Complete the FATES-CLM nitrogen coupling #3409
Conversation
PASS ERS_D_Ld30.1x1_brazil.I2000Clm60FatesCrujraRs.derecho_intel.clm-FatesColdPRT2 FAIL ERS_D_Ld30.1x1_brazil.I2000Clm60FatesCrujraRs.derecho_intel.clm-FatesColdPRT2--clm-mimicsFatesCold--clm-nofireemis The latter needs "nofireemis" to work with Fates, but it then dumps core in line 1180 SoilBiogeochemDecompCascadeMIMICSMod.F90
...calculating these variables: nf_soil%decomp_npools_sourcesink_col nf_soil%fates_litter_flux
slevis-lmwg
added
enhancement
|
With the latest commit, I repeated the two earlier tests and added another to check whether answers have changed from the baseline: The latter fails in case2, after reading the restart file, with a N balance error. UPDATE
|
| ! to scale up to column | ||
| plant_ndemand(c) = 0._r8 | ||
|
|
||
| ! We fill the vertically resolved array to simplify some jointly used code |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Put the if fates_parteh_mode == 2 here and make the else set plant_ndemand(_vr) = 0 to hopefully resolve the N balance error
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Likely still need to resolve N bal. error when parteh == 2
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The 3rd test still fails with a N-bal error, and I'm running the 4th test to see what happens:
- I still see indications of badly initialized variables...
- Try uncommenting the harvest lines mentioned in an earlier post
- Consider inconsistent if-statements
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Rethinking my tests:
- The 1x1 tests have not helped (I have now removed them)
- The ERP...PRT2 test fails with
FAILED to get /glade/derecho/scratch/slevis/ERP_Ld9.f45_f45_mg37.I2000Clm50FatesRs.derecho_intel.clm-FatesColdPRT2.20250814_175600_rzyi7o/case2/ERP_Ld9.f45_f45_mg37.I2000Clm50FatesRs.derecho_intel.clm-FatesColdPRT2.20250814_175600_rzyi7o/fates_params_prt2_prescribed_np.nc
so I will go back and try the preexisting PRT2 test and the closest non-PRT2:
./create_test ERS_D_Ld30.f45_f45_mg37.I2000Clm50FatesCruRsGs.derecho_intel.clm-FatesColdPRT2 -c /glade/campaign/cgd/tss/ctsm_baselines/fates-sci.1.84.0_api.40.0.0-ctsm5.3.066
./create_test ERS_D_Ld30.f45_f45_mg37.I2000Clm50FatesCruRsGs.derecho_intel.clm-FatesColdLUH2 -c /glade/campaign/cgd/tss/ctsm_baselines/fates-sci.1.84.0_api.40.0.0-ctsm5.3.066
- before this PR's changes: caseids 20250815_113417_sx4t8g and 20250815_113743_mr25bk
- with 01671b9: caseids 20250815_114817_ilbscj and 20250815_114840_il903r
- FAIL with the latest commit:
- testid 20250815_120848_v9vgmh gives this Traceback <-- TROUBLESHOOTING THIS CASE
error (65): floating invalid
Image PC Routine Line Source
libpthread-2.31.s 0000149243D098C0 Unknown Unknown Unknown
cesm.exe 0000000002F2D454 soilbiogeochemcom 608 SoilBiogeochemCompetitionMod.F90
cesm.exe 0000000003FCD516 cndrivermod_mp_cn 474 CNDriverMod.F90
cesm.exe 0000000001A99BF1 cnvegetationfacad 1030 CNVegetationFacade.F90
cesm.exe 0000000000A8B2C7 clm_driver_mp_clm 1058 clm_driver.F90
UPDATE I had placed the new code in the if (.not. use_nitrif_denitrif) opposite to what I should have done. I have now updated the code (while still keeping the new code in the ".not." section). Testing PASSed 20250825_174700_7w8gx9
- testid 20250815_120902_1msot7 gives the same Traceback, but also before the Traceback this error
Nan values for pftareafrac. dumping site info.
----------------------------------------
Site Coordinates
----------------------------------------
latitude = -74.0000000000000
longitude = 255.000000000000
Same test PASSed with the above update 20250826_101645_52b4zd
- Tests now work, though should they DIFF from the baseline?
|
Enabled fixation and ran the same tests: PRT2 still b4b with the baseline. PASS The same tests with the code change for harvest (same results relative to the baseline). |
|
Worked on the next checkbox in the issue (#3378), submitted the same tests, and after some troubleshooting: |
These variables originate in fates, so this renaming requires the same renaming in fates; I will open the corresponding PR very soon
Notes:
|
|
Updated the fates paramfile (see next commit) and submitted these two again The first (LUH2) same as before (DIFF from baseline) since nothing changed for it.
|
|
Submitted the same 2 tests, now with the error check suggested in NGEET/fates#1454 (see corresponding commit NGEET/fates@97839f1 in NGEET/fates#1472) |
1 participant
Description of changes
For now see the issue #3378
Specific notes
Contributors other than yourself, if any:
@rgknox @adrifoster @wwieder
CTSM Issues Fixed (include github issue #):
#3378
Are answers expected to change (and if so in what way)?
Any User Interface Changes (namelist or namelist defaults changes)?
Does this create a need to change or add documentation? Did you do so?
Testing performed
...with the first two commits in this PR:
Later comments point out that these two tests were inadequate at catching problems, and that I switched to two other tests.