ROMS 3.0 DIAGNOSTICS_UV option

Report or discuss software problems and other woes

Moderators: arango, robertson

Post Reply
Message
Author
elbio
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2003 9:16 pm
Location: U National S, Argentina

ROMS 3.0 DIAGNOSTICS_UV option

#1 Unread post by elbio »

Hi everybody,

I am working with ROMS3.0 under Red-Hat Linux and PGI Fortran. So far I’ve been able to run the pre-defined model applications and several regional simulations. I found the first problem when using option DIAGNOSTICS_UV. This option works fine with the pre-defined applications (set-up mostly with analytical options) but fails with the regional configurations. I’ve got the following run-time error message when attempting to open the first diagnostic file:

Code: Select all

   STEP  time[DAYS]  KINETIC_ENRG    POTEN_ENRG    TOTAL_ENRG   NET_VOLUME  trd

      0     0.00000  0.000000E+00  3.976536E+02  3.976536E+02  1.195432E+13   0
      DEF_HIS   - creating history file: ocean_his_0001.nc
      WRT_HIS   - wrote history  fields (Index=1,1) into time record = 0000001
      DEF_AVG   - creating average file: ocean_avg_0001.nc
      DEF_DIAGS - creating diagnostics file: ocean_dia_0001.nc
Segmentation fault (core dumped)

I’ve tried the same regional configurations with ROMS2.2 and it works. Has anyone experienced
the same problem with option DIAGNOSTICS_UV using ROMS3.0?

Thanks for your help,

ELBIO.

jcwarner
Posts: 1181
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 6:16 pm
Location: USGS, USA

#2 Unread post by jcwarner »

i am actually running an application right now with Diagnositcs_uv turned on and it is running fine.
Does the app work fine if you undef Diagnostics_uv?
Can you try to compile and run in debug mode to see if that provides any useable info?

elbio
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2003 9:16 pm
Location: U National S, Argentina

#3 Unread post by elbio »

Thanks for your reply.

The problem dissapears if option DIAGNOSTICS_UV is not defined.

I've tried compiling with the debugging option and DIAGNOSTICS_UV
turned on and I've got:

Code: Select all

          T  Hout(idFsur)    Write out free-surface.
          T  Hout(idUbar)    Write out 2D U-momentum component.
          T  Hout(idVbar)    Write out 2D V-momentum component.
          T  Hout(idUvel)    Write out 3D U-momentum component.
          T  Hout(idVvel)    Write out 3D V-momentum component.
          T  Hout(idWvel)    Write out W-momentum component.
          T  Hout(idOvel)    Write out omega vertical velocity.
          T  Hout(idTvar)    Write out tracer 01: temp
          T  Hout(idTvar)    Write out tracer 02: salt
          T  Hout(idUbms)    Write out bottom U-momentum stress.
          T  Hout(idVbms)    Write out bottom V-momentum stress.
0: Subscript out of range for array hout (inp_par.f90: 1250)
    subscript=0, lower bound=1, upper bound=500, dimension=1

jcwarner
Posts: 1181
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 6:16 pm
Location: USGS, USA

#4 Unread post by jcwarner »

ok. so let's go to the next level and actually edit the file
inp_par.f90
and go to line 1250 and see what is there.

elbio
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2003 9:16 pm
Location: U National S, Argentina

#5 Unread post by elbio »

I cannot see the problem:

line 1250 reads:

Code: Select all

         IF (Hout(idWlen,ng)) WRITE (out,170) Hout(idWlen,ng),         &
     &       'Hout(idWlen)',
parameter idWlen is related to wind-induced wave length. I cannot see the relationship with option DIAGNOSTICS_UV.

jcwarner
Posts: 1181
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 6:16 pm
Location: USGS, USA

#6 Unread post by jcwarner »

This seems odd. But .. in your input file, do you have
Hout(idWlen) == F ! wave length
or
Hout(idWlen) == T ! wave length

elbio
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2003 9:16 pm
Location: U National S, Argentina

#7 Unread post by elbio »

Hi John:

The funny thing is that the Logical Switch for wave length was not
even defined in my *.in file. After defining the logical switch,

Code: Select all

Hout(idWlen) == F
the problem with the diagnostic option was solved. It seems
strange, but it works.

Thanks very much for your help.

jcwarner
Posts: 1181
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 6:16 pm
Location: USGS, USA

#8 Unread post by jcwarner »

yes, that does sound strange.
I will add it to my "look into" list.
Perhaps you should update your *.in file to be consistent with the latest release. There may be other flags that you need.
-j

Post Reply