CICE6 coupling #35
Assignees
Comments
|
There is already a CICE6 cap that is CMEPS compliant and was put in place
by @mvertens Tony Craig. I am concerned that working on a separate cap is
duplicating efforts that are confusing. Is there some way to please
coordinate this effort.
…On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 7:55 AM Robert Grumbine ***@***.***> wrote:
For milestone Prototype 5 (which needs to be created)
We want/need the ability to couple with CICE6. Bob Grumbine currently
working on it.
Please discuss in comments here what, beyond passing the regular
NEMSCompsetRun, is needed or desired.
Also in comments, how we want to do this. e.g. it would be desirable to
get rid of the links CICE_CAP and CICE in the main ufs-s2s directory.
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#35?email_source=notifications&email_token=AB4XCE6PELYU7SIINRWHQOLRF64PLA5CNFSM4LCLUU52YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFUVEXG43VMWVGG33NNVSW45C7NFSM4ISZ2O5A>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AB4XCE5YC5KLSDTN52V2QULRF64PLANCNFSM4LCLUU5Q>
.
|
|
I'm working with the CICE Consortium and Tony. To the greatest extent
possible, this is a matter, only, of ensuring that the cap cooperates with
the UFS-S2S and its design/build goals. But the UFS-S2S does have
requirements not necessarily shared by all other users of CICE6, or CMEPS,
etc..
…On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 11:25 AM mvertens ***@***.***> wrote:
There is already a CICE6 cap that is CMEPS compliant and was put in place
by @mvertens Tony Craig. I am concerned that working on a separate cap is
duplicating efforts that are confusing. Is there some way to please
coordinate this effort.
On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 7:55 AM Robert Grumbine ***@***.***>
wrote:
> For milestone Prototype 5 (which needs to be created)
>
> We want/need the ability to couple with CICE6. Bob Grumbine currently
> working on it.
>
> Please discuss in comments here what, beyond passing the regular
> NEMSCompsetRun, is needed or desired.
>
> Also in comments, how we want to do this. e.g. it would be desirable to
> get rid of the links CICE_CAP and CICE in the main ufs-s2s directory.
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <
#35?email_source=notifications&email_token=AB4XCE6PELYU7SIINRWHQOLRF64PLA5CNFSM4LCLUU52YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFUVEXG43VMWVGG33NNVSW45C7NFSM4ISZ2O5A
>,
> or unsubscribe
> <
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AB4XCE5YC5KLSDTN52V2QULRF64PLANCNFSM4LCLUU5Q
>
> .
>
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#35?email_source=notifications&email_token=AFQ65HISZFLKFNFYHHL6OADRF7HANA5CNFSM4LCLUU52YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEN55PTA#issuecomment-595318732>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFQ65HODT2LCRAGMGM3IAPLRF7HANANCNFSM4LCLUU5Q>
.
--
Tel: 301-683-3747
Coupling and Dynamics Group
|
|
@rgrumbine and @AvichalMehra-NOAA since our goal is to use CMEPS and that is currently working in a fork that @DeniseWorthen has created, can the CICE6 model be coupled to UFS-S2S by forking from Denise's fork to see what issues may occur. We may need Tony's help (what is his github handle btw) to see how to build this though. |
|
We discussed a plan of getting everything stable, off of Denise's fork, and into ufs-s2s within a couple of weeks. Can we complete all of that before trying to bring in CICE6? Too much in flux right now. |
|
Tony is @apcraig The major issue is not the Cap (CMEPS vs. NEMS), but CICE5 (which Denise et al. have been working with) versus CICE6 (which includes extracting Icepack and some new module naming + structure) and getting the FV3-MOM6-CICE6 app to compile and link in ways which are not excessively discrepant from either the CICE6 standalone or the FV3-MOM6-CICE5 methods already in place. |
|
I totally agree. I just want to make sure that everyone is on the same page
and that duplicative work is not being done.
…On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 11:28 AM Rocky Dunlap ***@***.***> wrote:
We discussed a plan of getting everything stable, off of Denise's fork,
and into ufs-s2s within a couple of weeks. Can we complete all of that
before trying to bring in CICE6? Too much in flux right now.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#35?email_source=notifications&email_token=AB4XCE34BP67OTVX7DBLK3LRF7VOBA5CNFSM4LCLUU52YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEN6L7VA#issuecomment-595378132>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AB4XCEZKUXTU2EQPO2XFNHLRF7VOBANCNFSM4LCLUU5Q>
.
|
|
No worries on that. Thx I forgot about that? Yes let us wait till the merge to develop happens. And get that happening soon |
ShanSunNOAA
pushed a commit
to ShanSunNOAA/ufs-s2s-model
that referenced
this issue
Mar 13, 2020
FV3 is updated to include the following: * fv3atm issue ufs-community#37: fix the real(8) lat/lon in netcdf file * fv3atm ufs-community#35: Reducing background vertical diffusivities in the inversion layers * fv3atm ufs-community#24: bug in gfsphysics/physics/moninedmf_hafs.f * fv3atm ufs-community#18: Optimize netcdf write component and bugfix for post and samfdeepcnv.f * set (0-1) bounds for ficein_cpl * remove cache_size due to lower netcdf verion 4.5.1 on mars * Change ice falling to 0.9 in gfsphysics/physics/gfdl_cloud_microphys.F90 NEMS is updated to remove ice-ocean merge in prep_atm: * The following fields are now exported to FV3 as ice-only fields: mean_sensi_heat_flx mean_laten_heat_flx mean_up_lw_flx mean_evap_rate mean_zonal_moment_flx mean_merid_moment_flx MOM6 is updated to GFDL's 20200108 dev/master: * MOM6 adds field in MOM.res_1.nc (kg_m3_to_R). All other files are reproducible with previous baseline
ShanSunNOAA
pushed a commit
to ShanSunNOAA/ufs-s2s-model
that referenced
this issue
Oct 28, 2020
…_from_develop Update gsd/develop from NOAA-EMC develop
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
For milestone Prototype 5 (which needs to be created)
We want/need the ability to couple with CICE6. Bob Grumbine currently working on it.
Please discuss in comments here what, beyond passing the regular NEMSCompsetRun, is needed or desired.
Also in comments, how we want to do this. e.g. it would be desirable to get rid of the links CICE_CAP and CICE in the main ufs-s2s directory.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: