forked from NCAR/ccpp-physics
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
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
A version to compute emissivity for different scenarios with fractional grid in coupled/uncoupled models #5
Open
tanyasmirnova
wants to merge
2
commits into
SMoorthi-emc:SM_Sept21_PR
Choose a base branch
from
tanyasmirnova:PR_moorthi_tanya_rad_surface
base: SM_Sept21_PR
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Tanya,
There is one problem here. Note that in my version I save "sfcemis_ice" into semis_ice(i), as it is needed elsewhere. When we do this, it could potentially go through a different path in the above "if" loop when it is called another time.
Moorthi
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Moorthi,
I have changed the if statement to use semis_ice(i) with RUC lsm and CICE (for now other ice schemes or lake models do not provide semis_ice), and compute it in all other scenarios. Will this work now?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Tanya,
It won't work. I think my original version is fine. The reason it won't work is because, when it is coupled to CICE6, it only takes care of sea-ice, not lake ice. That is the reason I was adding "lakefrac" in the logic so that if it is coupled and not RUClsm, then to compute emissivity for the lake ice the default way.
Moorthi
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok, let's go with your version. Thank you for merging RUC LSM clean-up version into your PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@SMoorthi-emc I forgot to tell you that one thing will not work in your version with RUC LSM. The RUC ice model is turned on for ice on the ocean and lakes only when uncoupled from CICE or the lake model. Thus, if coupled to the lake model semis_ice(i) is not defined unless it is computed in the lake model (I think it is not the case for Flake). Therefore, with RUC LSM the "standard" method to compute semis_ice from snow depth should be applied it the lake model is turned on.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Tanya,
If the model is coupled to CICE6, then with RUC LSM, the emissivity from CICE6 used? In this case, if "flake" is called for lake, then RUC LSM does not update emissivity right? If no lake model is used, the RUC LSM will calculate lake ice emissivity. If this is the case, I think I need to update the code (for now assuming that "flake" does not update ice emissivity)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Moorthi, Yes to both questions. And yes, RUC LSM will calculate lake ice emissivity only if no lake model is used. Thank you!