Skip to content
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

Minor modification and bug fix in GFS cumulus convection schemes #885

Open
wants to merge 12 commits into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

rhaesung
Copy link

@rhaesung rhaesung commented Oct 31, 2024

Description

This PR mainly involves changes in ccpp-physics, and the code was provided by @JongilHan66.

  1. Modified prognostic updraft fraction (sigmab) calculation in 'progsigma_calc.f90' which is physically more sound:
    a) moisture convergence calculation: integrate from the convection source level rather than from the cloud base
    b) 2D advection of sigmab: sigmab advection averaged over the cloud layers rather than taking a maximum sigmab advection from k=2 to the model top
    c) To suppress unrealistically large reflectivity in the model first time step, minimum sigmab at the first time step is set to zero

  2. Fix in missing vertical transport of turbulent kinetic energy (TKE) when aerosol transport is turned on (samfdeepcnv.f & samfshalcnv.f)

  3. Introduce TKE at model layer interfaces (tkeh) for use in convection schemes (GFS_typedefs.F90, GFS_typedefs.meta, satmedmfvdifq.F, satmedmfvdifq.meta, samfdeepcnv.f, samfdeepcnv.meta, samfshalcnv.f, and samfshalcnv.meta)

  4. Vertical transports of hydrometeor variables are currently not allowed in the convection schemes. But vertical transports of number concentrations of only cloud water and ice are mistakenly allowed, which is fixed in this update (CCPP_typedefs.F90)

  5. All the modifications and bug fixes above had neutral impacts on the GFS forecasts

Dependencies

If testing this branch requires non-default branches in other repositories, list them.
Those branches should have matching names (ideally)

Do PRs in upstream repositories need to be merged first?
If so add the "waiting for other repos" label and list the upstream PRs

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.

3 participants