problems with cclm4.8 runs cfl criterion and NaNs – in #9: CCLM

in #9: CCLM

Dear colleagues,

I´m facing a problem with NaNs in all fields after the first time step together with a violation of CFL -criterion. I am aware, that this has already been the topic here, but my model setup is different.
I use the clm4.8_clm18 Version together with int2lm1.1_clm14 on the Cray-40 of DWD and MIROC5 data as input for 2.8km run. I attached some Output and Setup files in a tar-archive. The Output of int2lm seem to be ok, as well as the data in YUCHKDAT .
I already reduced the time step from 25 to 20 s, but that did not help. Maybe there is a problem already in the compilation?
Does anyone has an idea?

Best regards,

Michael

  @michaelhaller in #080bbea

Dear colleagues,

I´m facing a problem with NaNs in all fields after the first time step together with a violation of CFL -criterion. I am aware, that this has already been the topic here, but my model setup is different.
I use the clm4.8_clm18 Version together with int2lm1.1_clm14 on the Cray-40 of DWD and MIROC5 data as input for 2.8km run. I attached some Output and Setup files in a tar-archive. The Output of int2lm seem to be ok, as well as the data in YUCHKDAT .
I already reduced the time step from 25 to 20 s, but that did not help. Maybe there is a problem already in the compilation?
Does anyone has an idea?

Best regards,

Michael

problems with cclm4.8 runs cfl criterion and NaNs

Dear colleagues,

I´m facing a problem with NaNs in all fields after the first time step together with a violation of CFL -criterion. I am aware, that this has already been the topic here, but my model setup is different.
I use the clm4.8_clm18 Version together with int2lm1.1_clm14 on the Cray-40 of DWD and MIROC5 data as input for 2.8km run. I attached some Output and Setup files in a tar-archive. The Output of int2lm seem to be ok, as well as the data in YUCHKDAT .
I already reduced the time step from 25 to 20 s, but that did not help. Maybe there is a problem already in the compilation?
Does anyone has an idea?

Best regards,

Michael

View in channel

Hi Michael,

have a look at your P0-profile ( YUSPECIF ). It is nonsens.
About 500 hPa in about 900 m heihgt, and then constant P0 above 9800 m!!
Thus, the problem must already be in the INT2LM setup

The file “ OUTPUT ” in your tar-file: generally a file with this name comes from INT2LM (compared to CCLM it is the “ YUSPEFIC ” pendant).
But the file in your tar-file is certainly not from INT2LM.

With respect to MIROC forcing: ask Christian Steger; he applied MIROC in thge REKLIES project.
Perhaps, he can give you some advices.
What is the resolution of MIROC ? Do you really want to perform a direct downscaling form the GCM scale to the 2.8 km scale?

Hans-Jürgen

  @hans-jürgenpanitz in #49377d5

Hi Michael,

have a look at your P0-profile ( YUSPECIF ). It is nonsens.
About 500 hPa in about 900 m heihgt, and then constant P0 above 9800 m!!
Thus, the problem must already be in the INT2LM setup

The file “ OUTPUT ” in your tar-file: generally a file with this name comes from INT2LM (compared to CCLM it is the “ YUSPEFIC ” pendant).
But the file in your tar-file is certainly not from INT2LM.

With respect to MIROC forcing: ask Christian Steger; he applied MIROC in thge REKLIES project.
Perhaps, he can give you some advices.
What is the resolution of MIROC ? Do you really want to perform a direct downscaling form the GCM scale to the 2.8 km scale?

Hans-Jürgen

Hi Michael,

have a look at your P0-profile ( YUSPECIF ). It is nonsens.
About 500 hPa in about 900 m heihgt, and then constant P0 above 9800 m!!
Thus, the problem must already be in the INT2LM setup

The file “ OUTPUT ” in your tar-file: generally a file with this name comes from INT2LM (compared to CCLM it is the “ YUSPEFIC ” pendant).
But the file in your tar-file is certainly not from INT2LM.

With respect to MIROC forcing: ask Christian Steger; he applied MIROC in thge REKLIES project.
Perhaps, he can give you some advices.
What is the resolution of MIROC ? Do you really want to perform a direct downscaling form the GCM scale to the 2.8 km scale?

Hans-Jürgen