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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Update for gtg wafs #1142

Open
wants to merge 12 commits into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Update for gtg wafs #1142

wants to merge 12 commits into from
+508 −22

Conversation

YaliMao-NOAA
Copy link
Contributor

  1. Received a new GTG code delivery. Had regression tests on GFS, GEFS and HRRR and they all went through well.
  2. Picked up changes of adding extra vertical levels to WAFS in the WAFS separation implementation

@WenMeng-NOAA WenMeng-NOAA linked an issue Feb 21, 2025 that may be closed by this pull request
Update for GTG and WAFS #1143
Open
@WenMeng-NOAA WenMeng-NOAA added the Ready for Review This PR is ready for code review. label Mar 3, 2025
@WenMeng-NOAA
Copy link
Collaborator

@YaliMao-NOAA Please update UPP/parm/makefile to reflect relocation of all wafs-related control files.

@WenMeng-NOAA
Copy link
Collaborator

@YaliMao-NOAA Can you provide the test cases for gefs, hrrr? Would this version of gtg be working for rrfs v1?

WenMeng-NOAA
WenMeng-NOAA reviewed Mar 5, 2025
View reviewed changes
parm/hrrr_postcntrl_gtg.xml Outdated
@@ -0,0 +1,1222 @@
<?xml version="1.0"?>
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@YaliMao-NOAA Since this control file could be used for the upcoming DAFS implementation, I suggest to remove duplicated ops. HRRR fields and only keep gtg and new aviation fields.

@WenMeng-NOAA
Copy link
Collaborator

@YaliMao-NOAA Please validate my UPP standalone test for wafs at /u/wen.meng/ptmp/post_gfs_wafs_2019083000 on cactus.

@YaliMao-NOAA
Copy link
Contributor Author

@YaliMao-NOAA Please validate my UPP standalone test for wafs at /u/wen.meng/ptmp/post_gfs_wafs_2019083000 on cactus.

Yes, it looks good to me. It's for a GFSv16 case, not GFSv17, right?

@WenMeng-NOAA
Copy link
Collaborator

@YaliMao-NOAA Please validate my UPP standalone test for wafs at /u/wen.meng/ptmp/post_gfs_wafs_2019083000 on cactus.

Yes, it looks good to me. It's for a GFSv16 case, not GFSv17, right?

@YaliMao-NOAA I used the GFS v17 model output in C768.

@WenMeng-NOAA
Copy link
Collaborator

@YaliMao-NOAA Did you test for hrrr_dafs? If so, please share with me the test case.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@WenMeng-NOAA WenMeng-NOAA WenMeng-NOAA left review comments

@BenjaminBlake-NOAA BenjaminBlake-NOAA Awaiting requested review from BenjaminBlake-NOAA

At least 1 approving review is required to merge this pull request.

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Ready for Review This PR is ready for code review. WAFS
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Update for GTG and WAFS
2 participants
@YaliMao-NOAA @WenMeng-NOAA