CAM-SIMA diagnostics for all gravity wave parameterizations #338

jimmielin · 2025-12-05T17:56:29Z

Originator(s): @jimmielin

Description (include issue title and the keyword ['closes', 'fixes', 'resolves'] and issue number):

Add diagnostics (parity with CAM) for gravity wave parameterizations in CAM-SIMA.

List all namelist files that were added or changed: N/A

List all files eliminated and why: N/A

List all files added and what they do:

A       schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_convection_deep_diagnostics.F90
A       schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_convection_deep_diagnostics.meta
A       schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_frontogenesis_diagnostics.F90
A       schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_frontogenesis_diagnostics.meta
A       schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_moving_mountain_diagnostics.F90
A       schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_moving_mountain_diagnostics.meta
A       schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_orographic_diagnostics.F90
A       schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_orographic_diagnostics.meta
A       schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_ridge_beta_diagnostics.F90
A       schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_ridge_beta_diagnostics.meta
  - various diagnostic schemes for various gravity wave drag parameterizations.

List all existing files that have been modified, and describe the changes:
(Helpful git command: git diff --name-status development...<your_branch_name>)

M       schemes/gravity_wave_drag/gravity_wave_drag_convection.meta
M       schemes/gravity_wave_drag/gravity_wave_drag_frontogenesis.F90
M       schemes/gravity_wave_drag/gravity_wave_drag_frontogenesis.meta
M       schemes/gravity_wave_drag/gravity_wave_drag_moving_mountain.meta
M       schemes/gravity_wave_drag/gravity_wave_drag_orographic.F90
M       schemes/gravity_wave_drag/gravity_wave_drag_orographic.meta
  - fix issues with temperature tendencies/dry air enthalpy tendency units throughout.
  - fix incorrectly annotated hdepth (m not km) units

M       schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_common_diagnostics.F90
M       schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_common_diagnostics.meta
  - populate the remaining common gravity wave drag diagnostics (TTGW,UTGW_TOTAL,VTGW_TOTAL,QTGW,CLDLIQTGW,CLDICETGW)

M       suites/suite_cam4.xml
M       suites/suite_cam7.xml
M       test/test_suites/suite_gw_cam4.xml
M       test/test_suites/suite_gw_cam7_se.xml
  - call diagnostic schemes in SDFs

List all automated tests that failed, as well as an explanation for why they weren't fixed:
New baselines will be created in the eventual CAM-SIMA PR

Is this an answer-changing PR? If so, is it a new physics package, algorithm change, tuning change, etc?
New diagnostic fields
Model "state" is b4b

If yes to the above question, describe how this code was validated with the new/modified features:

nusbaume

Thanks for bringing in these diagnostics @jimmielin! I did have some some questions/concerns, mostly related to standard names and/or units, but of course if any of them are too much of a burden at this stage then we can likely just make an issue for it and deal with them later. Thanks again!

schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_common_diagnostics.F90

nusbaume · 2026-01-20T03:49:42Z

schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_convection_deep_diagnostics.F90

@@ -0,0 +1,103 @@
+! Diagnostics for gravity wave drag from deep convection (Beres scheme)
+module gravity_wave_drag_convection_deep_diagnostics
+  use ccpp_kinds, only: kind_phys


Can we move this use statement down to the run phase subroutine in order to better match the CAM-SIMA coding standards?

Thanks, edited throughout

nusbaume · 2026-01-20T04:11:50Z

schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_convection_deep_diagnostics.F90

+    call history_add_field('BTAUNET', 'net_eastward_reynolds_stress_due_to_deep_convective_gravity_wave_drag', 'ilev', 'avg', 'Pa')
+
+    call history_add_field('NETDT', 'tendency_of_air_temperature_due_to_deep_convection', 'lev', 'avg', 'K s-1')
+    call history_add_field('HDEPTH', 'convective_heating_depth_due_to_deep_convective_gravity_wave_drag', horiz_only, 'avg', 'km')


Just double-checking if this is the heating depth "due" to gravity wave drag, or if it is just the convective heating depth, that is then used by the gravity wave drag scheme? If it is the latter then I think the long name here should just be convective_heating_depth, and we should maybe add a note/issue that the official standard name should be updated as well.

