-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
consolidate gfs data to gfs_aero_c12/bkg for 20201214.21z #107
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: develop
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
|
This looks reasonable to me, but I hope @cmgas or @mer-a-o or @travissluka can also take a look! |
cmgas
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is good with me!
|
I understand the problem but this is still a duplication of the data. I think we all agree that there is no reason to have a separate folder for the atmosphere with or without atmospheric composition. I advocate having a consolidated folder with only one set of atmosphere backgrounds for GFS tests. With those new backgrounds we will have to update all GFS tracers related tests... a lot of unrewarding work... would EMC willing to help on this? @CoryMartin-NOAA @danholdaway Thanks |
|
I'm not sure I understand what you need help with? |
|
Another solution could be to add the missing variables needed for OASIM to the already-existing GFS aero files in the GFS_aero dir, this way this would limit the amount of files being duplicated and not require updating all the aerosol-related tests. |
|
Nevermind, ignore me |
|
just to clarify the tracer files in gfs and gfs_aero have different variables, gfs_c12/bkg> ncdump -h 20201214.230000.fv_tracer.res.tile3.nc this is aerosol file gfs_aero_c12/bkg> ncdump -h 20201214.210000.fv_tracer.res.tile1.nc That's why they need to be consolidated. |
@jeromebarre no, this won't limit the duplication, as anyway both tracer files needs to be consolidated and also we would need to add srf_wnd.res. and sfc_data data to aerosol bkg data which they do not belong there. So, I think this works best for now, but later on there could be a PR to consolidate aerosol data to gfs bkg data and remove the aerosol bkg data and update the corresponding tests. |
@HamidehGMAO Is the difference between tracer files in Sorry, it's difficult to compare the |
|
@mer-a-o I see! gfs doesn't have the aerosol variables and also gfs-aero dosn't have ice_wat, "cloud_liquid_ice" ; liq_wat "cloud_liquid_water" ; o3mr "ozone_mass_mixing_ratio" |
|
Thanks.
I suggest, for now, to add your files to
|
|
@mer-a-o @jeromebarre Could you please take a look, and see if you are happy with the new changes? Thanks. |
jeromebarre
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
great thx!
|
@mer-a-o do you feel your comments above were addressed to satisfaction? do you recommend that we proceed or that we make changes to Hamideh's branch before proceeding? |
Description
In order to run coupled oasim with aerosol optical thickness derived from gfs, we need to use gfs_aerosol bkg data, but we need bkg data for surface variables like surface wind speed and surface pressure as well. so we need a set of bkg data that include both aerosol data and other gfs bkg data. so here I just consolidated the gfs bkg data to the gfs_aero_c12/bkg to be able to run coupled oasim using gfs_aero_c12/bkg data
Issue(s) addressed
Resolves #105
Impact
this needs to be merged before
https://github.com/JCSDA-internal/coupling/pull/53
Checklist