Merge pull request #727 from ekluzek/CN_FUNbug

Fix the FUN bug, where an if statement was backwards...

bld/namelist_files/namelist_defaults_ctsm.xml

@@ -363,7 +363,7 @@ attributes from the config_cache.xml file (with keys converted to upper-case).
 <!-- The default filenames are given relative to the root directory
      for the CLM2 data in the CESM distribution -->
 <!-- Plant function types (relative to {csmdata}) -->
-<paramfile phys="clm5_0">lnd/clm2/paramdata/clm5_params.c190518.nc</paramfile>
+<paramfile phys="clm5_0">lnd/clm2/paramdata/clm5_params.c190529.nc</paramfile>
 <paramfile phys="clm4_5">lnd/clm2/paramdata/clm_params.c190518.nc</paramfile>
 
 <!-- ================================================================== -->

doc/ChangeLog

@@ -1,4 +1,123 @@
 ===============================================================
+Tag name:  ctsm1.0.dev043
+Originator(s):  erik (Erik Kluzek)
+Date: Wed Jun  5 10:17:06 MDT 2019
+One-line Summary: Fix FUN bug (frac_ideal_C_use was backwards in regard to delta_CN), and replace Ball-Berry mbbopt with the CLM4.5 version
+
+Purpose of changes
+------------------
+
+Carbon allocation to uptake responds to CN(uptake-cost) and CN(actual). The intended implementation is: For C:N 
+less than the target C:N, C allocation is reduced with cost. For C:N greater than the target C:N, C allocation 
+is increased with high C:N. However, the actual implementation is reversed. This change fixes that problem.
+
+Also the Ball-Berry mbbopt values had been changed in the creation of CLM5.0, as part of the tuning, but the new
+values don't work well (as our final tuning uses Medlyn photosynshesis rather than Ball-Berry). This brings the values
+for Ball-Berry for CLM5.0 back to the CLM4.5 values.
+
+Bugs fixed or introduced
+------------------------
+
+Issues fixed (include CTSM Issue #):  #704 #705
+
+   Fixes #705 -- Ball-Berry parameters in CLM5.0 should go back to the previous values in CLM4.5
+   Fixes #704 -- FUN code logic to reduce or increase carbon allocation used for uptake is reversed
+
+Significant changes to scientifically-supported configurations
+--------------------------------------------------------------
+
+Does this tag change answers significantly for any of the following physics configurations?
+(Details of any changes will be given in the "Answer changes" section below.)
+
+    [Put an [X] in the box for any configuration with significant answer changes.]
+
+[X] clm5_0
+
+[X] ctsm5_0-nwp
+
+[ ] clm4_5
+
+Notes of particular relevance for users
+---------------------------------------
+
+Caveats for users (e.g., need to interpolate initial conditions): None
+
+Changes to CTSM's user interface (e.g., new/renamed XML or namelist variables): None
+
+Changes made to namelist defaults (e.g., changed parameter values): New clm5.0 paramdata file
+
+Changes to the datasets (e.g., parameter, surface or initial files): mbbopt now use the clm4_5 values
+   rather than the pretuned clm5_0 values (before Medlyn was being used)
+
+Substantial timing or memory changes: None
+
+Notes of particular relevance for developers: (including Code reviews and testing)
+---------------------------------------------
+NOTE: Be sure to review the steps in README.CHECKLIST.master_tags as well as the coding style in the Developers Guide
+
+Caveats for developers (e.g., code that is duplicated that requires double maintenance): None
+
+Changes to tests or testing: None
+
+Code reviewed by: self, olyson
+
+
+CTSM testing: regular
+
+ [PASS means all tests PASS and OK means tests PASS other than expected fails.]
+
+  build-namelist tests:
+
+    cheyenne - PASS (134 tests are different from baseline as expected)
+
+  regular tests (aux_clm):
+
+    cheyenne ---- OK
+    hobart ------ OK
+
+If the tag used for baseline comparisons was NOT the previous tag, note that here:
+
+
+Answer changes
+--------------
+
+Changes answers relative to baseline: Yes!
+
+  Summarize any changes to answers, i.e.,
+    - what code configurations: Anything with use_FUN=T (so Clm50Bgc compsets) 
+        Also with Clm5.0 and Ball-Berry (stomatalcond_method='Ball-Berry1987') (so Clm50Nwp compsets)
+    - what platforms/compilers: All
+    - nature of change: climate is similar
+
+       "Our assessment is that the impact is relatively small, but would affect climate; 
+        however it doesn’t appear to strongly affect transient C response."
+
+   If this tag changes climate describe the run(s) done to evaluate the new
+   climate (put details of the simulations in the experiment database)
+      Experiments were done on the release branch
+       - casename: oleson/clm50_release-clm5.0.15_delta_CN_FUNbug_2deg_GSWP3V1_1850
+                   oleson/clm50_release-clm5.0.15_delta_CN_FUNbug_2deg_GSWP3V1_hist
+
+   URL for LMWG diagnostics output used to validate new climate:
+
+http://webext.cgd.ucar.edu/I1850/clm50_release-clm5.0.15_delta_CN_FUNbug_2deg_GSWP3V1_1850/lnd/clm50_release-clm5.0.15_delta_CN_FUNbug_2deg_GSWP3V1_1850.21_40-clm50_release-clm5.0.15_2deg_GSWP3V1_1850.21_40/setsIndex.html
+
+We've also completed a historical run. Diagnostics are here:
+
+http://webext.cgd.ucar.edu/I20TR/clm50_release-clm5.0.15_delta_CN_FUNbug_2deg_GSWP3V1_hist/lnd/clm50_release-clm5.0.15_delta_CN_FUNbug_2deg_GSWP3V1_hist.1995_2014-clm50_release-clm5.0.15_2deg_GSWP3V1_hist.1995_2014/setsIndex.html
+
+Detailed list of changes
+------------------------
+
+List any externals directories updated (cime, rtm, mosart, cism, fates, etc.): None
+
+Pull Requests that document the changes (include PR ids): #727
+(https://github.com/ESCOMP/ctsm/pull)
+
+  #727 -- Fix the FUN bug, where an if statement was backwards
+
+===============================================================
+===============================================================
 Tag name:  ctsm1.0.dev042
 Originator(s):  slevis (Samuel Levis,SLevis Consulting LLC,303-665-1310)
 Date: Tue May 21 23:29:31 MDT 2019
@@ -67,7 +186,7 @@ Changes to tests or testing: None
 Code reviewed by:
  @billsacks
 
