Skip to content

CM3 change rc cmeps1.1.31 x#12

Open
kieranricardo wants to merge 41 commits intocmeps1.1.35-xfrom
cm3-change-rc-cmeps1.1.31-x
Open

CM3 change rc cmeps1.1.31 x#12
kieranricardo wants to merge 41 commits intocmeps1.1.35-xfrom
cm3-change-rc-cmeps1.1.31-x

Conversation

@kieranricardo
Copy link

@kieranricardo kieranricardo commented Feb 2, 2026

Description of changes

CM3 related changes to CMEPS. This adds an "access" coupling mode and associate field exchange module. Also adds in a custom access coupling routine to "mep_phases_post_atm_mod.F90".

Specific notes

Contributors other than yourself, if any: @blimlim

Are changes expected to change answers? No, this shouldn't affect OM3.

@kieranricardo kieranricardo requested a review from a team February 2, 2026 23:43
Copy link
Collaborator

@anton-seaice anton-seaice left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I didn't go through everything, but my main comment is - can we harmonise field names and code style with the rest of CMEPS

nullify(is_local%wrap)
call ESMF_GridCompGetInternalState(gcomp, is_local, rc)

call ESMF_FieldBundleGet(is_local%wrap%FBImp(compice, compatm), fieldName='ia_aicen', field=ice_frac_cat, rc=rc)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Presumable we should be running the ChkErr error, most of the rest of the code does that

! to atm: from ocn
! ---------------------------------------------------------------------
allocate(S_flds(3))
S_flds = (/'So_t', 'So_u', 'So_v'/) ! sea_surface_temperature
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
S_flds = (/'So_t', 'So_u', 'So_v'/) ! sea_surface_temperature
S_flds = (/'So_t', 'So_u', 'So_v'/)

There's lots of comments like this which are wrong or only partially complete

! ---------------------------------------------------------------------
allocate(S_flds(9))
S_flds = (/'Si_t', &
'ia_aicen', &
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
'ia_aicen', &
'Si_ifrac_n', &

Should we try and reuse existing names for these ?

Copy link
Collaborator

@anton-seaice anton-seaice Feb 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

from

call addfld_from(compice, 'Si_ifrac_n')
call addfld_to(compocn, 'Si_ifrac_n')

kieranricardo and others added 4 commits February 16, 2026 10:09
Co-authored-by: Anton Steketee <79179784+anton-seaice@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Anton Steketee <79179784+anton-seaice@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Anton Steketee <79179784+anton-seaice@users.noreply.github.com>
- rename tti routine and add description
- rename coupling mode to "access-esm"
- delete unfinished comments
- delete unused fields
project(cmeps Fortran)

set(SRCFILES esmFldsExchange_cesm_mod.F90 med_fraction_mod.F90
set(SRCFILES esmFldsExchange_access_mod.F90 esmFldsExchange_cesm_mod.F90 med_fraction_mod.F90
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We don't use this file, so possibly this is confusing ([esmFldsExchange_hafs_mod.F90](https://github.com/ACCESS-NRI/CMEPS/blob/upstream-main/mediator/esmFldsExchange_hafs_mod.F90) isn't included, for example)

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It'd be nice to be able to use the same version of CMEPS in CM3 and OM3, but this CMakeList.txt is overridden in access3-share anyway, so I could put the change there. What do you think? Then we have a mediator that can compute both CM3 and OM3 fluxes.


do j = 1,lsize2
do i = 1,lsize1
if (ice_frac_cat_ptr(i, j) > 0.0) then
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

if ice_frac_cat_ptr is very small, won't there be a resulting overflow in ice_flux_cat_ptr ?

@kieranricardo
Copy link
Author

@anton-seaice this edge case doesn't occur in CM3. CICE zaps small ice fractions and the UM considers ocean fractions <0.01 as land, which limits how small ice_frac_cat_ptr can be here.

@anton-seaice anton-seaice changed the base branch from rc-cmeps1.1.31-x to cmeps1.1.35-x February 26, 2026 01:20
@anton-seaice
Copy link
Collaborator

Changed base to cmeps1.1.35-x, looks like it will merge fine

Copy link
Collaborator

@anton-seaice anton-seaice left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks @kieranricardo

I made it as far through this as I had time for.

There are some features in esmFldsExchange_cesm which are missing here and are quite useful, including the configuration option for rof->ocn mapping files and the detection of which meshes are the same. There's also lots of duplication with the addfld/addmap/addmrg with those in cesm FldsExchange.

Would it work to call esmFldsExchange_cesm first, and then in this file, only add any extra fields needed? All the fields in esmFldsExchange_cesm are wrapped in if (fldchk(...) statements, so it should just pass over any fields which are not needed.

! to med: masks from components
!----------------------------------------------------------
call addfld_from(compocn, 'So_omask')
call addfld_from(compice, 'Si_imask')
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
call addfld_from(compice, 'Si_imask')
if (is_local%wrap%comp_present(compice)) then
call addfld_from(compice, 'Si_imask')
endif

?

!=====================================================================

call addfld_to(compatm, 'So_ofrac')
call addfld_to(compatm, 'Si_ifrac')
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Needs an if comp_present ?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm not 100% on this, but I think doing the fieldchecks in esmFldsExchange_accessesm_init is sufficient (which I've now added). We can advertise whatever fields we want (which is what this does), as long as we don't try to map between fields that don't exist.

Also I can't see any comp_present checks in esmFldsExchange_cesm, so I think this should work :)

call addmrg_to(compatm, 'sstfrz', mrg_from=compice, mrg_fld='sstfrz', mrg_type='copy')

allocate(S_flds(7))
S_flds = (/'Si_ifrac_n', &
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We should avoid redefining these lists twice and just reuse, them or set them as Parameters.

kieranricardo and others added 6 commits March 16, 2026 12:06
Co-authored-by: Anton Steketee <79179784+anton-seaice@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Anton Steketee <79179784+anton-seaice@users.noreply.github.com>
@kieranricardo
Copy link
Author

kieranricardo commented Mar 16, 2026

@anton-seaice and @blimlim thanks for you reviews!

Re. using the esmFldsExchange_cesm, there's a few potential issues:

  • If any of the CESM fields use a different re-mapping to us this won't work (I think it will either crash, or the mappings will override each other without a guarentee of which mapping is actually used)
  • I'm fairly sure that this require's aofluxes to run (and crashes it is isn't run), which could potentially override the UM fluxes.
  • There's a potential additional maintainence burden - we'd have to keep track of which fields of ours they define, and what mappings are being used.

So I think we're better off just using our own self-contained module.

Re. the field names, most of these names were chosen to reuse existing fields in fd.yaml. Aside from rain, there aren’t many fields with the Faxa_ prefix there. Also, esmFldsExchange_cesm.F90 sometimes plays a bit fast and loose with the prefixes - e.g. Faxa_rain is exported directly to the ocean, whereas it would probably be more consistent for this to enter the mediator as Faxa_rain and then be mapped to Foxx_rain. Given that, I’m inclined to avoid introducing additional Faxa_... fields into fd.yaml, especially since the other esmFldsExchange... modules don’t fully adhere to that convention either. But I don’t feel strongly about it, so happy to go with whatever approach people think is best.

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

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants