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

add new JRA 1.5 streams for datm and drof #304

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Oct 30, 2024

Conversation

alperaltuntas
Copy link
Member

Description of changes

Add new JRA 1.5 streams for datm and drof.

Are changes expected to change answers (bfb, different to roundoff, more substantial): existing datm and drof modes remain b4b.

Any User Interface Changes (namelist or namelist defaults changes): none

Testing performed (e.g. aux_cdeps, CESM prealpha, etc): pr_mom, G runs with new datm and drof modes

Hashes used for testing: 3.0alpha3a

Copy link
Contributor

@jedwards4b jedwards4b left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

Comment on lines +38 to +43
CORE_IAF_JRA = JRA55 intra-annual year forcing (for forcing MOM6 and CICE)
CORE_IAF_JRA_1p4_2018 = JRA55 intra-annual year forcing, v1.4, through 2018 (for forcing MOM6 and CICE)
CORE_IAF_JRA_1p5_2023 = JRA55 intra-annual year forcing, v1.5, through 2023 (for forcing MOM6 and CICE)
CORE_RYF8485_JRA = JRA55 repeat year forcing, v1.3, 1984-1985 (for forcing MOM6 and CICE)
CORE_RYF9091_JRA = JRA55 repeat year forcing, v1.3, 1990-1991 (for forcing MOM6 and CICE)
CORE_RYF0304_JRA = JRA55 repeat year forcing, v1.3, 2003-2004 (for forcing MOM6 and CICE)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is there a reason to have the CORE_ prefix here? It's different than the CORE2_ prefix used for CORE forcing, but it's similar enough to feel like maybe it's not necessary?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I can't remember the exact reason but it was a desired prefix at the time when we first introduced JRA forcing (i.e., it was intentional).

@alperaltuntas
Copy link
Member Author

alperaltuntas commented Oct 25, 2024

@jedwards4b Any chance we can get this in alpha04b?

@jedwards4b
Copy link
Contributor

No problem, just add it to the plans page.

@alperaltuntas alperaltuntas self-assigned this Oct 25, 2024
…tafiles entries are present for a stream_entry
@alperaltuntas
Copy link
Member Author

@jedwards4b I don't have permissions to merge. Could you merge this PR?

@jedwards4b jedwards4b merged commit 83eb0d9 into ESCOMP:main Oct 30, 2024
1 check passed
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