-CTSM testing:
+CTSM testing: regular
 
  [PASS means all tests PASS and OK means tests PASS other than expected fails.]
 
@@ -87,10 +206,7 @@ If the tag used for baseline comparisons was NOT the previous tag, note that her
 Answer changes
 --------------
 
-Changes answers relative to baseline:
-
-  If a tag changes answers relative to baseline comparison the
-  following should be filled in (otherwise remove this section):
+Changes answers relative to baseline: Yes!
 
   Summarize any changes to answers, i.e.,
     - what code configurations: ALL

doc/ChangeSum

@@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
 Tag                   Who      Date  Summary
 ============================================================================================================================
+  ctsm1.0.dev043     erik 06/05/2019 Fix FUN bug (frac_ideal_C_use was backwards in regard to delta_CN), 
+                                     and replace Ball-Berry mbbopt with the CLM4.5 version
   ctsm1.0.dev042   slevis 05/21/2019 Rename, correct, and simplify parameters dewmx and sno_stor_max
   ctsm1.0.dev041    sacks 05/17/2019 Add water tracers to CanopyHydrologyMod
   ctsm1.0.dev040   slevis 05/03/2019 Move some hard-coded parameters from code to params.nc file

doc/README.CHECKLIST.master_tags

@@ -25,6 +25,8 @@ https://github.com/ESCOMP/ctsm/wiki/CTSM-development-workflow
    3b -- update the ExpectedFails list if expected fails changes in 1a
         $EDITOR cime_config/testdefs/ExpectedTestFails.xml
    3c -- make sure you understand any changes to the baselines -- to document in ChangeLog
+   3d -- Check the log file for run_sys_tests (../run_sys_test.log), to make sure that 
+         externals are correct (see 2c above)
 
