin https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA/UPP.git (fetch)
origin https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA/UPP.git (push)
upstream ***@***.***:NOAA-EMC/UPP.git (fetch)
upstream ***@***.***:NOAA-EMC/UPP.git (push)
Is this the correct upstream?
…On 12/19/2022 12:38 PM, WenMeng-NOAA wrote:
@ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> Can you sync your
branch with upstream/develop? The procedure can be found at
https://github.com/NOAA-EMC/UPP/wiki/UPP-Code-Development#update-your-branch-at-your-fork-with-branch-develop-at-authoritative-repository
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#600 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MJ4NOIBN5KXYHHF57DWOCMSVANCNFSM6AAAAAASYSFTNM>.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
|
There's a conflict in the flat file. Not sure how to deal with this:
Hera:/scratch1/NCEPDEV/stmp2/Eric.Aligo/UPP>git merge upstream/develop
Auto-merging sorc/ncep_post.fd/VRBLS2D_mod.f
Auto-merging sorc/ncep_post.fd/SURFCE.f
Auto-merging sorc/ncep_post.fd/INITPOST_NETCDF.f
Auto-merging sorc/ncep_post.fd/DEALLOCATE.f
Auto-merging sorc/ncep_post.fd/ALLOCATE_ALL.f
Auto-merging parm/postxconfig-NT-fv3lam_rrfs.txt
*CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in parm/postxconfig-NT-fv3lam_rrfs.txt*
Removing parm/postxconfig-NT-fv3lam_cmaq.txt
Auto-merging parm/postxconfig-NT-fv3lam.txt
Auto-merging parm/post_avblflds.xml
Auto-merging parm/fv3lam_rrfs.xml
Removing parm/fv3lam_cmaq.xml
Auto-merging parm/fv3lam.xml
Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.
…On 12/19/2022 12:38 PM, WenMeng-NOAA wrote:
@ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> Can you sync your
branch with upstream/develop? The procedure can be found at
https://github.com/NOAA-EMC/UPP/wiki/UPP-Code-Development#update-your-branch-at-your-fork-with-branch-develop-at-authoritative-repository
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#600 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MJ4NOIBN5KXYHHF57DWOCMSVANCNFSM6AAAAAASYSFTNM>.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/develop' into winterwx
parm/postxconfig-NT-GFS-F00-TWO.txt
Outdated
| @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ | |||
| 2 | |||
| 47 | |||
| 156 | |||
| 162 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ericaligo-NOAA Can you revert the changes in this file?
|
Just for clarification, I should remove these fields from
postcntrl_gfs_f00_two.xml?
910 <param>
911 <shortname>ACM_GRAUPEL_ON_SURFACE</shortname>
912 <scale>6.0</scale>
913 </param>
914
915 <param>
916 <shortname>BUCKET_GRAUPEL_ON_SURFACE</shortname>
917 <scale>6.0</scale>
918 </param>
919
920 <param>
921 <shortname>ACM_FRAIN_ON_SURFACE</shortname>
922 <scale>4.0</scale>
923 </param>
924
925 <param>
926 <shortname>BUCKET_FRAIN_ON_SURFACE</shortname>
927 <scale>4.0</scale>
928 </param>
929
930 <param>
931 <shortname>ACM_SNOWFALL_ON_SURFACE</shortname>
932 <scale>4.0</scale>
933 </param>
934
935 <param>
936 <shortname>BUCKET_SNOWFALL_ON_SURFACE</shortname>
937 <scale>4.0</scale>
938 </param>
…On 12/19/2022 4:39 PM, WenMeng-NOAA wrote:
***@***.**** commented on this pull request.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In parm/postcntrl_gfs_f00_two.xml
<#600 (comment)>:
> @@ -907,6 +907,36 @@
<scale>3.0</scale>
</param>
+ <param>
@ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> Can you revert the
changes in this file?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#600 (review)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MJJZG3TOEDHUU2SG4TWODIX7ANCNFSM6AAAAAASYSFTNM>.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Yes, this control file is used for gfs inline post. |
|
Done.
