Ocean Modeling Discussion

ROMS/TOMS

Search for:
It is currently Mon Oct 23, 2017 4:57 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC

Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 7:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 1:31 pm
Posts: 15
Location: south china sea institute of oceanography
Hi, i am runing npzd. In my study area,alkalinity,NH4,LdetritusN,SDeN,LdetritusC,TIC data is absent. I can not find any other reanalysis data or simulation data from internet. So,I used a constent value for all grids and used as my boundary condition. the same value for all time series (12 months). the value was picked up from a literature. the model can not run sucessuflly. should I set the boundary condition changes with time?
I used climate data (monthly mean value)for NO3, O2, and so on (COADS 05 and WOA2009). I used modis chlorophyll monthly mean value in 2016 as the initial data and forcing condition. phytoplankton was set by chlorophyll.

now, the model blow up.
i was wondering if the forcing condition (U,V, pair, tair) are not match with NH4 (constants for all grids)? should they match with the changes of the chlorophyll and phytoplankton?

what should i do when the model blow up? should i try to track the fortran code and find which step is something wrong?
thank you so much for your help in advance, best wishes
Code:

       326 0001-01-03 00:54:00.00  1.805362E-02  1.009324E+02  1.009504E+02  4.729840E+11
                     (004,028,18)  3.956102E-01  1.365641E-01  1.130226E+01  4.059272E+00
       327 0001-01-03 01:03:00.00  1.707953E-02  1.009146E+02  1.009317E+02  4.728986E+11
                     (004,027,19)  3.526031E-01  1.868201E-01  1.182530E+01  5.002697E+00
       328 0001-01-03 01:12:00.00  1.635206E-02  1.008860E+02  1.009024E+02  4.727603E+11
                     (006,025,18)  2.752542E-01  4.995576E-01  1.422893E+01  7.306116E+00
       329 0001-01-03 01:21:00.00  1.656034E-02  1.008469E+02  1.008635E+02  4.725701E+11
                     (006,024,19)  2.383016E-01  1.426992E+00  2.045112E+01  1.410777E+01
       330 0001-01-03 01:30:00.00  2.925909E-02  1.007976E+02  1.008268E+02  4.723289E+11
                     (006,023,20)  1.342662E-01  5.816475E+00  4.073108E+01  4.860259E+01

 Blowing-up: Saving latest model state into  RESTART file




Code:
    GET_NGFLD   - ammonium southern boundary condition,            0001-01-16 00:00:00.00
                   (Grid= 01, Rec=0000001, Index=1, File: roms_bry.nc)
                   (Tmin=         15.0000 Tmax=        345.0000)      t =         15.0000
                   (Min =  5.00000000E+00 Max =  5.00000000E+00)
    GET_NGFLD   - chlorophyll southern boundary condition,         0001-01-16 00:00:00.00
                   (Grid= 01, Rec=0000001, Index=1, File: roms_bry.nc)
                   (Tmin=         15.0000 Tmax=        345.0000)      t =         15.0000
                   (Min =  2.69459943E-02 Max =  1.90680868E+00)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 6:23 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 5:29 pm
Posts: 25
Location: UC Santa Cruz
Hi. In my experience, a blow-up like this usually results from a physical circulation problem and not from the ecosystem model. Have you configured this model without the biogeochemistry and ensured that it runs?

Also, with only 327 time-steps until a problem, you may be able to output the model every time-step to see exactly where in the domain and when the problem originates. Sometimes a problem is visible very quickly after the start of the run.

Good luck!

Chris


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Sep 28, 2017 4:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 1:31 pm
Posts: 15
Location: south china sea institute of oceanography
cae wrote:
Hi. In my experience, a blow-up like this usually results from a physical circulation problem and not from the ecosystem model. Have you configured this model without the biogeochemistry and ensured that it runs?

Also, with only 327 time-steps until a problem, you may be able to output the model every time-step to see exactly where in the domain and when the problem originates. Sometimes a problem is visible very quickly after the start of the run.

Good luck!

