Possible Bug / Missing check with itype_bbc_w – 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>
Hello,
<br/>
i possibly found a bug or more likely a missing check.
<br/>
CCLMv5.0_clm1
<br/>
If i start a modelrun with 60 vertical levels and itype_fast_waves=2 and itype_bbc_w=114 it works as intended.
<br/>
If i start a modelrun with 60 vertical levels and itype_fast_waves=2 and itype_bbc_w=2 it crashes with “plev for interpolation above model top” as expected.
<br/>
If i start a modelrun with 42 vertical levels and itype_fast_waves=2 and itype_bbc_w=2 it does not crash and works. Which it should not.
</p>
<p>
Could someone verify this?
</p>
<p>
my vcoord for lvl42
</p>
<p>
vcoord_d = 27193.0658, 22742.1584, 20068.5896, 18106.1209, 16524.8088,
15178.2350, 13992.3276, 12922.8843, 11943.6117, 11037.0808,
10191.5898, 9398.6143, 8652.9089, 7949.5885, 7285.6545,
6658.5778, 6066.0753, 5506.8627, 4979.7154, 4483.2385,
4016.7224, 3579.4124, 3170.6701, 2789.9847, 2436.6500,
2110.3428, 1810.6762, 1537.0295, 1288.9723, 1065.9676,
867.4797, 692.7013, 541.1079, 411.4626, 302.8908,
242.5893, 201.7746, 161.1152, 120.6095, 80.2560,
40.0534, 20.0081,0.00,
</p>
<p>
for lvl60
</p>
<p>
vcoord_d = 22000.00, 21000.00, 20030.85, 19092.06, 18183.14,
17303.62, 16453.01, 15630.82, 14836.56, 14069.76,
13329.92, 12616.57, 11929.21, 11267.36, 10630.54,
10018.26, 9430.04, 8865.39, 8323.82, 7804.86,
7308.01, 6832.79, 6378.71, 5945.30, 5532.06,
5138.52, 4764.17, 4408.55, 4071.16, 3751.53,
3449.15, 3163.56, 2894.26, 2640.77, 2402.61,
2179.28, 1970.31, 1775.21, 1593.49, 1424.67,
1268.26, 1123.79, 990.75, 868.68, 757.08,
655.46, 563.35, 480.26, 405.70, 339.19,
280.25, 228.38, 183.10, 143.93, 110.38,
81.97, 58.21, 38.62, 22.71, 10.00,
0.00,
</p>
<p>
Hello,
<br/>
i possibly found a bug or more likely a missing check.
<br/>
CCLMv5.0_clm1
<br/>
If i start a modelrun with 60 vertical levels and itype_fast_waves=2 and itype_bbc_w=114 it works as intended.
<br/>
If i start a modelrun with 60 vertical levels and itype_fast_waves=2 and itype_bbc_w=2 it crashes with “plev for interpolation above model top” as expected.
<br/>
If i start a modelrun with 42 vertical levels and itype_fast_waves=2 and itype_bbc_w=2 it does not crash and works. Which it should not.
</p>
<p>
Could someone verify this?
</p>
<p>
my vcoord for lvl42
</p>
<p>
vcoord_d = 27193.0658, 22742.1584, 20068.5896, 18106.1209, 16524.8088,
15178.2350, 13992.3276, 12922.8843, 11943.6117, 11037.0808,
10191.5898, 9398.6143, 8652.9089, 7949.5885, 7285.6545,
6658.5778, 6066.0753, 5506.8627, 4979.7154, 4483.2385,
4016.7224, 3579.4124, 3170.6701, 2789.9847, 2436.6500,
2110.3428, 1810.6762, 1537.0295, 1288.9723, 1065.9676,
867.4797, 692.7013, 541.1079, 411.4626, 302.8908,
242.5893, 201.7746, 161.1152, 120.6095, 80.2560,
40.0534, 20.0081,0.00,
</p>
<p>
for lvl60
</p>
<p>
vcoord_d = 22000.00, 21000.00, 20030.85, 19092.06, 18183.14,
17303.62, 16453.01, 15630.82, 14836.56, 14069.76,
13329.92, 12616.57, 11929.21, 11267.36, 10630.54,
10018.26, 9430.04, 8865.39, 8323.82, 7804.86,
7308.01, 6832.79, 6378.71, 5945.30, 5532.06,
5138.52, 4764.17, 4408.55, 4071.16, 3751.53,
3449.15, 3163.56, 2894.26, 2640.77, 2402.61,
2179.28, 1970.31, 1775.21, 1593.49, 1424.67,
1268.26, 1123.79, 990.75, 868.68, 757.08,
655.46, 563.35, 480.26, 405.70, 339.19,
280.25, 228.38, 183.10, 143.93, 110.38,
81.97, 58.21, 38.62, 22.71, 10.00,
0.00,
</p>
Hello,
i possibly found a bug or more likely a missing check.
CCLMv5.0_clm1
If i start a modelrun with 60 vertical levels and itype_fast_waves=2 and itype_bbc_w=114 it works as intended.
If i start a modelrun with 60 vertical levels and itype_fast_waves=2 and itype_bbc_w=2 it crashes with “plev for interpolation above model top” as expected.
If i start a modelrun with 42 vertical levels and itype_fast_waves=2 and itype_bbc_w=2 it does not crash and works. Which it should not.
<p>
I am not that familiar with the dynamics of the model to give a profound answer. However, from former model simulations I know that a depth of just 10m for the surface layer causes problems. All default vertical coordinates in int2lm2.0 (see module
<code>
vgrid_refatm_utils
</code>
) have a depth of 20m. If you do not have good reasons for choosing 10m I suggest the distribution below.
<br/>
The 42 level distribution looks quite strange. I cannot create it with the vertical coordinate tool http://www.clm-community.eu/index.php?menuid=10&reporeid=328
</p>
<pre>
kelm_tot = 60,
vcoord_d = 22000.00, 21000.00, 20031.19, 19093.06, 18185.11,
17306.84, 16457.74, 15637.32, 14845.07, 14080.49,
13343.07, 12632.32, 11947.73, 11288.79, 10655.01,
10045.88, 9460.90, 8899.57, 8361.38, 7845.83,
7352.43, 6880.65, 6430.02, 6000.01, 5590.13,
5199.88, 4828.75, 4476.25, 4141.86, 3825.08,
3525.42, 3242.37, 2975.43, 2724.09, 2487.85,
2266.22, 2058.68, 1864.73, 1683.88, 1515.62,
1359.44, 1214.84, 1081.33, 958.40, 845.54,
742.26, 648.04, 562.40, 484.82, 414.80,
351.84, 295.44, 245.10, 200.30, 160.56,
125.37, 94.21, 66.60, 42.03, 20.00,
0.00,
</pre>
<p>
I am not that familiar with the dynamics of the model to give a profound answer. However, from former model simulations I know that a depth of just 10m for the surface layer causes problems. All default vertical coordinates in int2lm2.0 (see module
<code>
vgrid_refatm_utils
</code>
) have a depth of 20m. If you do not have good reasons for choosing 10m I suggest the distribution below.
<br/>
The 42 level distribution looks quite strange. I cannot create it with the vertical coordinate tool http://www.clm-community.eu/index.php?menuid=10&reporeid=328
</p>
<pre>
kelm_tot = 60,
vcoord_d = 22000.00, 21000.00, 20031.19, 19093.06, 18185.11,
17306.84, 16457.74, 15637.32, 14845.07, 14080.49,
13343.07, 12632.32, 11947.73, 11288.79, 10655.01,
10045.88, 9460.90, 8899.57, 8361.38, 7845.83,
7352.43, 6880.65, 6430.02, 6000.01, 5590.13,
5199.88, 4828.75, 4476.25, 4141.86, 3825.08,
3525.42, 3242.37, 2975.43, 2724.09, 2487.85,
2266.22, 2058.68, 1864.73, 1683.88, 1515.62,
1359.44, 1214.84, 1081.33, 958.40, 845.54,
742.26, 648.04, 562.40, 484.82, 414.80,
351.84, 295.44, 245.10, 200.30, 160.56,
125.37, 94.21, 66.60, 42.03, 20.00,
0.00,
</pre>
I am not that familiar with the dynamics of the model to give a profound answer. However, from former model simulations I know that a depth of just 10m for the surface layer causes problems. All default vertical coordinates in int2lm2.0 (see module
vgrid_refatm_utils
) have a depth of 20m. If you do not have good reasons for choosing 10m I suggest the distribution below.