…On 12/19/2022 8:12 PM, WenMeng-NOAA wrote:
Just for clarification, I should remove these fields from
postcntrl_gfs_f00_two.xml? 910 911 ACM_GRAUPEL_ON_SURFACE
912 6.0 913 914 915 916 BUCKET_GRAUPEL_ON_SURFACE
917 6.0 918 919 920 921 ACM_FRAIN_ON_SURFACE
922 4.0 923 924 925 926 BUCKET_FRAIN_ON_SURFACE
927 4.0 928 929 930 931
ACM_SNOWFALL_ON_SURFACE 932 4.0 933 934 935
936 BUCKET_SNOWFALL_ON_SURFACE 937 4.0 938
… <#>
On 12/19/2022 4:39 PM, WenMeng-NOAA wrote: /*@*/.**** commented on
this pull request.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In parm/postcntrl_gfs_f00_two.xml <#600 (comment)
<#600 (comment)>>:
> @@ -907,6 +907,36 @@ 3.0 + @ericaligo-NOAA
<https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA>
https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA Can you revert the changes in
this file? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#600
(review)
<#600 (review)>>,
or unsubscribe
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MJJZG3TOEDHUU2SG4TWODIX7ANCNFSM6AAAAAASYSFTNM.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
/*@*/.***>
Yes, this control file is used for gfs inline post.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#600 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MPGQ2QWEZKTVAD2OALWOEBWBANCNFSM6AAAAAASYSFTNM>.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
|
Hi, there was a meeting a few weeks ago with GSL discussing the fields
that would be output. Here's the document I provided and slide 2 is what
was agreed upon.
…On 12/20/2022 11:48 AM, WenMeng-NOAA wrote:
***@***.**** commented on this pull request.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In sorc/ncep_post.fd/INITPOST_NETCDF.f
<#600 (comment)>:
> @@ -1620,6 +1621,35 @@ SUBROUTINE INITPOST_NETCDF(ncid2d,ncid3d)
call read_netcdf_2d_para(ncid2d,ista,ista_2l,iend,iend_2u,jsta,jsta_2l,jend,jend_2u, &
spval,VarName,SFCEXC)
+! accumulated snowfall
+ VarName='tsnowp'
@EricJames-NOAA <https://github.com/EricJames-NOAA> You will submit a
PR to output some GSL precip type variables for RRFS. I would like to
know if there are any conflicts since 3 GSL variables (acgraup,
graup_bucket, acfrain) were assigned to read new winter diag fields
from model.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#600 (review)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MMUOAXT5QA6NXHCJEDWOHPNTANCNFSM6AAAAAASYSFTNM>.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
…ct time stamp in grib2 file for accumulated fields.
|
Added change log to both INITPOST and SURFCE.f
…On 12/23/2022 10:51 AM, WenMeng-NOAA wrote:
***@***.**** commented on this pull request.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In sorc/ncep_post.fd/SURFCE.f
<#600 (comment)>:
> @@ -93,6 +93,7 @@ SUBROUTINE SURFCE
acond,maxqshltr,minqshltr,avgpotevp,AVGPREC_CONT, &
@ericaligo-NOAA <https://github.com/ericaligo-NOAA> Can you add a
change log in this subroutine?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#600 (review)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALQ75MLS27PEJSBJDB3WRCLWOXC73ANCNFSM6AAAAAASYSFTNM>.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
WenMeng-NOAA
added
Ready for Review
|
The UPP RT tests were completed on WCOSS2, Hera and Orion. The updates of baselines for GFS and RRFS are needed with this PR. |
Six new winter weather diagnostics from GFS and RRFS are read in. Changes were made to SURFCE.f to allow the correct time stamp to be used for the continuous fields. The new fields were also added to the xml files and new flat files were created.
Issue:
#568