 (4) Use diff and status to make sure any new files are in the repo and only the correct
     changes are on the branch
@@ -43,6 +45,7 @@ https://github.com/ESCOMP/ctsm/wiki/CTSM-development-workflow
    5c -- Update date stamp on ChangeLog
         ./UpDateChangeLog.pl -update
    5d -- Commit new change files
+   5e -- Push all the changes on your local branches to the branch on your fork
 
 (6) Submit a pull request (PR) for the changes
     Have someone review it if you are able. At minimum review it youself. The PR mechanism

src/biogeochem/CNFUNMod.F90

@@ -1232,20 +1232,20 @@ subroutine CNFUN(bounds,num_soilc, filter_soilc,num_soilp&
                      else
                        delta_CN = (leafc(p)+leafc_storage(p))/(leafn(p)+leafn_storage(p)) - leafcn(ivt(p)) ! leaf CN ratio                                                              
                      end if
-                     ! C used for uptake is reduced if the cost of N is very high                
+                     ! C used for uptake is reduced if the cost of N is very high
                      frac_ideal_C_use = max(0.0_r8,1.0_r8 - (total_N_resistance-fun_cn_flex_a(ivt(p)))/fun_cn_flex_b(ivt(p)) )
-                     ! then, if the plant is very much in need of N, the C used for uptake is increased accordingly.                  
-                     if(delta_CN .gt.0.and. frac_ideal_C_use.lt.1.0)then           
-                       frac_ideal_C_use = frac_ideal_C_use + (1.0_r8-frac_ideal_C_use)*min(1.0_r8, delta_CN/fun_cn_flex_c(ivt(p)))
-                     end if    
-                     ! If we have too much N (e.g. from free N retranslocation) then make frac_ideal_c_use even lower.    
-                     ! For a CN delta of fun_cn_flex_c, then we reduce C expendiure to the minimum of 0.5. 
-                     ! This seems a little intense? 
+                     ! then, if the plant is very much in need of N, the C used for uptake is increased accordingly.
                      if(delta_CN.lt.0.0)then
-                        frac_ideal_C_use = frac_ideal_C_use + 0.5_r8*(1.0_r8*delta_CN/fun_cn_flex_c(ivt(p)))
-                     endif 
+                       frac_ideal_C_use = frac_ideal_C_use + (1.0_r8-frac_ideal_C_use)*min(1.0_r8, delta_CN/fun_cn_flex_c(ivt(p)))
+                     end if
+                     ! If we have too much N (e.g. from free N retranslocation) then make frac_ideal_c_use even lower.
+                     ! For a CN delta of fun_cn_flex_c, then we reduce C expendiure to the minimum of 0.5.
+                     ! This seems a little intense?
+                     if(delta_CN .gt.0.and. frac_ideal_C_use.lt.1.0)then
+                       frac_ideal_C_use = frac_ideal_C_use + 0.5_r8*(1.0_r8*delta_CN/fun_cn_flex_c(ivt(p)))
+                     end if
+                     ! don't let this go above 1 or below an arbitrary minimum (to prevent zero N uptake).
                      frac_ideal_C_use = max(min(1.0_r8,frac_ideal_C_use),0.5_r8) 
-                     ! don't let this go above 1 or below an arbirtray minimum (to prevent zero N uptake). 
                  else
                      frac_ideal_C_use= 1.0_r8
                  end if