-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
build from pre any specific land changes associated with Aus PFTs #148
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
🚀 Attempted to deploy 🖥️
|
🚀 Attempted to deploy 🖥️
|
PR#148-3 -> GPP-148-3 at /g/data/p66/jxs599/ESM16/PAYU/Feat/feat-GPP-148-3-ff752 |
@JhanSrbinovsky - you say in the note above that in the 148-2 test you have set the ocean albedo factor to 1, but it still appears to be 0.92 in /g/data/p66/jxs599/ESM16/PAYU/Feat/feat-148-GPP-a29dc/atmosphere/input_atm.nml - or am I missing something? |
…27ce2d3ff2a7a0caedb64dec421
@rml599gh - bugger - I was told I didn't need to use my user scripts anymore if the appeared in the payu directory. I'll overwrite and restART actually I think I messed it up. It must've worked in the other run where I rm-ed mention of it completely so it would run |
🚀 Attempted to deploy 🖥️
|
PR#148-3 -> GPP-148-3 at /g/data/p66/jxs599/ESM16/PAYU/Feat/feat-148-GPP-ff752 corresponds to code differences between |
…b5a94d5298a57a116540445b3b
🚀 Attempted to deploy 🖥️
|
PR#148-4 -> GPP-148-4 at /g/data/p66/jxs599/ESM16/PAYU/Feat/feat-GPP-148-4-e4b98 corresponds to code differences between |
albedo factor is added
PR#148-5 -> GPP-148-5 at /g/data/p66/jxs599/ESM16/PAYU/Feat/feat-GPP-5-148-efcfd/ corresponds to code differences between |
🚀 Attempted to deploy 🖥️
|
analysis by @rml599gh indicates difference occurs between PR148-5 and 148-2 corresponding code differences are: Note: river routing, inland basin changes shoulder be in Claires #129-3 anyway. So test - PR#148-6 -> GPP-148-6 at /g/data/p66/jxs599/ESM16/PAYU/Feat/feat-GPP-5-148-PR129-3/ that has executable from PR129-3 Also ( assuming this shows up same changes)I will set up tests using executables including step changes. (in PM) |
@rml599gh - DOH! I skipped over the code change in the very last merge. I suspect the logic is is error leading to the NP ratio for leaves being
As a side, at a glance npleax could be 0, crashing at npleafx_coef=NaN. I'll test a revised LOGIC strategy in GPP-7. It won't be as succinct and pretty, but it should return the same GPP again I hope. |
@JhanSrbinovsky - not sure I follow your last comment about npleafx_coef. Having been set to 1, it should be modified in the IF (ANY ... block. |
I imagine the ANY should be next to the array. i.e. IF ( scalar == ANY (/ EGBL, AM, AX /) IF ( ANY( scalar == (/ EGBL, AM, AX /) ) doesn't really make sense. ivt is never == to the array |
I don't know the syntax - but wouldn't it fail to compile if it was wrong? And I thought Claire had confirmed that her re-write of the code in the subroutine gave the same answer when we were trying to track down why the name changing gave a different answer (due to the LAI_THRESH 0.99 change). |
🚀 Attempted to deploy 🖥️
|
perhaps not. maybe instead of nothing getting into the loop, everything was. maybe it was evaluating if any ivt(mp) is EGBL etc then do this. What I should've said was using ANY is usually in the form of IF (scalar == ANY(array) ). which I just realize I copied/pasted and forgot to add IF ivt(np) = EGBL There is also the problem that we are inside of a DO loop over np, so IDK what it would evaluate it as IDK what the comparison was to? no guarantee that this will resolve it, but its worth checking |
!redeploy |
🚀 Attempted to deploy 🖥️
|
🚀 Attempted to deploy 🖥️
|
🚀 Attempted to deploy 🖥️
|
PR builds went up to 9 as I kept making syntax errors. AND mod in casa_ncdf might not be necessary here but it certainly is for FCM build which is generally how I build incrementally. I reverted to FCM build for the very reason that simple build failures here due to syntax have a 20min (at least) turn around to discover. Where as FCM build can incrementally build and reveal a typo (with better error log) within minutes. revised conditional -
Other mods there are simply formatting as it was difficult to read and be confident of indentation, nesting, etc |
@JhanSrbinovsky - looks like GPP-7 is giving identical answers to 148-2. GPP-6 (129-3) is different from previous cases. Maybe we should test a case where we go back to the original way that casa_feedback was coded and just add in Australian xeric to the original code. |
under way. skimming the differences - maybe defining the _coeff = 1 by default stands out |
|
🚀 Attempted to deploy 🖥️
|
PR#148-11 -> GPP-11 at /g/data/p66/jxs599/ESM16/PAYU/Feat/feat-GPP-11/ - move initialization of _coef to inside DO loop |
🚀 Attempted to deploy 🖥️
|
PR#148-11 -> GPP-12 at /g/data/p66/jxs599/ESM16/PAYU/Feat/feat-GPP-12/ - use code as in PR148-11 WITH 100%albedo. If the new formulation is successfully a mere refactoring of the original code (moving the initialization of xnpleaf_coef inside the DO loop) then results from this run should match GPP-10 |
PR#148-11 -> GPP-13 at /g/data/p66/jxs599/ESM16/PAYU/Feat/feat-GPP-13/ - same as GPP-12 EXCEPT start from restart270 (Sept-B) |
This pull request has been mentioned on ACCESS Hive Community Forum. There might be relevant details there: https://forum.access-hive.org.au/t/esm1-6-spin-up-experiments/4219/1 |
First build PR#148-1 - build from pre any specific land changes associated with Aus PFTs PR#129
PR148-2 builds from the head of the main branch as at Oct 7. (a29dc8b934a20872a400a3730d36fb52cff8b37d)
Both versions use:
payu clone [email protected]:ACCESS-NRI/access-esm1.6-configs.git -B test-PIspinup-Sept-C
runs on gadi:
PR#148-1 -> GPP-148-1 at /g/data/p66/jxs599/ESM16/PAYU/Feat/feat-148-GPP-6602d
PR#148-2 -> GPP-148-2 at /g/data/p66/jxs599/ESM16/PAYU/Feat/feat-148-GPP-a29dc
Sept spin up configs used in both ARE seemingly ok EXCEPT the earlier 148-1 does not have the code changes neccessary to deal with the ocean albedo parameter in the namelist, input_atm.nml. Therefore the line is removed in the 148-1 config and for consistency in the 148-2 run it is set to 1
🚀 The latest prerelease
access-esm1p6/pr148-2
at 1b2ab93 is here: #148 (comment) 🚀🚀 The latest prerelease
access-esm1p6/pr148-11
at 1f69710 is here: #148 (comment) 🚀