problems with cclm4.8 runs cfl criterion and NaNs – in #9: CCLM
in #9: CCLM
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>
Dear colleagues,
</p>
<p>
I´m facing a problem with NaNs in all fields after the first time step together with a violation of
<span class="caps">
CFL
</span>
-criterion. I am aware, that this has already been the topic here, but my model setup is different.
<br/>
I use the clm4.8_clm18 Version together with int2lm1.1_clm14 on the Cray-40 of
<span class="caps">
DWD
</span>
and MIROC5 data as input for 2.8km run. I attached some Output and Setup files in a tar-archive. The Output of int2lm seem to be ok, as well as the data in
<span class="caps">
YUCHKDAT
</span>
.
<br/>
I already reduced the time step from 25 to 20 s, but that did not help. Maybe there is a problem already in the compilation?
<br/>
Does anyone has an idea?
</p>
<p>
Best regards,
</p>
<p>
Michael
</p>
<p>
Dear colleagues,
</p>
<p>
I´m facing a problem with NaNs in all fields after the first time step together with a violation of
<span class="caps">
CFL
</span>
-criterion. I am aware, that this has already been the topic here, but my model setup is different.
<br/>
I use the clm4.8_clm18 Version together with int2lm1.1_clm14 on the Cray-40 of
<span class="caps">
DWD
</span>
and MIROC5 data as input for 2.8km run. I attached some Output and Setup files in a tar-archive. The Output of int2lm seem to be ok, as well as the data in
<span class="caps">
YUCHKDAT
</span>
.
<br/>
I already reduced the time step from 25 to 20 s, but that did not help. Maybe there is a problem already in the compilation?
<br/>
Does anyone has an idea?
</p>
<p>
Best regards,
</p>
<p>
Michael
</p>
I´m facing a problem with NaNs in all fields after the first time step together with a violation of
CFL
-criterion. I am aware, that this has already been the topic here, but my model setup is different.
I use the clm4.8_clm18 Version together with int2lm1.1_clm14 on the Cray-40 of
DWD
and MIROC5 data as input for 2.8km run. I attached some Output and Setup files in a tar-archive. The Output of int2lm seem to be ok, as well as the data in
YUCHKDAT
.
I already reduced the time step from 25 to 20 s, but that did not help. Maybe there is a problem already in the compilation?
Does anyone has an idea?
<p>
Hi Michael,
</p>
<p>
have a look at your P0-profile (
<span class="caps">
YUSPECIF
</span>
). It is nonsens.
<br/>
About 500 hPa in about 900 m heihgt, and then constant P0 above 9800 m!!
<br/>
Thus, the problem must already be in the INT2LM setup
</p>
<p>
The file “
<span class="caps">
OUTPUT
</span>
” in your tar-file: generally a file with this name comes from INT2LM (compared to
<span class="caps">
CCLM
</span>
it is the “
<span class="caps">
YUSPEFIC
</span>
” pendant).
<br/>
But the file in your tar-file is certainly not from INT2LM.
</p>
<p>
With respect to
<span class="caps">
MIROC
</span>
forcing: ask Christian Steger; he applied
<span class="caps">
MIROC
</span>
in thge
<span class="caps">
REKLIES
</span>
project.
<br/>
Perhaps, he can give you some advices.
<br/>
What is the resolution of
<span class="caps">
MIROC
</span>
? Do you really want to perform a direct downscaling form the
<span class="caps">
GCM
</span>
scale to the 2.8 km scale?
</p>
<p>
Hans-Jürgen
</p>
<p>
Hi Michael,
</p>
<p>
have a look at your P0-profile (
<span class="caps">
YUSPECIF
</span>
). It is nonsens.
<br/>
About 500 hPa in about 900 m heihgt, and then constant P0 above 9800 m!!
<br/>
Thus, the problem must already be in the INT2LM setup
</p>
<p>
The file “
<span class="caps">
OUTPUT
</span>
” in your tar-file: generally a file with this name comes from INT2LM (compared to
<span class="caps">
CCLM
</span>
it is the “
<span class="caps">
YUSPEFIC
</span>
” pendant).
<br/>
But the file in your tar-file is certainly not from INT2LM.
</p>
<p>
With respect to
<span class="caps">
MIROC
</span>
forcing: ask Christian Steger; he applied
<span class="caps">
MIROC
</span>
in thge
<span class="caps">
REKLIES
</span>
project.
<br/>
Perhaps, he can give you some advices.
<br/>
What is the resolution of
<span class="caps">
MIROC
</span>
? Do you really want to perform a direct downscaling form the
<span class="caps">
GCM
</span>
scale to the 2.8 km scale?
</p>
<p>
Hans-Jürgen
</p>
have a look at your P0-profile (
YUSPECIF
). It is nonsens.
About 500 hPa in about 900 m heihgt, and then constant P0 above 9800 m!!
Thus, the problem must already be in the INT2LM setup
The file “
OUTPUT
” in your tar-file: generally a file with this name comes from INT2LM (compared to
CCLM
it is the “
YUSPEFIC
” pendant).
But the file in your tar-file is certainly not from INT2LM.
With respect to
MIROC
forcing: ask Christian Steger; he applied
MIROC
in thge
REKLIES
project.
Perhaps, he can give you some advices.
What is the resolution of
MIROC
? Do you really want to perform a direct downscaling form the
GCM
scale to the 2.8 km scale?
problems with cclm4.8 runs cfl criterion and NaNs
Dear colleagues,
I´m facing a problem with NaNs in all fields after the first time step together with a violation of CFL -criterion. I am aware, that this has already been the topic here, but my model setup is different.
I use the clm4.8_clm18 Version together with int2lm1.1_clm14 on the Cray-40 of DWD and MIROC5 data as input for 2.8km run. I attached some Output and Setup files in a tar-archive. The Output of int2lm seem to be ok, as well as the data in YUCHKDAT .
I already reduced the time step from 25 to 20 s, but that did not help. Maybe there is a problem already in the compilation?
Does anyone has an idea?
Best regards,
Michael
Hi Michael,
have a look at your P0-profile ( YUSPECIF ). It is nonsens.
About 500 hPa in about 900 m heihgt, and then constant P0 above 9800 m!!
Thus, the problem must already be in the INT2LM setup
The file “ OUTPUT ” in your tar-file: generally a file with this name comes from INT2LM (compared to CCLM it is the “ YUSPEFIC ” pendant).
But the file in your tar-file is certainly not from INT2LM.
With respect to MIROC forcing: ask Christian Steger; he applied MIROC in thge REKLIES project.
Perhaps, he can give you some advices.
What is the resolution of MIROC ? Do you really want to perform a direct downscaling form the GCM scale to the 2.8 km scale?
Hans-Jürgen