UFS-SRW v3.0.0 SciDoc updates #91
Conversation
mkavulich
requested review from
JongilHan66,
grantfirl,
Qingfu-Liu,
dustinswales,
haiqinli,
tanyasmirnova and
mzhangw
as code owners
| npx = 220 | ||
| npy = 132 | ||
| npz = 64 | ||
| nrows_blend = 10 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@mkavulich nrows_blend = 20
| lsoil = 4 | ||
| lsoil_lsm = 9 | ||
| ltaerosol = .true. | ||
| lwhtr = .true. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@mkavulich Please, insert here:
mosaic_lu = 1
mosaic_soil = 1
| @@ -3,8 +3,8 @@ | |||
|
|
|||
| \section RRFS_v1beta_suite_overview Overview | |||
|
|
|||
| The RRFS_v1beta suite is the primary suite target for the upcoming operational implementation of | |||
| the Rapid Refresh Forecast System (RRFS), which is used in the UFS SRW App. This suite is most | |||
| The RRFS_v1beta suite is one of candicates for the future operational implementation of | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a typo "--> candidates". @mkavulich
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ligiabernardet your comment "The RRFS_v1beta suite is the primary suite target for the upcoming operational implementation of the Rapid Refresh Forecast System (RRFS) (not correct. The operational RRFS v1 will use RUC LSM and may use GF. Say that this WAS the primary target but that things have evolved since then)" is addressed here.
| @@ -3,9 +3,9 @@ | |||
|
|
|||
| \section rap_suite_overview Overview | |||
|
|
|||
| The RAP suite contains the parameterizations used in the NOAA operational Rapid Refresh (RAP) model | |||
| which runs at 13-km resolution. Currently, the RAP suite is supported in SCM only. For additional | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ligiabernardet You suggestion "rap_suite_page.html: Currently, the RAP suite is supported in SCM only. (not correct)" is addressed.
| @@ -4,8 +4,9 @@ | |||
| \section wofs_v0_suite_overview Overview | |||
|
|
|||
| The WoFS_v0 suite is targeted for use in the upcoming operational implementation | |||
| of the NOAA's Warn-on-Forecast System (WoFS). This suite is most applicable for | |||
| runs at 3-km resolution since it does not parameterize deep convection. | |||
| of the NOAA's Warn-on-Forecast System (WoFS) and for the RRFS ensemble. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ligiabernardet Your comment "targeted for use in the upcoming operational implementation of the NOAA's Warn-on-Forecast System (WoFS) and for the RRFS ensemble." is addressed here.
physics/docs/pdftxt/CLM_LAKE.txt
Outdated
| The CLM lake model requires bathymetry for the lake points in the model domain. Grid points are assigned as lake points when the | ||
| fraction of lake coverage in the grid cell exceeds 50% and when this point is disconnected from oceans. The lake water mask is | ||
| therefore binary, set to either 1 or 0. This binary approach for models with higher horizontal resolution, for example, 3-km resolution in | ||
| in the UFS SRW App, is capable of capturing the effect of lakes on regional heat and moisture fluxes. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ligiabernardet Your comment "in the regional application of UFS (RRFS) -> in the UFS SRW App" is addressed here.
physics/docs/pdftxt/CLM_LAKE.txt
Outdated
|
|
||
| @image html https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/12705538/250180794-76af93a2-a7ba-4e9a-9478-5657198862b8.png "Figure 1: Lake depths for lakes in the 3-km RRFS domain." width=600 | ||
|
|
||
| To cold-start the CLM lake model in the UFS SRW App: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ligiabernardet Your comment "To cold-start the CLM lake model in RRFS -. To cold-start the CLM lake model in the UFS SRW App" is addressed here.
physics/docs/pdftxt/CU_GF_deep.txt
Outdated
| Jiang et al.(2010) \cite Jiang_2010, and Lee and Feingold (2010) \cite lee_and_feingold_2010 ). Wet scavenging is considered to add a memory impact. Aerosol dependence is considered experimental and is turned off at this point. GF is able to transport tracers. | ||
| Recently, GPU capabilities and cap suppressing (\p do_cap_suppress) based on radar data assimilation have been added,and they are used only for the RAP suite. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@mkavulich This part is suggested to be introduced earlier to address @ligiabernardet comment "Aerosol dependence is considered experimental and is turned off at this point. -> Aerosol dependence is considered experimental and is not supported in this release. This should be mentioned earlier in the paragraph, when aerosol-dependence is introduced."
physics/docs/pdftxt/CU_GF_deep.txt
Outdated
|
|
||
| \version UFS-SRW v3.0.0 | ||
|
|
||
| \b The \b Implementation \b of \b GF \b in \b RRFS | ||
| - Updates for aerosol-awareness (experimental) | ||
| - Scale-awareness is turned off when explicit microphysics is not active anywhere in the column | ||
| - GF completely is turned off at grid points when MYNN produces shallow convection at that point | ||
| - Radar reflectivity considers mass flux PDF as well as whether scale-awareness is turned on at the grid point in equation. | ||
|
|
||
| \b The \b implementation \b of \b GF \b in \b HAFS \b is \b undergoing. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ligiabernardet I think your comment "CCPP v6.0.0. I recommend incorporating info related to all previous releases into the main text. Then just describe the changes for the current distribution (SRW v3)" is addressed here.
| - Some fixed parameters have been made scale-aware | ||
| - Updated coupling between radiation and convection has been implemented | ||
|
|
||
| \b Operational \b Impacts \b in \b RAP/HRRR |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ligiabernardet Your comment "Operational Impacts in RAP/HRRR -> Why is this under "Physics Updates"? The last RAP/HRRR op impl was a while back." is addressed by removing this already.
| \version UFS-SRW v3.0.0 | ||
|
|
||
| \b The \b Implementation \b of \b GF \b in \b RRFS | ||
| - Updates for aerosol-awareness (experimental) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ligiabernardet Your comment "Updates for aerosol-awareness (I suggest removing this since it seems it is not supported in the App)" is handled by adding "experimental" as a note.
|
|
||
| The atmospheric inputs into the model are temperature, water vapor, horizontal wind components from the lowest atmospheric level | ||
| and short-wave and longwave radiative fluxes. The CLM lake model then provides latent heat and sensible heat fluxes back to the | ||
| atmosphere. It also computes 2-m temperature/moisture, skin temperature, lake temperature, ice fraction, ice thickness, snow water |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ligiabernardet Regarding your comment "It also computes 2-m temperature: Of the air?? That is surprising to me.", I see Man leaves it as is. I guess the reason for this is because CLM works like a land surface model but over lake grid points, where it would calculate those 2-m diagnostics based on M-O similarity theory (https://www2.cesm.ucar.edu/models/cesm2/land/CLM50_Tech_Note.pdf, ~Page 48).
|
@mkavulich @mzhangw @bluefinweiwei Let me know when you think that you've addressed all comments and are ready to enter the merge queue. |
|
@grantfirl There are several places (typos & edits based on Ligia's suggestions) that need to make mods. I can do it myself and then submit a PR to @mkavulich but I think letting @mkavulich handle this on his side would be more efficient? Tks. |
@bluefinweiwei Sounds good, I'm trying to determine when to try to add this to the UFS merge queue. @mkavulich Let me know if this is something that can potentially be merged in the next 2 weeks. |
|
@grantfirl Sorry I've been slow in responding, I've been attending the EPIC UFS workshop this week. I will prioritize getting these comments wrapped up early next week. With Tanya's comments I will also need to update the default HRRR namelist in the UFS SRW app, but that should not take too long (assuming the SRW tests pass). So if that goes to plan this PR should be ready by mid-next week, assuming no one else has major comments/suggestions. @bluefinweiwei Thanks for updating the review, I can see your comments now. I will get to them soon. |
No problem. I'll go ahead and request that this get added to the merge queue for no earlier than late next week. |
…te "v3" file), correct misspelled pages "shemes" --> "schemes"
|
@tanyasmirnova Thank you again for your suggestions and help with the new namelist options! I have incorporated all of your suggestions (and consolidated the two sets of namelists), with two exceptions:
|
|
@mkavulich Thank you, Mike, for your effort to provide the fractional soil/veg information used in RUC LSM with mosaic_lu=1 and mosaic_soil = 1. The blending band width is fine as 10. |
|
@bluefinweiwei Thanks for summarizing the work that still needed to be done for @ligiabernardet's comments. I think I have gotten them all, let me know if there's anything else you notice. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@bluefinweiwei @ligiabernardet I pushed a few more changes after reading through the updates fully. Most are minor wording/grammar changes, but I wanted someone to double-check that these are correct/appropriate.
| \section des_clmlake Description | ||
|
|
||
| The Community Land Model (CLM) lake model is a multi-level one-dimensional lake model that has been implemented within the operational 3-km HRRR and | ||
| 13-km RAP for small lakes (Benjamin et al. (2022) \cite gmd-15-6659-2022). This implementation is from the Community Land Model version 4.5 (Oleson et al. (2013) \cite Oleson2013). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this sentence correct about the version of the CLM? The previous wording was unclear, but I'm not 100% I captured the meaning correctly.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Here is the original doc from Tanya "CLM lake model is a multi-level one-dimensional lake model that has been implemented within the operational 3-km HRRR and 13-km RAP for small lakes (Benjamin et al., 2022). It is the Community Land Model (CLM) lake model, version 4.5. Subin et al (2012) describe the 1-d CLM lake model as applied within the Community Earth System Model (CESM) as a component of the overall CESM CLM (Lawrence et al 2019). Gu et al (2015) describe the introduction of the CLM lake model into the WRF model and initial experiments using its 1-d solution for both Lakes Superior (average depth of 147 m) and Erie (average depth of 19 m).". So, I think CLM v4.5 should be the right version. But, the citation Oleson et al. 2013 is not correct. Where does this citation come from?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The Oleson et al. 2013 is the technical description of the whole CLM version 4.5, the lake model being a part of it. Thus, this reference might be relevant.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Great, thanks for the clarification!
physics/docs/pdftxt/CLM_LAKE.txt
Outdated
|
|
||
| @image html https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/12705538/250180794-76af93a2-a7ba-4e9a-9478-5657198862b8.png "Figure 1: Lake depths for lakes in the 3-km RRFS domain." width=600 | ||
|
|
||
| To cold-start the CLM lake model in the UFS weather model: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I changed this line from "UFS SRW App" to "UFS weather model', since the UFS SRW App doesn't have any option to activate the CLM lake model without manually editing the weather model namelist.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Tanya's original input is "To cold-start the CLM lake model in RRFS:" I think regional application/configuration is key here, but I understand Ligia wants to highlight in this doc is for SRW App. How about "To cold-start the CLM lake model in regional configurations of the UFS" or something along the lines?
|
|
||
| \section version_cugf_enh CCPP Physics Updates | ||
|
|
||
| \version UFS-SRW v3.0.0 | ||
|
|
||
| \b The \b Implementation \b of \b GF \b in \b RRFS | ||
| <b>The Implementation of GF in RRFS prototypes</b> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I added "prototypes" here due to the continued uncertainty around RRFS implementations
| @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ | |||
|
|
|||
| The WoFS_v0 suite is targeted for use in the upcoming operational implementation | |||
| of the NOAA's Warn-on-Forecast System (WoFS) and for the RRFS ensemble. | |||
| This suite is most applicable for runs at 3-km resolution since it does | |||
| This suite is most applicable for runs at 3-km resolution and higher since it does | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since the WoFS is intended to be higher resolution than 3-km, I added "<=" here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@mkavulich I left a few additional minor comments. A major one is the duplications in GF descriptions of aerosol-dependence. I put a suggestion in the chat.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@mkavulich I went over the HTML and left a few additional comments, mostly just typos. Otherwise, everything looks good to me wrt v3.0.0 release. Thanks!
|
@bluefinweiwei Thanks again for all those comments, I pushed the final changes and I think this documentation is ready! |
|
We're looking to potentially combine this PR with another that's next for testing, but we need this PR to be approved first if any assigned reviewers could please approve. @mkavulich if you could ensure to sync up with the latest dev branch as well please. Thank you. |
|
@mkavulich @FernandoAndrade-NOAA Since I'm a collaborator on @mkavulich's fork, I've merged with the latest ufs/dev and pushed to this branch. It should be OK to merge with @SamuelTrahanNOAA SamuelTrahanNOAA:tanya-fix-20230724 |
This is a rebased version of #80 that removes large images. @mzhangw has contributed most of this work, but she is on leave and so we need to move to a different fork to continue making updates.
The updated docs can be viewed here: https://dtcenter.ucar.edu/GMTB/UFS_SRW_App_v3.0.0/doc/html/
Addresses #96