Chris


Thank u so much for your reply and suggestion. It’s so helpful and I really appreciated it. I plotted the parameters in restart file (ocean_rst.nc) as your suggestion (i.e. NH4, NO3, Salt, temp, Zeta, Phytoplankton, zooplankton, chlorophyll, large detritus N - LdetritusN, SdetritusN, LdetritusC, SdetritusC , alkalinity,TIC,Hbbl,Hsbl,zeta). They look fine. There are no obvious weird abnormal in these plots. The ranges of the values of the parameter are fine. There is no obvious error in the edges of the study area.
I also checked the history file (ocean_his.nc) and average file(ocean_avg.nc). I found shflux, latent, sensible look weird in the history file (ocean_his.nc) and average file(ocean_avg.nc). There are errors in the edges of the study area(southen boundary). I attached them here. But lward, temp, sward look fine. In order to avoid the parameters are wrong from the start of the model running (I mean if I gave the weird values in the forcing file -roms_frc.nc). I checked the forcing file. They look fine. I also attached them here.
In this situation, which fortran code or fortran module I should check or follow.
In ur opinion, which kind of problem would be. What direction I should track?
Do u think the energy (KINETIC_ENRG POTEN_ENRG TOTAL_ENRG) is too big for the grid (006,023,20) in time step 330? (5.816475E+00 4.073108E+01 4.860259E+01)


Code:
328 0001-01-03 01:12:00.00  1.635206E-02  1.008860E+02  1.009024E+02  4.727603E+11
                     (006,025,18)  2.752542E-01  4.995576E-01  1.422893E+01  7.306116E+00
       329 0001-01-03 01:21:00.00  1.656034E-02  1.008469E+02  1.008635E+02  4.725701E+11
                     (006,024,19)  2.383016E-01  1.426992E+00  2.045112E+01  1.410777E+01
       330 0001-01-03 01:30:00.00  2.925909E-02  1.007976E+02  1.008268E+02  4.723289E+11
                     (006,023,20)  1.342662E-01  5.816475E+00  4.073108E+01  4.860259E+01


Attachments:
temp_z_1_T=4_ .png
temp_z_1_T=4_ .png [ 72.66 KiB | Viewed 183 times ]
swrad_z_1_T=1_ .png
swrad_z_1_T=1_ .png [ 68.16 KiB | Viewed 183 times ]
ssflux_z_1_T=1_ .png
ssflux_z_1_T=1_ .png [ 53.6 KiB | Viewed 183 times ]
shflux_z_1_T=1_ .png
shflux_z_1_T=1_ .png [ 70.56 KiB | Viewed 183 times ]
sensible_z_1_T=1_ .png
sensible_z_1_T=1_ .png [ 64.41 KiB | Viewed 183 times ]
File comment: omega in average
omega_z_1_T=1_ .png
omega_z_1_T=1_ .png [ 53.64 KiB | Viewed 183 times ]
File comment: lward in average file
lwrad_z_1_T=1_ .png
lwrad_z_1_T=1_ .png [ 68.28 KiB | Viewed 183 times ]
File comment: latent in average file (ocean_avg.nc)
latent_z_1_T=1_ .png
latent_z_1_T=1_ .png [ 69 KiB | Viewed 183 times ]
File comment: hbbi in rst file (time step is 1).
Hbbl_z_1_T=1_ .png
Hbbl_z_1_T=1_ .png [ 68.81 KiB | Viewed 183 times ]


Last edited by chaoyu1985 on Thu Sep 28, 2017 6:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Sep 28, 2017 4:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 1:31 pm
Posts: 15
Location: south china sea institute of oceanography
cae wrote:
Hi. In my experience, a blow-up like this usually results from a physical circulation problem and not from the ecosystem model.



the parameters in frc files look normal. i gave them form climate data (monthly averaged)


Attachments:
Tair_T=1_ .png
Tair_T=1_ .png [ 99.13 KiB | Viewed 182 times ]
shflux_T=1_ .png
shflux_T=1_ .png [ 210.57 KiB | Viewed 182 times ]
sensible_T=1_ .png
sensible_T=1_ .png [ 99.02 KiB | Viewed 182 times ]
lwrad_T=1_ .png
lwrad_T=1_ .png [ 220.06 KiB | Viewed 182 times ]
File comment: latent in frc files, times series is 15,45,75,105 days
latent_T=1_ .png
latent_T=1_ .png [ 98.54 KiB | Viewed 182 times ]
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Sep 28, 2017 8:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:33 pm
Posts: 51
Location: University of Aegean
Greetings

At the last record (328) - when your model is blowing up -
you have a maximum speed at point (i,j,k)(006,023,20)
of 48.6 m/s... It's clear that the problem is on your
physical model as already mentioned. Check your restart
file to see where this point is and what is going on.
Try to reduce your timestep (dt) and then rerun the model.

Giannis


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Sep 28, 2017 3:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 5:29 pm
Posts: 3236
Location: IMS/UAF, USA
Also, you could make it blow up twice as fast by removing the northern half of your domain. It's all land, but the model computes over land points, so it is taking time.
Quote:
(006,023,20) 1.342662E-01 5.816475E+00 4.073108E+01 4.860259E+01
These are CFL numbers for the x, y, z directions. The y-direction one is definitely unstable.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group