casch@mit_edu
New Member
Hello,
We have just completed a 50-year test run of CLM-DGVM (version 3.5) in OpenMPI mode (using 64-bit Opteron machines). We have not made any modifications to the source code (i.e. all we did was invoke "define DGVM" in the compile options).
We have performed this run with no specified initial conditions (so finidata = '' in our namelist file). The model starts and completes the 50 year simulation (i.e. "endrun" is not called by CLM or no runtime errors). However, all of the biogeophysical variables as well as those from the 'hv' netCDF history files give either undefined or null values for grids where DGVM should be growing vegetation. Although we do see values in the biogeophysical outputs for grids specified as lake or glacier landunit types.
It seems as though the DGVM module is not growing vegetation in the grid like it should (i.e. looking at the Levis et al. tech. report - we should be seeing some signs of vegetation, npp, rh, etc. values within the first 10 years of the run).
Any idea as to why the model is behaving this way?
Thank you!
We have just completed a 50-year test run of CLM-DGVM (version 3.5) in OpenMPI mode (using 64-bit Opteron machines). We have not made any modifications to the source code (i.e. all we did was invoke "define DGVM" in the compile options).
We have performed this run with no specified initial conditions (so finidata = '' in our namelist file). The model starts and completes the 50 year simulation (i.e. "endrun" is not called by CLM or no runtime errors). However, all of the biogeophysical variables as well as those from the 'hv' netCDF history files give either undefined or null values for grids where DGVM should be growing vegetation. Although we do see values in the biogeophysical outputs for grids specified as lake or glacier landunit types.
It seems as though the DGVM module is not growing vegetation in the grid like it should (i.e. looking at the Levis et al. tech. report - we should be seeing some signs of vegetation, npp, rh, etc. values within the first 10 years of the run).
Any idea as to why the model is behaving this way?
Thank you!
