Skip to content

Interim Aerosol Collection Changes for FP#727

Open
acollow wants to merge 3 commits intoGEOS-FP-5_42from
feature/acollow/aerohistforFP
Open

Interim Aerosol Collection Changes for FP#727
acollow wants to merge 3 commits intoGEOS-FP-5_42from
feature/acollow/aerohistforFP

Conversation

@acollow
Copy link
Contributor

@acollow acollow commented May 9, 2025

This PR includes changes to the HISTORY templates for FPP and FP in regards to the aerosol collections.

  1. The aer_Nx collection has been reverted back to 3 hourly time averaged as opposed to 1 hourly instantaneous
  2. The adg_Nx collection has been reverted back to 3 hourly time averaged as opposed to 1 hourly time averaged
  3. Aerosol fields were added back into the instantaneous 1 hourly hyperwall collection

File spec changes are still present through the addition of new variables and a few variable name changes affiliated with GOCART-2G. Please keep me posted with the status of including this into FPP so that I can take a look at a sample output file to be sure everything looks good.

@acollow acollow requested a review from a team as a code owner May 9, 2025 13:31
@acollow acollow added the 0 diff trivial The changes in this pull request are trivially zero-diff (documentation, build failure, &c.) label May 9, 2025
@mathomp4
Copy link
Member

mathomp4 commented May 9, 2025

@acollow @rtodling Oooh boy. You are reversing a lot of things in AGCM.rc.tmpl. Is that all needed?

For example the @MODELATM in:

@MODELATMAIAU_IMPORT_RESTART_FILE

is needed to support the Data Atmosphere work of @mfmehari

If these are removed the data atmosphere setup is most likely fully broken. If you can't handle this at this time, those changes should go on a branch, but I'm not sure we can break develop and data atmosphere like that.

@sshakoor1 and myself could work with @gmao-jstassi if need be to help fix up fvsetup and GEOSdas.csm

@acollow
Copy link
Contributor Author

acollow commented May 9, 2025

I based this off of the tag being used to FPP, and should not be merged into develop. I need to follow up with @rtodling on which branch it actually should merged into since I wasn't sure what the appropriate branch was from a first glance.

@acollow acollow marked this pull request as draft May 9, 2025 14:40
@acollow acollow changed the base branch from develop to bugfix/rtodling/fvdycore_fix_siteam May 20, 2025 17:31
@acollow acollow marked this pull request as ready for review May 20, 2025 17:32
@mathomp4
Copy link
Member

@acollow It looks like the tavg3_2d_adg_Nx- collections are conservative but the tavg3_2d_adg_Nx+- ones are not.

Should they be consistent? (Note: I don't know what - vs +- means, so maybe + means not conservative?)

@acollow
Copy link
Contributor Author

acollow commented May 30, 2025

I don't know what +/- means either but my best guess is analysis vs forecast. I will check with Arlindo when he is back next week since I only manipulated the variables that are getting written and left everything else as is.

@rlucches
Copy link

The + notation indicates a file that is going to be written in "forecast" mode, i.e, beyond the 6-hour section of the IAU. There would be no reason to have one of these conservative and one of them not.

@rtodling rtodling changed the base branch from bugfix/rtodling/fvdycore_fix_siteam to GEOS-FP-5_42 January 9, 2026 17:27
mathomp4
mathomp4 previously approved these changes Jan 12, 2026
@mathomp4
Copy link
Member

As this is an ADAS branch, I've moved the CODEOWNERS to be @GEOS-ESM/adas-gatekeepers since @rtodling should be able to approve and merge FP things

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

Labels

0 diff trivial The changes in this pull request are trivially zero-diff (documentation, build failure, &c.)

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants