Skip to content

GWDO2026: Revisions in gravity wave drag scheme (bl_gwdo.F90)#1409

Open
Songyou184 wants to merge 12 commits into
MPAS-Dev:developfrom
Songyou184:GWDO2026
Open

GWDO2026: Revisions in gravity wave drag scheme (bl_gwdo.F90)#1409
Songyou184 wants to merge 12 commits into
MPAS-Dev:developfrom
Songyou184:GWDO2026

Conversation

@Songyou184
Copy link
Copy Markdown

This PR is a part of Revised GWDO + new PBL option for SHIN-HONG scheme #1389

Testing and relations to other Pull Requests should be added as subsequent comments.

See the below examples for more information.
MPAS-Dev/MPAS#930
MPAS-Dev/MPAS#931

 	modified:   core_atmosphere/Registry.xml
 	modified:   core_atmosphere/physics/mpas_atmphys_driver_gwdo.F
 	modified:   core_atmosphere/physics/mpas_atmphys_driver_sfclayer.F
 	modified:   core_atmosphere/physics/mpas_atmphys_vars.F
 	modified:   core_atmosphere/physics/physics_wrf/module_bl_gwdo.F
 	modified:   core_atmosphere/physics/physics_wrf/module_sf_sfclayrev.F
	deleted:    core_atmosphere/physics/physics_wrf/module_sf_sfclayrev.F
 	new file:   mpas_atmphys_driver_sfclayer.F
 	new file:   physics_wrf/module_sf_sfclayrev.F
 	modified:   src/core_atmosphere/physics/mpas_atmphys_driver.F
@jihyeonjang jihyeonjang self-requested a review May 22, 2026 03:38
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@jihyeonjang jihyeonjang left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As noted on Externals.cfg, I think it would be better to use the NCAR/MMM-physics repository, if possible.

Would 20260319-WRFv4.8.0 be the right tag for this PR? Or should we wait for the upcoming tag instead? If the new tag is preferred, when is it expected to be available?

Also, can the upcoming tag, or 20260319-WRFv4.8.0, be used directly with @Songyou184's modified MPAS code in this PR and his other PRs (#1410, #1411)?

I am adding @weiwangncar @dudhia for more input. Thank you!

protocol = git
repo_url = https://github.com/NCAR/MMM-physics.git
tag = 20250616-MPASv8.3
repo_url = https://github.com/songyou184/MMM-physics.git
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is a private repository rather than the public MMM-physics repository. If possible, I think the branch/tag specified in Externals.cfg should be from https://github.com/NCAR/MMM-physics.git.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@jihyeonjang Since bl_gwdo.F90 in MMM-physics has recently updated, it is now ok to point to that repository. But it may need to update the hash to access the newest code.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@jihyeonjang jihyeonjang Jun 4, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@weiwangncar Which MMM-physics tag (or branch) should be used with the MPAS mods for KIM-GWDO and SFCLAY-TOFD? 20260319-WRFv4.8.0?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@islas Should we create a new tag for the WRF release. The last one is out of date compared to the current release branch.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@jihyeonjang Currently the top of the MMM-physics repository is the one, and we will update the tag for WRF release (tag 20260319-WRFv4.8.0 is out-of-date). But perhaps you should create a tag for MPAS release as well.

sina_p !sine of map rotation [-]

real(kind=RKIND),dimension(:,:),allocatable:: &
ter_p, &!orographic height [m]
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ter_p can be deleted? It does not appear to be used anywhere.

<nml_option name="config_gwdo_nonhyd" type="logical" default_value="true" in_defaults="true"
units="-"
description="Logical index for nonhydrostatic effect in kim_gwdo scheme"
possible_values="true. or .false."/>
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For possible_values, "." is needed before true, so it should be:
possible_values=".true. or .false."

units="-"
description="Effective grid length ratio in kim_gwdo scheme"
possible_values="Non-negative real values"/>
<nml_option name="config_gwdo_nonhyd" type="logical" default_value="true" in_defaults="true"
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@jihyeonjang jihyeonjang May 22, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is it okay to set in_defaults="false" so that config_gwdo_nonhyd is set to true automatically and does not need to be specified by users in namelist.atmosphere, similar to the other physics options?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@Songyou184: In PR #1358, config_gwdo_nonhyd is false by default , but here it is set to true by default. Please confirm its default value.

@jihyeonjang
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

jihyeonjang commented Jun 3, 2026

Related information for this PR was found in the closed PR #1358 as follows:

Update of the YSU_GWD scheme (Choi and Hong 2015, JGR), and renamed it as KIM_GWD scheme. Revisions include sub-grid orographic statistics and configuration of the drag stress and blocking stress, as described in Hong et al. (2025, WAF).

  1. The name of the scheme is "bl_kim_gwdo" instead of "bl_ysu_gwdo".
  2. in "namelist.atmosphere"
&physics
   config_gwdo_nonhyd = true
/

"config_gwdo_nonhyd=true" should result in an overall decrease of GWD stress by less than 10 % over high mountains. A significant reduction appears over the Antarctic.

@Songyou184
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Songyou184 commented Jun 3, 2026 via email

@weiwangncar
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@Songyou184 In WRF, kim_tofd is currently set to false. It may be good to do the same in MPAS since it is a newer option, and it may double count surface drag if someone is using the GSL gwdo (correct?).

@Songyou184
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Songyou184 commented Jun 3, 2026 via email

@jihyeonjang
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

jihyeonjang commented Jun 4, 2026

@Songyou184 I would like to suggest the following modifications:

  • config_kim_tofd is not introduced in this PR, but in #1410. Could you briefly explain how config_kim_gwdo and config_kim_tofd are related? My understanding is that they are not dependent of each other, since you mentioned that TOFD can be used with GSL GWD.

  • Could you make the modifications I suggested previously and merge the commit to this PR branch?

  • Following the discussion above, could you also update Registry.xml in #1410 as follows? I left a review comment there.
    <nml_option name="config_kim_tofd" type="logical" default_value="false" in_defaults="false"

@Songyou184
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Songyou184 commented Jun 4, 2026 via email

@Songyou184
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Songyou184 commented Jun 4, 2026 via email

@Songyou184
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Songyou184 commented Jun 4, 2026 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants