Opened 2 years ago

Closed 22 months ago

#702 closed enhancement (fixed)

Missing output on monitoring

Reported by: luyssaert Owned by: somebody
Priority: major Milestone: ORCHIDEE 4.1
Component: Tools Version: trunc
Keywords: Cc:

Description (last modified by luyssaert)

When using the monitoring tool with the latest trunk, several of the default output variables have a value of zero suggesting that those diagnostic variables are not correctly passed/written. Check the units and make sure all default output variables are present in the monitoring tool (most likely the problem is in the ORCHIDEE code, not in the monitoring tool).

  • SBG_c3PftFrac_lands + SBG_c4PftFrac_lands does not adds up to 100%. Could be correct but check whether this is on purpose.
  • What is the meaning of SBG_cMassVariation_lands? What can we learn from this variable, why is it in the monitoring?
  • Values are suspicious for SBG_cProduct_lands, SBG_fLuc_lands, and SBG_fwoodharvest_lands. Wrong units or something else going wrong?
  • Values are zero for SRF_delta_water_stock, SRF_snownobio_lands, SRF_vegetg_lands, and SRF_water_budget_closure
  • Strange spike in the 1970 for SBG_nbp_lands and SBG_nep_lands. Changes in nbp and nep are implausible.
  • Following r6826, twbr was closed but SRF_water_budget_closure is not

Change History (5)

comment:1 Changed 2 years ago by luyssaert

  • Summary changed from Missing output on intermonitoring to Missing output on monitoring

comment:2 Changed 2 years ago by luyssaert

  • Description modified (diff)

comment:3 Changed 2 years ago by luyssaert

  • SBG_c3PftFrac_lands + SBG_c4PftFrac_lands does not adds up to 100%.

The reference is the continental fraction (contfrac) and thus includes nofrac_bio and PFT1. Given this reference it is to be expected that the sum of SBG_c3PftFrac_lands and SBG_c4PftFrac_lands does not add up to 1. This code is identical to Tag 2.1. Nothing was changed.

  • What is the meaning of SBG_cMassVariation_lands?

The name of the variable is well chosen so it shows the variation in biomass. The expectation is that the variation is rather small at the global scale. A sudden increase in the variation is suspicious. The same information could probably be retrieved from simply analyzing the total biomass. This kind of information (i.e., sudden increase in biomass) is useful to have in the monitoring but the unique selling argument of SBG_cMassVariation_lands remains elusive.

  • Values are suspicious for SBG_cProduct_lands, SBG_fLuc_lands, and SBG_fwoodharvest_lands. Wrong units or something else going wrong?

The code contained several problems which have been fixed in r6822 and r6829. Corrections coded by Chao Yue.

  • Values are zero for SRF_delta_water_stock, SRF_snownobio_lands, SRF_vegetg_lands, and SRF_water_budget_closure

see ticket #712. Corrections coded by Agnes Ducharne, Fabienne Maignan and Sebastiaan Luyssaert

  • Strange spike in the 1970 for SBG_nbp_lands and SBG_nep_lands during years with an above average SRF_precip_lands. The change in precipitation seems plausible, the changes in nbp and nep are implausible.

The problem could be traced back to the recalculation of fvpd. This still needs to be fixed. This ticket.

  • Following r6826, twbr was closed but SRF_water_budget_closure is not

see ticket #712 (reopened).

Last edited 2 years ago by luyssaert (previous) (diff)

comment:4 Changed 2 years ago by luyssaert

  • Description modified (diff)

comment:5 Changed 22 months ago by luyssaert

  • Resolution set to fixed
  • Status changed from new to closed

In r6904 all variables on the libIGCM monitoring have reasonable values.

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.