-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 150
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
dependance of some namelist default on the number of vertical levels (lev)? #819
Comments
Adding @fvitt and @brian-eaton to the discussion |
The setting of |
@fvitt - Since you were the person who felt that some of the LT/MT variables should be in namelist_defaults, and made the change to move them, could you explain your reasoning. Based on @cecilehannay's request in this issue, do you have any problem with us moving them back to the use_cases? |
I thought it would be better to have these namelist parameters set in one place rather than multiple use case files. Setting them in one place is easier to maintain. My thinking is that the use case files are for setting exceptions to the defaults. |
In a sense |
Another solution may be add a configure attribute (or option) such as "model_top" which can have valid values of "LT", "MT", "HT", and "XT". This attribute can be used in namelist_defaults_cam.xml for the settings as |
@fvitt and @brian-eaton - @nusbaume and I had a meeting this morning to brainstorm this issue, and after discussing several scenarios, we independently came up with the identical solution of introducing a configure option which we also named "model_top"! We propose introducing valid values of "LT" and "MT" and bringing this into #820. The "HT" and "XT" valid values can be brought in at a later time and we can open a separate issue for them. |
A cursory look and I only see an nlev / namelists_defaults dependence for |
What is the feature/what would you like to discuss?
This issue should probably remove all nlev references in places where "lt" and "mt" can be used instead of nlev.
In
namelist_defaults_cam.xml
, there are parameters that are connected to the number of levels. While it makes sense forncdata
to be connected to nlev, it doesn't make sense for other parameters.Instead these parameters should connected to the
lt
ormt
configuration. This is to avoid getting the wrong parameters when changing nlev.For instance, we have in
namelist_defaults_cam.xml
But if we are doing a LT run with a different number of levels than L58, we get
gw_apply_tndmax=.true.
I've just experienced this with a LT and L32. I changed it manually in
user_nl_cam
but it would be best if it would automatically come out the same for allLT
runs.They are other parameters dependent of nlev=58 or 93
Is there anyone in particular you want to be part of this conversation?
@JulioTBacmeister, @cacraigucar
Will this change (regression test) answers?
Yes
Will you be implementing this enhancement yourself?
Any CAM SE can do this
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: