U-dz360 user-defined STASHmaster file incorporation

Unified Model
1

Dear helpdesk,

I now have an updated STASHmaster_A file to include new ancillaries. Although I’ve pointed STASHMASTER to the directory containing this new STASHmaster_A (under app/um/file/STASHmaster/STASHmaster_A), the suite didn’t seem to pick it up and failed. Please see the job.out:
[INFO] command: um-recon
[WARN] UM version (VN=x.y) defined in the environment.
[INFO] Overriding $VN to 13.9
[WARN] Using default STASHmaster as none provided “/projects/metoff/umdir/vn13.9/ctldata/STASHmaster”.
[WARN] Using default STASH2CF as none provided “/projects/metoff/umdir/vn13.9/ctldata/STASH2CF/STASH_to_CF.txt”.

Could you please help look into how to incorporate a new STASHmaster file in u-dz360? Thanks!

Weiyu

2

Hi,

To force the model to look at user STASHmaster_A, an additional setting is required in the um (glm_um)/rose-app.conf under [env] block

STASHMASTER=STASHmaster

Further,

  • the entry for 0-321 in glm_um/file/STASHmaster/STASHmaster_A is duplicated. This might cause probems.
  • Pl commit the changes to your suite so it is clear what has changed from the parent suite (which presumably works).

Mohit

3

Hi Mohit,

Thanks! I specified STASHMASTER=STASHmaster in glm_um/rose-app.conf and from job.out it seems the model is now using my own stashmaster file. But the job still failed:
???

???!!!???!!!???!!!???!!!???!!! ERROR ???!!!???!!!???!!!???!!!???!!!

? Error code: 2

? Error from routine: RCF_EXPPX

? Error message: Cant find required STASH item 321 section 0 model 1 in STASHmaster

? Error from processor: 0

? Error number: 1926

???

Is it because 0 321 was added in a wrong way in stashmaster_A? I’ve now committed the changes. Thanks!

Weiyu

4

Hi Weiyu,

That is most likely due to the model not being able to read the new field correctly. The STASHmaster input uses a Fixed format, so any extra spaces, shifting of the delimiters will cause the field to be rejected.

Comparing the entry against another 3-D ancillary field shows that the ‘321’ field needs to be shifted one space to the left.

image
image718×223 12.1 KB

Also make sure you know the correct numbers are being used for the option codes (line 3 first block). These are specific to model schemes/ choices and field can also be rejected if UM deciphers that the field should not be active in the current configuration.
The full reference for option codes can be found in Section C-3 of the STASH documentation paper, with the n numbers counted from right to left.

Mohit