The 42 level distribution looks quite strange. I cannot create it with the vertical coordinate tool http://www.clm-community.eu/index.php?menuid=10&reporeid=328
Possible Bug / Missing check with itype_bbc_w
Hello,
i possibly found a bug or more likely a missing check.
CCLMv5.0_clm1
If i start a modelrun with 60 vertical levels and itype_fast_waves=2 and itype_bbc_w=114 it works as intended.
If i start a modelrun with 60 vertical levels and itype_fast_waves=2 and itype_bbc_w=2 it crashes with “plev for interpolation above model top” as expected.
If i start a modelrun with 42 vertical levels and itype_fast_waves=2 and itype_bbc_w=2 it does not crash and works. Which it should not.
Could someone verify this?
my vcoord for lvl42
vcoord_d = 27193.0658, 22742.1584, 20068.5896, 18106.1209, 16524.8088, 15178.2350, 13992.3276, 12922.8843, 11943.6117, 11037.0808, 10191.5898, 9398.6143, 8652.9089, 7949.5885, 7285.6545, 6658.5778, 6066.0753, 5506.8627, 4979.7154, 4483.2385, 4016.7224, 3579.4124, 3170.6701, 2789.9847, 2436.6500, 2110.3428, 1810.6762, 1537.0295, 1288.9723, 1065.9676, 867.4797, 692.7013, 541.1079, 411.4626, 302.8908, 242.5893, 201.7746, 161.1152, 120.6095, 80.2560, 40.0534, 20.0081,0.00,
for lvl60
vcoord_d = 22000.00, 21000.00, 20030.85, 19092.06, 18183.14, 17303.62, 16453.01, 15630.82, 14836.56, 14069.76, 13329.92, 12616.57, 11929.21, 11267.36, 10630.54, 10018.26, 9430.04, 8865.39, 8323.82, 7804.86, 7308.01, 6832.79, 6378.71, 5945.30, 5532.06, 5138.52, 4764.17, 4408.55, 4071.16, 3751.53, 3449.15, 3163.56, 2894.26, 2640.77, 2402.61, 2179.28, 1970.31, 1775.21, 1593.49, 1424.67, 1268.26, 1123.79, 990.75, 868.68, 757.08, 655.46, 563.35, 480.26, 405.70, 339.19, 280.25, 228.38, 183.10, 143.93, 110.38, 81.97, 58.21, 38.62, 22.71, 10.00, 0.00,
I am not that familiar with the dynamics of the model to give a profound answer. However, from former model simulations I know that a depth of just 10m for the surface layer causes problems. All default vertical coordinates in int2lm2.0 (see module
vgrid_refatm_utils) have a depth of 20m. If you do not have good reasons for choosing 10m I suggest the distribution below.The 42 level distribution looks quite strange. I cannot create it with the vertical coordinate tool http://www.clm-community.eu/index.php?menuid=10&reporeid=328
kelm_tot = 60, vcoord_d = 22000.00, 21000.00, 20031.19, 19093.06, 18185.11, 17306.84, 16457.74, 15637.32, 14845.07, 14080.49, 13343.07, 12632.32, 11947.73, 11288.79, 10655.01, 10045.88, 9460.90, 8899.57, 8361.38, 7845.83, 7352.43, 6880.65, 6430.02, 6000.01, 5590.13, 5199.88, 4828.75, 4476.25, 4141.86, 3825.08, 3525.42, 3242.37, 2975.43, 2724.09, 2487.85, 2266.22, 2058.68, 1864.73, 1683.88, 1515.62, 1359.44, 1214.84, 1081.33, 958.40, 845.54, 742.26, 648.04, 562.40, 484.82, 414.80, 351.84, 295.44, 245.10, 200.30, 160.56, 125.37, 94.21, 66.60, 42.03, 20.00, 0.00,