large differences in version INT2LM_2.00_clm4 und INT2LM_2.05_clm2 – in #10: INT2LM
in #10: INT2LM
Cookies disclaimer
Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your
device in order to verify your login. These cookies are essential
to provide access to resources on this website and it will not
work properly without.
Learn more
<p>
Hi Daniel,
</p>
<p>
I have seen these comments, and already did an additional test setting:
<br/>
> itype_balance_pp=1, itype_profiles_vert_interp=1, lmultlay_deepsoil_clim_hcorr=.FALSE.,
<br/>
which means using the old defaults methods. (in the old version I had lbalance_pp=T, which is also hard-coded in the new version).
<br/>
But the differences are in the same order of magnitude, even between the two INT2LM_2.05_clm2 runs with the two different namelist settings.
</p>
<p>
I started with the configuration of the
<span class="caps">
CORDEX
</span>
-
<span class="caps">
FPS
</span>
-Convection simulations, which used INT2LM_2.00_clm4. I attach the settings. For INT2LM_2.05_clm2 I just deleted lbalance_pp (and then changed the 3 namelist parameters in the sensitivity test mentioned above), but maybe other settings would be necessary to adapt?
</p>
<p>
Best wishes,
<br/>
Susanne
</p>
<p>
Hi Daniel,
</p>
<p>
I have seen these comments, and already did an additional test setting:
<br/>
> itype_balance_pp=1, itype_profiles_vert_interp=1, lmultlay_deepsoil_clim_hcorr=.FALSE.,
<br/>
which means using the old defaults methods. (in the old version I had lbalance_pp=T, which is also hard-coded in the new version).
<br/>
But the differences are in the same order of magnitude, even between the two INT2LM_2.05_clm2 runs with the two different namelist settings.
</p>
<p>
I started with the configuration of the
<span class="caps">
CORDEX
</span>
-
<span class="caps">
FPS
</span>
-Convection simulations, which used INT2LM_2.00_clm4. I attach the settings. For INT2LM_2.05_clm2 I just deleted lbalance_pp (and then changed the 3 namelist parameters in the sensitivity test mentioned above), but maybe other settings would be necessary to adapt?
</p>
<p>
Best wishes,
<br/>
Susanne
</p>
I have seen these comments, and already did an additional test setting:
> itype_balance_pp=1, itype_profiles_vert_interp=1, lmultlay_deepsoil_clim_hcorr=.FALSE.,
which means using the old defaults methods. (in the old version I had lbalance_pp=T, which is also hard-coded in the new version).
But the differences are in the same order of magnitude, even between the two INT2LM_2.05_clm2 runs with the two different namelist settings.
I started with the configuration of the
CORDEX
-
FPS
-Convection simulations, which used INT2LM_2.00_clm4. I attach the settings. For INT2LM_2.05_clm2 I just deleted lbalance_pp (and then changed the 3 namelist parameters in the sensitivity test mentioned above), but maybe other settings would be necessary to adapt?
Hi Daniel,
I have seen these comments, and already did an additional test setting:
> itype_balance_pp=1, itype_profiles_vert_interp=1, lmultlay_deepsoil_clim_hcorr=.FALSE.,
which means using the old defaults methods. (in the old version I had lbalance_pp=T, which is also hard-coded in the new version).
But the differences are in the same order of magnitude, even between the two INT2LM_2.05_clm2 runs with the two different namelist settings.
I started with the configuration of the CORDEX - FPS -Convection simulations, which used INT2LM_2.00_clm4. I attach the settings. For INT2LM_2.05_clm2 I just deleted lbalance_pp (and then changed the 3 namelist parameters in the sensitivity test mentioned above), but maybe other settings would be necessary to adapt?
Best wishes,
Susanne