Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

Version 1 Next »

Date

Time

  • PST:
  • EST: 3:40-5:40pm

Call Info

  • web session: 
  • call number:

Attendees

  • lots of people

Goals

What Actually Happened

  • Chris Golaz read through the tasks listed under goals.
    • Robert Jacob expressed surprise that he was in charge of water+energy budgets (reflecting communication breakdown)
    • Peter Thornton noted that land tuning task was related to leaf albedo rather than leaf area index
  • Peter Thornton: does each component have its own conservation checking?
    • Phil Rasch (pnl.gov): atmos has checks
      • Peter Caldwell: but they are broken and we know from RESTOM-RESSURF and other checks that energy and water in atmos don't conserve.
    • Doug Jacobsen (Unlicensed): ocean has conservations checks. Problem seems to be in coupling between components - he has a python script available to look at coupler history files. He figured out part of the reason why ocean lost 3m was river runoff was screwed up. Still have ~1m of lost ocean over 40 yrs though. Notes that G cases conserve... only B cases don't.
    • Gautam Bisht notes that CLM4.5 doesn't crash when energy conservation errors are found (error call is commented out). It should print warning messages though.
  • Phil Rasch (pnl.gov) points out that he's still unclear whether snowfall onto land or ocean accounts for the latent heat of fusion properly
    • Doug Jacobsen (Unlicensed) assures us that ocean is carrying latent heat of fusion for snow and ice (i.e. snow melts and takes up heat when hits ocean)

Action items

  •  
  • No labels