Good point, it's the convective heating depth (that gets diagnosed inside the deep convective gravity waves code so it's an output from there).

After looking at the hdepth calculations between here and the convective schemes I decided to change due_to to for since they differ slightly, throughout the gw code.

There's a variant for shallow convection (that scheme is unused), would it be OK with you to change it to {deep,shallow}_convective_heating_depth? I think I can make all changes entirely within this atmos_phys PR

nusbaume · 2026-01-20T04:18:53Z

schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_convection_deep_diagnostics.meta

+  standard_name = tendency_of_air_temperature_due_to_diffusion_due_to_deep_convective_gravity_wave_drag
+  units = J kg-1 s-1


This standard name cannot be correct if the units are J kg-1 s-1. Is this the tendency of dry_air_enthalpy_at_constant_pressure instead of temperature?

Please note that I am happy to just make an issue for this change so that we can remember to deal with it later, instead of fixing it immediately in this PR.

Yes you are correct, it should be tendency_of_ dry_air_enthalpy_at_constant_pressure_due_to_diffusion_due_to_deep_convective_gravity_wave_drag. It gets divided by cpair only when outputting diagnostics so the unit for that is J kg-1 s-1 until its output then it's K s-1 (the output diagnostic "standard name" is kept at tendency_of_air_temperature_due_to_diffusion_due_to_deep_convective_gravity_wave_drag).

I made the change throughout. Thanks!

nusbaume · 2026-01-20T04:20:05Z

schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_convection_deep_diagnostics.meta

+  standard_name = tendency_of_air_temperature_due_to_kinetic_energy_dissipation_due_to_deep_convective_gravity_wave_drag
+  units = J kg-1 s-1


I have the same standard name concern here (either the units are wrong, or the standard name is wrong and it should be dry_air_enthalpy_at_constant_pressure instead).

Thanks, made the same change as above

nusbaume · 2026-01-21T03:38:35Z

schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_frontogenesis_diagnostics.F90

@@ -0,0 +1,126 @@
+! Diagnostics for gravity wave drag from frontogenesis.
+module gravity_wave_drag_frontogenesis_diagnostics
+  use ccpp_kinds, only: kind_phys


Move this use statement down to the *_run subroutine? This same request holds for the other diagnostics source code files in this PR as well.

Thanks, edited throughout

nusbaume · 2026-01-21T03:54:34Z

schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_frontogenesis_diagnostics.meta

+  standard_name = tendency_of_air_temperature_due_to_diffusion_due_to_frontogenesis_gravity_wave_drag
+  units = J kg-1 s-1


Another standard name that might not be correct according to the units? Please note that this same question holds for all of the tendency_of_air_temperature_due_to_XYZ variables with units of J kg-1 s-1 in this PR.

Thanks, edited the .meta file standard names for dttdf and dttke throughout to reflect that it's tendency of dry air enthalpy at constant pressure (J kg-1 s-1) coming out of the scheme; the output is in K s-1 which is the tendency of air temperature.

nusbaume · 2026-01-21T04:13:48Z

schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_moving_mountain_diagnostics.F90

+    call history_add_field('UTGW_MOVMTN', 'tendency_of_eastward_wind_due_to_moving_mountain_gravity_wave_drag', 'lev', 'inst', 'm s-2')
+    call history_add_field('VTGW_MOVMTN', 'tendency_of_northward_wind_due_to_moving_mountain_gravity_wave_drag', 'lev', 'inst', 'm s-2')
+
+    call history_add_field('HDEPTH_MOVMTN', 'convective_heating_depth_due_to_moving_mountain_gravity_wave_drag', horiz_only, 'inst', 'km')


Just double-checking if this heating depth is "due" to gravity wave drag, or just an input that is used by the gravity wave scheme? If it is just used by the scheme then I might change the due_to in the long/standard name to for, or something like that.

Thanks for the question. After looking at the hdepth calculations between here and the convective schemes I decided to change due_to to for since they differ slightly, throughout the gw code.

nusbaume · 2026-01-21T04:19:22Z

schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_moving_mountain_diagnostics.F90

+    call history_add_field('UCELL_MOVMTN', 'eastward_wind_at_steering_level_due_to_moving_mountain_gravity_wave_drag', horiz_only, 'inst', 'm s-1')
+    call history_add_field('VCELL_MOVMTN', 'northward_wind_at_steering_level_due_to_moving_mountain_gravity_wave_drag', horiz_only, 'inst', 'm s-1')
+    call history_add_field('CS_MOVMTN', 'gravity_wave_phase_speed_in_source_direction_due_to_moving_mountain_gravity_wave_drag', horiz_only, 'inst', 'm s-1')
+    call history_add_field('XPWP_SRC_MOVMTN', 'momentum_flux_source_due_to_moving_mountain_gravity_wave_drag', horiz_only, 'inst', 'm2 s-2')


Just double-checking if this momentum flux is actually due_to, or caused by the gravity wave drag, or if it is for gravity waves, i.e. a source of gravity wave drag?

I agree it should be for (it's constructed from a layer-averaged xpwp_clubb = sqrt(upwp_clubb**2 + vpwp_clubb**2) field.

I changed throughout to momentum_flux_source_for_moving_mountain_gravity_wave_drag

nusbaume · 2026-01-21T04:27:19Z

schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_moving_mountain_diagnostics.meta

+  intent = in
+[ hdepth ]
+  standard_name = convective_heating_depth_due_to_moving_mountain_gravity_wave_drag
+  units = km


Should the units actually be meters (m) here? If not then I don't think we want the conversion in the source code.

Thanks, should be m in the meta files, edited!

Co-authored-by: Jesse Nusbaumer <nusbaume@ucar.edu>

jimmielin · 2026-01-22T15:03:06Z

Thanks @nusbaume for the review! I edited some standard names throughout the GW parameterizations in particular to address concerns about the use of tendency_of_air_temperature_ when it is dry air enthalpy tendency - my apologies that the scope of the PR increased a little but hopefully it should be a coherent set of changes to review.

gw_drag_diags push for PR

25b60e6

jimmielin self-assigned this Dec 5, 2025

jimmielin added enhancement New feature or request CAM4 CAM-SIMA tuning labels Dec 5, 2025

nusbaume requested review from nusbaume and removed request for nusbaume December 17, 2025 18:01

jimmielin requested a review from nusbaume January 5, 2026 17:09

nusbaume requested changes Jan 22, 2026

View reviewed changes

jimmielin and others added 3 commits January 22, 2026 09:17

Update schemes/sima_diagnostics/gravity_wave_drag_common_diagnostics.F90

bdc226d

Co-authored-by: Jesse Nusbaumer <nusbaume@ucar.edu>

Address reviewer comments.

7cd41c2

Merge branch 'development' into hplin/gw_drag_diags

1b0e7fb

jimmielin requested a review from nusbaume January 22, 2026 15:00

		standard_name = tendency_of_air_temperature_due_to_diffusion_due_to_deep_convective_gravity_wave_drag
		units = J kg-1 s-1

CAM-SIMA diagnostics for all gravity wave parameterizations #338

Are you sure you want to change the base?

CAM-SIMA diagnostics for all gravity wave parameterizations #338

Uh oh!

Conversation

jimmielin commented Dec 5, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

nusbaume left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jimmielin Jan 22, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jimmielin commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

jimmielin commented Dec 5, 2025 •

edited

Loading

jimmielin Jan 22, 2026 •

edited

Loading