The mismatch of the actual and reference date – in #9: CCLM

in #9: CCLM

<p> Hello, </p> <p> I got date mismatch error ( <span class="caps"> ERROR </span> <span class="caps"> CODE </span> : 8102) while running <span class="caps"> CCLM </span> -v5.0_clm15 with 0.44deg resolution for future period. I have already used almost the same script for the simulation of reference period and I didn’t encounter any problems. You can find my attempts below to solve the problem but the error still exists. <ul> <li> I restarted the model run after reproducing the int2lm data again. </li> <li> I rerun the model by changing number of the processors. </li> <li> I restarted the model after replacing the lbfd2092081906.nc file with a working file in case it was corrupted. </li> </ul> </p> <p> I’m attaching the log-file and <span class="caps"> YUSPECIF </span> . Does any of you have an idea about the reason of the problem? </p> <p> Cheers, </p> <p> Cemre </p>

  @cemreyürük in #e1679c9

<p> Hello, </p> <p> I got date mismatch error ( <span class="caps"> ERROR </span> <span class="caps"> CODE </span> : 8102) while running <span class="caps"> CCLM </span> -v5.0_clm15 with 0.44deg resolution for future period. I have already used almost the same script for the simulation of reference period and I didn’t encounter any problems. You can find my attempts below to solve the problem but the error still exists. <ul> <li> I restarted the model run after reproducing the int2lm data again. </li> <li> I rerun the model by changing number of the processors. </li> <li> I restarted the model after replacing the lbfd2092081906.nc file with a working file in case it was corrupted. </li> </ul> </p> <p> I’m attaching the log-file and <span class="caps"> YUSPECIF </span> . Does any of you have an idea about the reason of the problem? </p> <p> Cheers, </p> <p> Cemre </p>

The mismatch of the actual and reference date

CS wrote

Hello,

I got date mismatch error ( ERROR CODE : 8102) while running CCLM -v5.0_clm15 with 0.44deg resolution for future period. I have already used almost the same script for the simulation of reference period and I didn’t encounter any problems. You can find my attempts below to solve the problem but the error still exists.

  • I restarted the model run after reproducing the int2lm data again.
  • I rerun the model by changing number of the processors.
  • I restarted the model after replacing the lbfd2092081906.nc file with a working file in case it was corrupted.

I’m attaching the log-file and YUSPECIF . Does any of you have an idea about the reason of the problem?

Cheers,

Cemre

View in channel
<p> Can you send the output of <br/> <code> ncdump -v time /data/data_int2lm_mpi_med044_rcp85/lbfd2092081906.nc </code> <br/> please. </p>

  @burkhardtrockel in #3dba9c1

<p> Can you send the output of <br/> <code> ncdump -v time /data/data_int2lm_mpi_med044_rcp85/lbfd2092081906.nc </code> <br/> please. </p>
BR replied

Can you send the output of
ncdump -v time /data/data_int2lm_mpi_med044_rcp85/lbfd2092081906.nc
please.

View in channel
<p> Dear Burkhardt, </p> <p> You can find the output file in the attachment. </p> <p> Regards, <br/> Cemre </p>

  @cemreyürük in #e66cfed

<p> Dear Burkhardt, </p> <p> You can find the output file in the attachment. </p> <p> Regards, <br/> Cemre </p>
CS replied

Dear Burkhardt,

You can find the output file in the attachment.

Regards,
Cemre

View in channel
<p> The is an overflow in an integer precision when calculating a time difference. Actually a bug in the program. <br/> Can you try to replace in src_input.f90 <br/> <pre> iref_act = iref_actsp * 60 + isec - isec_ref !--br 15.05.19 </pre> <br/> by <br/> <pre> iref_act = INT(iref_actsp,int_dp) * 60_int_dp + INT(isec,int_dp) - INT(isec_ref,int_dp) !--br 15.07.20 </pre> <br/> compile <span class="caps"> COSMO </span> - <span class="caps"> CLM </span> and try again? <br/> If this does not work and you are sure that all your input data have the right date you can try to comment out the following lines in src_input.f90 and compile the program again: <br/> <pre> IF (iref_act /= itimepassed) THEN ierror = 10 <span class="caps">ENDIF</span></pre> </p> <p> </p>

  @burkhardtrockel in #b751f8c

<p> The is an overflow in an integer precision when calculating a time difference. Actually a bug in the program. <br/> Can you try to replace in src_input.f90 <br/> <pre> iref_act = iref_actsp * 60 + isec - isec_ref !--br 15.05.19 </pre> <br/> by <br/> <pre> iref_act = INT(iref_actsp,int_dp) * 60_int_dp + INT(isec,int_dp) - INT(isec_ref,int_dp) !--br 15.07.20 </pre> <br/> compile <span class="caps"> COSMO </span> - <span class="caps"> CLM </span> and try again? <br/> If this does not work and you are sure that all your input data have the right date you can try to comment out the following lines in src_input.f90 and compile the program again: <br/> <pre> IF (iref_act /= itimepassed) THEN ierror = 10 <span class="caps">ENDIF</span></pre> </p> <p> </p>
BR replied

The is an overflow in an integer precision when calculating a time difference. Actually a bug in the program.
Can you try to replace in src_input.f90 

       iref_act = iref_actsp * 60 + isec - isec_ref         !--br 15.05.19

by 
      iref_act = INT(iref_actsp,int_dp) * 60_int_dp + INT(isec,int_dp) - INT(isec_ref,int_dp)         !--br 15.07.20

compile COSMO - CLM and try again?
If this does not work and you are sure that all your input data have the right date you can try to comment out the following lines in src_input.f90 and compile the program again: 
      IF (iref_act /= itimepassed) THEN
        ierror = 10
      ENDIF

View in channel
<p> iref_act is calculated in src_input.f90 as; <br/> &gt; iref_act = iref_act * 60._ireals + isec – isec_ref </p> <p> Also, iref_actsp and int_dp wasn’t defined in src_input.f90 so it gives error when I compile <span class="caps"> COSMO </span> - <span class="caps"> CLM </span> again. I have attached the src_input.f90 </p>

  @cemreyürük in #6e54e4c

<p> iref_act is calculated in src_input.f90 as; <br/> &gt; iref_act = iref_act * 60._ireals + isec – isec_ref </p> <p> Also, iref_actsp and int_dp wasn’t defined in src_input.f90 so it gives error when I compile <span class="caps"> COSMO </span> - <span class="caps"> CLM </span> again. I have attached the src_input.f90 </p>
CS replied

iref_act is calculated in src_input.f90 as;
> iref_act = iref_act * 60._ireals + isec – isec_ref

Also, iref_actsp and int_dp wasn’t defined in src_input.f90 so it gives error when I compile COSMO - CLM again. I have attached the src_input.f90

View in channel
<p> You do not run the latest version: <br/> https://redc.clm-community.eu/projects/cclm/wiki/Downloads <br/> COSMO- <span class="caps"> CLM </span> -v5.0_clm16.tar.gz <br/> If you use this version even my proposed change in src_input.f90 may not be necessary. </p>

  @burkhardtrockel in #ea961a8

<p> You do not run the latest version: <br/> https://redc.clm-community.eu/projects/cclm/wiki/Downloads <br/> COSMO- <span class="caps"> CLM </span> -v5.0_clm16.tar.gz <br/> If you use this version even my proposed change in src_input.f90 may not be necessary. </p>
BR replied

You do not run the latest version:
https://redc.clm-community.eu/projects/cclm/wiki/Downloads
COSMO- CLM -v5.0_clm16.tar.gz
If you use this version even my proposed change in src_input.f90 may not be necessary.

View in channel
<p> You are right, I was running <span class="caps"> COSMO </span> - <span class="caps"> CLM </span> -v5.0_clm15 in the latest version of starter package. Now, I replaced it with the new version ( <span class="caps"> COSMO </span> - <span class="caps"> CLM </span> -v5.0_clm16) and compiled the program again. Then, I restarted cclm script but it did not work. Finally, I changed iref_act with the proposed line and now it seems cclm is working without error! To be on the safe side, would you suggest simulating the whole time period from the beginning? </p> <p> Thank you very much for your suggestions and help. </p>

  @cemreyürük in #1456679

<p> You are right, I was running <span class="caps"> COSMO </span> - <span class="caps"> CLM </span> -v5.0_clm15 in the latest version of starter package. Now, I replaced it with the new version ( <span class="caps"> COSMO </span> - <span class="caps"> CLM </span> -v5.0_clm16) and compiled the program again. Then, I restarted cclm script but it did not work. Finally, I changed iref_act with the proposed line and now it seems cclm is working without error! To be on the safe side, would you suggest simulating the whole time period from the beginning? </p> <p> Thank you very much for your suggestions and help. </p>
CS replied

You are right, I was running COSMO - CLM -v5.0_clm15 in the latest version of starter package. Now, I replaced it with the new version ( COSMO - CLM -v5.0_clm16) and compiled the program again. Then, I restarted cclm script but it did not work. Finally, I changed iref_act with the proposed line and now it seems cclm is working without error! To be on the safe side, would you suggest simulating the whole time period from the beginning?

Thank you very much for your suggestions and help.

View in channel
<p> Changes from 5.0clm15 to 5.0clm16 are <br/> <pre> <ul> <li>corrected a bug for netCDF restart files when running long time simulations: change some variable definitions to higher precision<br/> <em>affected modules:</em></li> </ul></pre> </p> * src_input.f90 <ul> <li> add cell_method “time: point” to instantaneous quantities. <br/> <em> affected modules: </em> </li> </ul> * netcdf_io.f90 <ul> <li> allow for missing_value==-1.E20 in <span class="caps"> CIN </span> _MU, <span class="caps"> CIN </span> _ML, <span class="caps"> CAPE </span> _MU, <span class="caps"> CAPE </span> _ML in case of netCDF output <br/> <em> affected modules: </em> </li> </ul> * src_output.f90 <p> <br/> These should not affect the results. However, you can also just replace the src_input.f90 in your clm5-code by the one you changed in the clm16 version to avoid inconsistencies in the output meta data. </p>

  @burkhardtrockel in #b52c3d8

<p> Changes from 5.0clm15 to 5.0clm16 are <br/> <pre> <ul> <li>corrected a bug for netCDF restart files when running long time simulations: change some variable definitions to higher precision<br/> <em>affected modules:</em></li> </ul></pre> </p> * src_input.f90 <ul> <li> add cell_method “time: point” to instantaneous quantities. <br/> <em> affected modules: </em> </li> </ul> * netcdf_io.f90 <ul> <li> allow for missing_value==-1.E20 in <span class="caps"> CIN </span> _MU, <span class="caps"> CIN </span> _ML, <span class="caps"> CAPE </span> _MU, <span class="caps"> CAPE </span> _ML in case of netCDF output <br/> <em> affected modules: </em> </li> </ul> * src_output.f90 <p> <br/> These should not affect the results. However, you can also just replace the src_input.f90 in your clm5-code by the one you changed in the clm16 version to avoid inconsistencies in the output meta data. </p>
BR replied

Changes from 5.0clm15 to 5.0clm16 are 

  • corrected a bug for netCDF restart files when running long time simulations:
    change some variable definitions to higher precision
    affected modules:

* src_input.f90
  • add cell_method “time: point” to instantaneous quantities.
    affected modules:
* netcdf_io.f90
  • allow for missing_value==-1.E20 in CIN _MU, CIN _ML, CAPE _MU, CAPE _ML in case of netCDF output
    affected modules:
* src_output.f90


These should not affect the results. However, you can also just replace the src_input.f90 in your clm5-code by the one you changed in the clm16 version to avoid inconsistencies in the output meta data.

View in channel