-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 361
Completing the FATES-CLM nitrogen coupling #3378
Copy link
Copy link
Labels
FATES API updateChanges to the FATES version that also REQUIRE an API change in CTSMChanges to the FATES version that also REQUIRE an API change in CTSMenhancementnew capability or improved behavior of existing capabilitynew capability or improved behavior of existing capabilitynon-b4bChanges answers (incl. adding tests)Changes answers (incl. adding tests)scienceEnhancement to or bug impacting scienceEnhancement to or bug impacting sciencetest: aux_clmPass aux_clm suite before mergingPass aux_clm suite before mergingtest: ctsm_sciRun and check ctsm_sci suite before mergingRun and check ctsm_sci suite before mergingtest: fatesPass fates test suite before mergingPass fates test suite before merging
Milestone
Description
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
FATES API updateChanges to the FATES version that also REQUIRE an API change in CTSMChanges to the FATES version that also REQUIRE an API change in CTSMenhancementnew capability or improved behavior of existing capabilitynew capability or improved behavior of existing capabilitynon-b4bChanges answers (incl. adding tests)Changes answers (incl. adding tests)scienceEnhancement to or bug impacting scienceEnhancement to or bug impacting sciencetest: aux_clmPass aux_clm suite before mergingPass aux_clm suite before mergingtest: ctsm_sciRun and check ctsm_sci suite before mergingRun and check ctsm_sci suite before mergingtest: fatesPass fates test suite before mergingPass fates test suite before merging
Type
Projects
StatusShow more project fields
Done
StatusShow more project fields
Done
I think of this as the parent issue: NGEET/fates#1270
Currently we can only send synthetic uptake boundary conditions to FATES, and send nothing back to CLM.
This issue will address coupling to CLM's:
In meeting with @rgknox and @adrifoster we discussed that I should focus on the
else !----------NITRIF_DENITRIF-------------!section of SoilBiogeochemCompetitionMod.F90 (<-- for guidance see Allocation in E3SM-Project/E3SM#4325)
and on new bc_in lines in utils/clmfates_interfaceMod.F90.
@rgknox suggested that for now FATES need not worry about
.not. use_nitrif_denitrif.Testing starting from ctsm5.3.065 (fates: sci.1.84.0_api.40.0.0):
A motivation behind this update is to perform single-point FATES-MIMICS simulations, so I modified this existing test as below
ERS_D_Ld30.f45_f45_mg37.I2000Clm50FatesCruRsGs.izumi_nag.clm-FatesColdPRT2Side notes about PRT2 tests:
fates_cnp_prescribed_nuptake = 1andfates_cnp_prescribed_puptake =1as per changing prescribed N and P uptake to 1 in the FATES PRT2 test #2624Single-point tests
PASS ERS_D_Ld30.1x1_brazil.I2000Clm60FatesCrujraRs.derecho_intel.clm-FatesColdPRT2Turning on mimics shows that we will need to troubleshoot the FATES-MIMICS coupling:
FAIL ERS_D_Ld30.1x1_brazil.I2000Clm60FatesCrujraRs.derecho_intel.clm-FatesColdPRT2--clm-mimicsFatesColdFates and fireemis cannot both be true, so...
FAIL ERS_D_Ld30.1x1_brazil.I2000Clm60FatesCrujraRs.derecho_intel.clm-FatesColdPRT2--clm-mimicsFatesCold--clm-nofireemisDUMPS CORE and states "floating overflow" in line 1180 SoilBiogeochemDecompCascadeMIMICSMod.F90So I tried our preexisting FATES-MIMICS test with nofireemis appended
FAIL ERP_P256x2_Ld30.f45_f45_mg37.I2000Clm60FatesRs.derecho_intel.clm-mimicsFatesCold--clm-nofireemisCH4 Conservation Error in CH4Mod during diffusion, nstep, c, errch4 (mol /m^2.timestep) 1 2 NaNSame test in debug mode
ERP_D_P256x2_Ld30.f45_f45_mg37.I2000Clm60FatesRs.derecho_intel.clm-mimicsFatesCold--clm-nofireemistraceback
@rgknox suggests switching from intel to gnu for better uninitialized variable catching.