Error with coupling in upgrading from UM vn11.4 to 12.1

Hi CMS,

I have upgraded suite from UM vn11.4 (u-cf309) to UM vn12.1 (u-da133). The suite is a regional model with GA7 physics, coupled to the KPP mixed-layer ocean model. The suite runs OK (I have managed to run for 3 months); however the ocean model does not appear to be receiving the precipitation field from the atmosphere (see attached plots for comparison – at vn11.4, the KPP precip minus evap. matches the UM P - E, whereas at vn12.1 it matches just -E).

surface_water_fluxes_KPP_vs_UM_vn11.4_2012Nov
surface_water_fluxes_KPP_vs_UM_vn12.1_2012Nov

Could you help me to diagnose where this has gone wrong?

Many thanks,
Dan

Dan
Where is u-cf309

Grenville

Hi Grenville,

u-cf309 was run by Emma Howard; output from the last run is in her cylc-run directory on ARCHER2 at /work/n02/n02/emmah.

Best wishes,
Dan

Dan

Which fields (stash codes) go into calculating P minus E?

Grenville

Hi Grenville,

Thanks for getting back to me.

For KPP:
P minus E at surface is output directly.
For the UM:
P is the sum of convective rainfall amount (m01s05i201), convective snowfall amount (m01s04i202), stratiform rainfall amount (m01s04i201), stratiform snowfall amount (m01s04i202).
E is the surface upward water flux (m01s03i223), which is the same as the evaporation over open sea (m01s03i232) and -1/L times the surface latent heat flux (m01s03i234).

Cheers,
Dan

Dan

It’s a bit hard to see what’s going on with only model failure to look at - do you have logs etc for the 3-month run?

Grenville

Dan

It’s a bit hard to see what’s going on with only model failure to look at - do you have logs etc for the 3-month run?

Grenville

Dan

It’s a bit hard to see what’s going on with only model failure to look at - do you have logs etc for the 3-month run?

Grenville

Dan

It’s a bit hard to see what’s going on with only model failure to look at - do you have logs etc for the 3-month run?

Grenville

Hi Grenville,

My apologies, I’ve set the working version of the suite u-da133 running again so you can see the log files.

Best wishes,
Dan

Hi Grenville,

Let me know whether there’s any more information I can provide. The 3 month simulation is all there now.

Cheers,
Dan

Hi,

As we’ve traced the problem back to KPP not receiving the total precipitation field, we’d like to work out:
a) Is the UM outputting the correct precip fields to the coupler? All the STASH requests are there (in the “UPCOUP” usage profile), but is there a way to see what’s actually output during the model run?
b) If the answer to a) is yes, do the fields match the saved precip, or are they zero for some reason?
c) If the fields are correctly output by the UM, does Oasis read them in correctly?
d) If the Oasis reads them in correctly, why doesn’t KPP get them?

Could you please help us with steps a) (interrogating what fields are actually output to the coupler by the UM), c) (checking what the coupler receives), and d) (checking why KPP reads in 0)?

Many thanks,
Dan

Hi Dan

We are looking a this - it’s proving a bit of a challenge.

Grenville

Thanks for the update, Grenville! Sorry it’s proving difficult. Let me know if there’s any way I can help.

Best wishes,
Dan

Hi Dan,

The atmosphere to ocean coupling variables are set in src/control/coupling/oasis3_puta2o.F90. It looks like the calculation of totalrain has been mangled with the upgrade of UM version.

Comparing the code block in Emma’s 11.4 suite to your 12.1 suite, there are a couple of lines missing which means the variable isn’t set properly:

  IF (l_train) THEN
    DO j=1,oasis_jmt
      DO i=1,oasis_imt
        rainls(i,j) = c_lsrain(i,j)
        IF (l_param_conv) THEN
          rainconv(i,j) = c_cvrain(i,j)
        ELSE
          rainconv(i,j) = 0.0
        END IF
        IF (l_ctile .AND. fland_loc(i,j) == 1.0) THEN
          totalrain(i,j,1)=0.0
        ELSE IF (.NOT. l_ctile .AND. land(i,j)>0.99) THEN
-          totalrain(i,j,1)=0.0
-        ELSE
          totalrain(i,j,1)=rainls(i,j)+rainconv(i,j)
        END IF
      END DO
    END DO
  END IF

Hopefully it should just be a case of fixing this in the vn12.1_vn12.1_metum-goml branch.

Annette

1 Like

Hi Annette,

Thanks so much for finding this! I can confirm that KPP is now correctly receiving the total rain.

Best wishes,
Dan

This topic was automatically closed 24 hours after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.