SWAN_COUPLING: Trunk-r165 vs Trunk-r168

Bug reports, work arounds and fixes

Moderators: arango, robertson

Post Reply
Message
Author
dhson
Posts: 32
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2003 10:40 am
Location: Institute of Meteorology and hydrology

SWAN_COUPLING: Trunk-r165 vs Trunk-r168

#1 Post by dhson » Tue Mar 25, 2008 4:53 am

Hi,
1. I'm trying to couple SWAN & ROMS on Fedora Core 7 with Intel Fortran 10.1.012, NETCDF4, MPICH2.
I've attempted with the example of coupling_inlet_test.in however:
* Trunk-r168 was failed in compilation:

cd Build; /opt/mpich2/bin/mpif90 -c -ip -O3 -xW -I/opt/MCT/include ocean_coupler.f90
fortcom: Error: ocean_coupler.f90, line 206: This name does not have a type, and must have an explicit type. [IWAVE]
CALL Router_init (Iwave, GSMapROMS, OCN_COMM_WORLD, RoutROMS)
------------------------^
fortcom: Error: ocean_coupler.f90, line 206: There is no matching specific subroutine for this generic subroutine call. [ROUTER_INIT]
CALL Router_init (Iwave, GSMapROMS, OCN_COMM_WORLD, RoutROMS)
-----------^
compilation aborted for ocean_coupler.f90 (code 1)

* Trunk-r165 was successful in compilation but it seemed that it stoped after reading the ROMS input file:

WEST_FSGRADIENT Western edge, free-surface, gradient condition.
WEST_M2GRADIENT Western edge, 2D momentum, gradient condition.
WEST_M3GRADIENT Western edge, 3D momentum, gradient condition.
Error reading initialisation file
- I've checked and found out that in the file coupling_inlet_test.in

whatever the line
WAV_name = Waves/SWAN/External/INPUT_inlet_test ! wave model
could be, the errors were the same.

2. By the way:
- It is possible to couple ROMS & SWAN on Curvilinear grid?
- I'm also trying to couple WRF but could not get WFR from omlab/branches/arango because of permission problem?
- I've been running successfully WRF Model Version 2.2 (December 2006)

Is there anybody can help me to get out of these?

Many thanks in advance,

jcwarner
Posts: 855
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 6:16 pm
Location: USGS, USA

#2 Post by jcwarner » Tue Mar 25, 2008 1:48 pm

1. ROMS v 3.1 was very stable with the SWAN coupling. I believe that was revision 166 (?) as stated on
viewtopic.php?t=837

Right now, there is a strong effort to recode many of the communication routines for the coupling so that similar routines can be used with MCT and with ESMF. As this is ongoing, it appears that the present version is not working correctly. Please keep reporting any problems that come up and I will push to get these working. However, these revisions will be ongoing for some time now, so you may want to get the stable version (rev 166) to work for your application and use that for a while until we get the new stuff working.

2. roms + swan can couple on curvilinear grid. i have several applications using this. for now, they still have to both be on the same grid. that will change in the future.

3. we have a version of roms + swan + wrf working. But as we are changing the coding for the coupler from roms-swan, we also want to update the wrf coupling routines. So the release of coupling to wrf will be a while.

User avatar
jivica
Posts: 135
Joined: Mon May 05, 2003 2:41 pm
Location: The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia

#3 Post by jivica » Wed Mar 26, 2008 7:27 am

I am just posting my comment on the WRF and ROMS; Discussing with J. Wilkin I got to quite happy usage of WRF and ROMS without messy cloud fraction at all. I am using net shortwave at surf., only incoming longwave and the rest for bulk (T2, mslp, U10,V10, Rh) and let ROMS compute longwave outgoing .. Results are really improved. There is option for replacing SST in WRF so one can run ROMS only forced with WRF and in next step can use ROMS SST and update WRF input files and do again.. well this is if you do not have fully coupling....
I am wondering, as WRF is quite expensive for CPU, do you couple WRF and ROMS (and possibly) SWAN using ESMF on different grid resolution? There should be regridding incuded in ESMF as routine, so one could use lower resolution for WRF that contain ROMS and SWAN grid...
Cheers, Ivica

Post Reply