Opened 8 months ago

Last modified 6 months ago

#237 new Defect

Inconsistent netCDF output

Reported by: ahilboll Owned by:
Priority: major Milestone:
Component: FP other Version: FLEXPART 10.3
Keywords: Cc:

Description

While looking at the netCDF output from FLEXPART 10.3, I find some inconsistencies:

  1. in backward mode (irrespective of the combination of IND_SOURCE and IND_RECEPTOR I try), the netCDF output file contains DD_specNNN and WD_specNNN variables which are completely filled with the value 9.969209968386869e+36. I believe it would be less confusing for the user if these variables were not added to the netCDF output in case of backward runs
  1. for LINIT_COND=1 and LINIT_COND=2, there is no initial conditions written to the netCDF output; the initial conditions are just there in form of a grid_initial_001 binary file. I believe it would be nice for the user if this information were also contained in the netCDF output.
  1. for IFLUX=1, there is no flux data written to the netCDF output; the fluxes are just there in form of a grid_flux_YYYYMMDDHHMMSS binary file. I believe it would be nice for the user if this information were also contained in the netCDF output.
  1. for IND_SOURCE=1 and IND_RECEPTOR=3 or IND_RECEPTOR=4, the netCDF output contains a variable spec001_mr with units s m3 kg-1; however according to Table 1 in Eckhardt et al. 2017, it should be m.
  1. for IND_SOURCE=2 and IND_RECEPTOR=3 or IND_RECEPTOR=4, the netCDF output contains a variable spec001_mr with units s; however according to Table 1 in Eckhardt et al. 2017, it should be kg m-2.

Issues 1+4+5 are based on the assumption that the deposition variables should not be present for backward runs; one could argue that for IND_RECEPTOR=3 only WD_spec001 should be there, and for IND_RECEPTOR=4 only DD_spec001 should be there. Any way, the way the variables are currently handled in the netCDF output is confusing and should be fixed before officically releasing FLEXPART 10.3

Change History (2)

comment:1 follow-up: Changed 7 months ago by ahilboll

An additional one:

  1. With IND_SOURCE=1 and IND_RECEPTOR=1, the units of the concentration field is ng m-3 while the deposition fields are 1e-12 kg m-2 -- which of course is effectively also ng but the different notations are potentially confusing.

comment:2 in reply to: ↑ 1 Changed 6 months ago by pesei

Replying to ahilboll:

An additional one:

  1. With IND_SOURCE=1 and IND_RECEPTOR=1, the units of the concentration field is ng m-3 while the deposition fields are 1e-12 kg m-2 -- which of course is effectively also ng but the different notations are potentially confusing.

See also #239

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.
hosted by ZAMG