
Hi Mike, <br><br>I am also working with ERAS5. did you divided your variables over 86400?. ERAS5 (radiation, precipitation etc) are given in days-1.<br><br>Kind regards, <br><br>Estanislao<br><br>Kind regards,<br><br>Sent from my Huawei Mobile<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"></head><body><div class="quote" style="line-height: 1.5"><br><br>-------- Original Message --------<br>Subject: MITgcm-support Digest, Vol 201, Issue 10<br>From: mitgcm-support-request@mitgcm.org<br>To: mitgcm-support@mitgcm.org<br>CC: <br><br><br type="attribution"><blockquote class="quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Send MITgcm-support mailing list submissions to<br>        mitgcm-support@mitgcm.org<br><br>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>        http://mailman.mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-support<br>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>       mitgcm-support-request@mitgcm.org<br><br>You can reach the person managing the list at<br>    mitgcm-support-owner@mitgcm.org<br><br>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>than "Re: Contents of MITgcm-support digest..."<br><br><br>Today's Topics:<br><br>   1. Re: ??: The obvious difference between ERA5 and NCEP-R1<br>      forcing (Matthew Mazloff)<br>   2. ??:  ??: The obvious difference between ERA5 and NCEP-R1<br>      forcing (Leming Van)<br><br><br>----------------------------------------------------------------------<br><br>Message: 1<br>Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2020 09:44:13 -0700<br>From: Matthew Mazloff <mmazloff@ucsd.edu><br>To: mitgcm-support@mitgcm.org<br>Subject: Re: [MITgcm-support] ??: The obvious difference between ERA5<br>  and NCEP-R1 forcing<br>Message-ID: <53DF5894-A01E-4571-8EF6-C3414680148B@ucsd.edu><br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br><br>Hi Mike<br><br>It is possible it could give worse results, but very unlikely. However its too hard for me to diagnose what is going on. There are many variables to your problem.<br><br>For ERA5 I have this in my data.exf:<br> &EXF_NML_03<br> exf_offset_atemp   = 273.15,<br> exf_inscal_swdown  = -1.0,<br> exf_inscal_lwdown  = -1.0,<br><br>Not sure how to help you, <br>Matt<br><br><br><br>> On Mar 15, 2020, at 5:41 AM, Leming Van <ifanliming@outlook.com> wrote:<br>> <br>> Hi, everyone<br>> <br>> Recently I tried to change forcing dataset from NCEP-R1(6-hourly) to ERA5(hourly), but the results of them look so different. I compared the results of NCEP-R1 with the reanalysis data of HYCOM, and these two data look similar. <br>> <br>> Did I pick the wrong variables from ERA5? Or does this mean that higher temporal and spatial resolution atmospheric forcing ERA5 results in worse simulation results than lower resolution NCEP-R1?<br>> <br>> I put the results at here, https://1drv.ms/u/s!AoS5GLJhmvDtjB5Ovnz63FidKeMo?e=c2hS7z <https: 1drv.ms="" u="" s!aos5gljhmvdtjb5ovnz63fidkemo?e="c2hS7z"><br>> Suggestions are welcome.<br>> <br>> <br>> -Mike<br>> <br>> _______________________________________________<br>> MITgcm-support mailing list<br>> MITgcm-support@mitgcm.org <mailto:mitgcm-support@mitgcm.org><br>> http://mailman.mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-support <http: mailman.mitgcm.org="" mailman="" listinfo="" mitgcm-support=""><br>-------------- next part --------------<br>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>URL: <http: mailman.mitgcm.org="" pipermail="" mitgcm-support="" attachments="" 20200315="" ab93e1b5="" attachment-0001.html=""><br><br>------------------------------<br><br>Message: 2<br>Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 06:26:29 +0000<br>From: Leming Van <ifanliming@outlook.com><br>To: "mitgcm-support@mitgcm.org" <mitgcm-support@mitgcm.org><br>Subject: [MITgcm-support] ??:  ??: The obvious difference between ERA5<br>  and NCEP-R1 forcing<br>Message-ID:<br>      <hk2pr04mb3538d8fed28b383dc4c46bc1d4f90@hk2pr04mb3538.apcprd04.prod.outlook.com><br>        <br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"<br><br>Hi, Matt<br><br>Thank you for your advice. I'm sorry that I didn't provide enough information.<br><br>I downloaded the ERA5 dataset at https://cds.climate.copernicus.eu/cdsapp#!/dataset/reanalysis-era5-single-levels?tab=form<br>Copernicus Climate Data Store | Copernicus Climate Data Store<https: cds.climate.copernicus.eu="" cdsapp#!="" dataset="" reanalysis-era5-single-levels?tab="form"><br>CDS Menu. Home; Search; Datasets; Applications; Toolbox; FAQ; Live; Copernicus Climate Data Store<br>cds.climate.copernicus.eu<br><br>And I selected precip[mean_total_precipitation_rate. kg m-2 s-1], atemp[2m_temperature. K], swdown[mean_surface_downward_short_wave_radiation_flux. W m-2], lwdown[mean_surface_downward_long_wave_radiation_flux. W m-2], uwind[10m_u_component_of_wind.  m s-1], vwind[10m_v_component_of_wind.  m s-1], because ERA5 does not provide aqh directly, I used air pressure[surface_pressure  Pa] and dewpoint temperature[2m_dewpoint_temperature  K] to calculate aqh.<br><br>Since the data is hourly, I only downloaded the area of interest(bigger than South China Sea), and besides, the data is zonally aligned from 35N to 5S, I flipped it to 5S-35N.<br><br>I compared the ERA5 with NCEP, and I don't think there is much difference except for the short-wave radiation. Please check the attachment.<br><br>I only have one question, do you choose the same ERA5 variables like me? If not, could you tell me which variables you choose?<br><br>Please let me know if any other files are needed for diagnosis. Thanks in advance.<br><br><br>-Mike<br><br><br>Here is the setting of my data.exf<br><br># $Header: /u/gcmpack/MITgcm_contrib/eh3/llc/ecco-godae/input_50lev/data.exf,v 1.1 2007/03/06 19:13:51 heimbach Exp $<br>#<br># *********************<br># External Forcing Data<br># *********************<br> &EXF_NML_01<br> useAtmWind        = .TRUE.,<br># rotateStressOnAgrid = .TRUE.,<br> exf_iprec         = 32,<br> exf_yftype        = 'RL',<br> useExfYearlyFields = .false.,<br> twoDigitYear      = .false.,<br> useExfCheckRange  =.false.,<br> &<br><br> &EXF_NML_02<br> climsstfile        = 'woa13_sst_monthly_globe_relax.box',<br> climsssfile        = 'woa13_sss_monthly_globe_relax.box',<br> precipfile         = 'era5_prate_2002-2005_hourly.box',<br> atempfile          = 'era5_air_2002-2005_hourly.box',<br> aqhfile            = 'era5_shum_2002-2005_hourly.box',<br> swdownfile         = '',<br> swfluxfile         = 'era5_nswrs_2002-2005_hourly.box',<br> lwfluxfile         = '',<br> lwdownfile         = 'era5_dlwrf_2002-2005_hourly.box',<br> uwindfile          = 'era5_uwnd_2002-2005_hourly.box',<br> vwindfile          = 'era5_vwnd_2002-2005_hourly.box',<br> runofffile         = 'run-off.bin_1x1',<br>#<br> climsststartdate1  = 20020101,<br> climsststartdate2  = 000000,<br> climsstperiod      = -12,<br> climsssstartdate1  = 20020101,<br> climsssstartdate2  = 000000,<br> climsssperiod      = -12,<br> runoffstartdate1   = 20020101,<br> runoffstartdate2   = 000000,<br> runoffperiod       = -12,<br>#<br> precipstartdate1=20020101,<br> precipstartdate2=000000,<br> precipperiod=3600.0,<br> atempstartdate1=20020101,<br> atempstartdate2=000000,<br> atempperiod=3600.0,<br> aqhstartdate1=20020101,<br> aqhstartdate2=000000,<br> aqhperiod=3600.0,<br> swdownstartdate1=20020101,<br> swdownstartdate2=000000,<br> swdownperiod=3600.0,<br> lwfluxstartdate1=20020101,<br> lwfluxstartdate2=000000,<br> lwfluxperiod=3600.0,<br> swfluxstartdate1=20020101,<br> swfluxstartdate2=000000,<br> swfluxperiod=3600.0,<br> lwdownstartdate1=20020101,<br> lwdownstartdate2=000000,<br> lwdownperiod=3600.0,<br> uwindstartdate1=20020101,<br> uwindstartdate2=000000,<br> uwindperiod=3600.0,<br> vwindstartdate1=20020101,<br> vwindstartdate2=000000,<br> vwindperiod=3600.0,<br> hfluxstartdate1=20020101,<br> hfluxstartdate2=000000,<br> hfluxperiod=3600.0,<br> sfluxstartdate1=20020101,<br> sfluxstartdate2=000000,<br> sfluxperiod=3600.0,<br> ustressstartdate1=20020101,<br> ustressstartdate2=000000,<br> ustressperiod=3600.0,<br> vstressstartdate1=20020101,<br> vstressstartdate2=000000,<br> vstressperiod=3600.0,<br> &<br><br> &EXF_NML_03<br> exf_inscal_precip=1.,<br> exf_offset_atemp=0.0,<br> exf_inscal_runoff  = 3.1710e-08,<br> &<br><br> &EXF_NML_04<br> precip_lon0        = 95.0D0,<br> precip_lon_inc     = 0.25D0,<br> precip_lat0        = -5.0D0,<br> precip_lat_inc     = 160*0.25D0,<br> precip_nlon        = 160,<br> precip_nlat        = 160,<br>#<br> atemp_lon0        = 95.0D0,<br> atemp_lon_inc     = 0.25D0,<br> atemp_lat0        = -5.0D0,<br> atemp_lat_inc     = 160*0.25D0,<br> atemp_nlon        = 160,<br> atemp_nlat        = 160,<br>#<br> aqh_lon0        = 95.0D0,<br> aqh_lon_inc     = 0.25D0,<br> aqh_lat0        = -5.0D0,<br> aqh_lat_inc     = 160*0.25D0,<br> aqh_nlon        = 160,<br> aqh_nlat        = 160,<br>#<br> swdown_lon0        = 95.0D0,<br> swdown_lon_inc     = 0.25D0,<br> swdown_lat0        = -5.0D0,<br> swdown_lat_inc     = 160*0.25D0,<br> swdown_nlon        = 160,<br> swdown_nlat        = 160,<br>#<br> lwflux_lon0        = 95.0D0,<br> lwflux_lon_inc     = 0.25D0,<br> lwflux_lat0        = -5.0D0,<br> lwflux_lat_inc     = 160*0.25D0,<br> lwflux_nlon        = 160,<br> lwflux_nlat        = 160,<br>#<br> swflux_lon0        = 95.0D0,<br> swflux_lon_inc     = 0.25D0,<br> swflux_lat0        = -5.0D0,<br> swflux_lat_inc     = 160*0.25D0,<br> swflux_nlon        = 160,<br> swflux_nlat        = 160,<br>#<br> lwdown_lon0        = 95.0D0,<br> lwdown_lon_inc     = 0.25D0,<br> lwdown_lat0        = -5.0D0,<br> lwdown_lat_inc     = 160*0.25D0,<br> lwdown_nlon        = 160,<br> lwdown_nlat        = 160,<br>#<br> uwind_lon0        = 95.0D0,<br> uwind_lon_inc     = 0.25D0,<br> uwind_lat0        = -5.0D0,<br> uwind_lat_inc     = 160*0.25D0,<br> uwind_nlon        = 160,<br> uwind_nlat        = 160,<br>#<br> vwind_lon0        = 95.0D0,<br> vwind_lon_inc     = 0.25D0,<br> vwind_lat0        = -5.0D0,<br> vwind_lat_inc     = 160*0.25D0,<br> vwind_nlon        = 160,<br> vwind_nlat        = 160,<br>#<br> ustress_lon0        = 95.0D0,<br> ustress_lon_inc     = 0.25D0,<br> ustress_lat0        = -5.0D0,<br> ustress_lat_inc     = 160*0.25D0,<br> ustress_nlon        = 160,<br> ustress_nlat        = 160,<br>#<br> vstress_lon0        = 95.0D0,<br> vstress_lon_inc     = 0.25D0,<br> vstress_lat0        = -5.0D0,<br> vstress_lat_inc     = 160*0.25D0,<br> vstress_nlon        = 160,<br> vstress_nlat        = 160,<br>#<br> hflux_lon0        = 95.0D0,<br> hflux_lon_inc     = 0.25D0,<br> hflux_lat0        = -5.0D0,<br> hflux_lat_inc     = 160*0.25D0,<br> hflux_nlon        = 160,<br> hflux_nlat        = 160,<br>#<br> sflux_lon0        = 95.0D0,<br> sflux_lon_inc     = 0.25D0,<br> sflux_lat0        = -5.0D0,<br> sflux_lat_inc     = 160*0.25D0,<br> sflux_nlon        = 160,<br> sflux_nlat        = 160,<br>#<br> runoff_lon0        = 0.50D0,<br> runoff_lon_inc     = 1.0D0,<br> runoff_lat0        = -79.5D0,<br> runoff_lat_inc     = 159*1.0D0,<br> runoff_nlon        = 360,<br> runoff_nlat        = 160,<br>#<br> climsst_lon0    = -179.875D0,<br> climsst_lon_inc = 0.25D0,<br> climsst_lat0    = -89.875D0,<br> climsst_lat_inc = 719*0.25D0,<br> climsst_nlon    = 1440,<br> climsst_nlat    = 720,<br>#<br> climsss_lon0    = -179.875D0,<br> climsss_lon_inc = 0.25D0,<br> climsss_lat0    = -89.875D0,<br> climsss_lat_inc = 719*0.25D0,<br> climsss_nlon    = 1440,<br> climsss_nlat    = 720,<br>#<br> &<br><br> &EXF_NML_OBCS<br> obcsNstartdate1   = 20020101,<br> obcsNstartdate2   = 000000,<br> obcsNperiod       = 2628000.0,<br> obcsEstartdate1   = 20020101,<br> obcsEstartdate2   = 000000,<br> obcsEperiod       = 2628000.0,<br> obcsSstartdate1   = 20020101,<br> obcsSstartdate2   = 000000,<br> obcsSperiod       = 2628000.,<br> &<br><br>________________________________<br>???: MITgcm-support <mitgcm-support-bounces@mitgcm.org> ?? Matthew Mazloff <mmazloff@ucsd.edu><br>????: 2020?3?16? 0:44<br>???: mitgcm-support@mitgcm.org <mitgcm-support@mitgcm.org><br>??: Re: [MITgcm-support] ??: The obvious difference between ERA5 and NCEP-R1 forcing<br><br>Hi Mike<br><br>It is possible it could give worse results, but very unlikely. However its too hard for me to diagnose what is going on. There are many variables to your problem.<br><br>For ERA5 I have this in my data.exf:<br> &EXF_NML_03<br> exf_offset_atemp   = 273.15,<br> exf_inscal_swdown  = -1.0,<br> exf_inscal_lwdown  = -1.0,<br><br>Not sure how to help you,<br>Matt<br><br><br><br>On Mar 15, 2020, at 5:41 AM, Leming Van <ifanliming@outlook.com<mailto:ifanliming@outlook.com>> wrote:<br><br>Hi, everyone<br><br>Recently I tried to change forcing dataset from NCEP-R1(6-hourly) to ERA5(hourly), but the results of them look so different. I compared the results of NCEP-R1 with the reanalysis data of HYCOM, and these two data look similar.<br><br>Did I pick the wrong variables from ERA5? Or does this mean that higher temporal and spatial resolution atmospheric forcing ERA5 results in worse simulation results than lower resolution NCEP-R1?<br><br>I put the results at here, https://1drv.ms/u/s!AoS5GLJhmvDtjB5Ovnz63FidKeMo?e=c2hS7z<br>Suggestions are welcome.<br><br><br>-Mike<br><br>_______________________________________________<br>MITgcm-support mailing list<br>MITgcm-support@mitgcm.org<mailto:mitgcm-support@mitgcm.org><br>http://mailman.mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-support<br><br>-------------- next part --------------<br>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>URL: <http: mailman.mitgcm.org="" pipermail="" mitgcm-support="" attachments="" 20200316="" 30a03675="" attachment.html=""><br>-------------- next part --------------<br>A non-text attachment was scrubbed...<br>Name: ERA5-hourly.jpg<br>Type: image/jpeg<br>Size: 604409 bytes<br>Desc: ERA5-hourly.jpg<br>URL: <http: mailman.mitgcm.org="" pipermail="" mitgcm-support="" attachments="" 20200316="" 30a03675="" attachment.jpg=""><br>-------------- next part --------------<br>A non-text attachment was scrubbed...<br>Name: NCEP-6hourly.jpg<br>Type: image/jpeg<br>Size: 546245 bytes<br>Desc: NCEP-6hourly.jpg<br>URL: <http: mailman.mitgcm.org="" pipermail="" mitgcm-support="" attachments="" 20200316="" 30a03675="" attachment-0001.jpg=""><br><br>------------------------------<br><br>Subject: Digest Footer<br><br>_______________________________________________<br>MITgcm-support mailing list<br>MITgcm-support@mitgcm.org<br>http://mailman.mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-support<br><br><br>------------------------------<br><br>End of MITgcm-support Digest, Vol 201, Issue 10<br>***********************************************<br></http:></http:></http:></mailto:mitgcm-support@mitgcm.org></ifanliming@outlook.com<mailto:ifanliming@outlook.com></mitgcm-support@mitgcm.org></mmazloff@ucsd.edu></mitgcm-support-bounces@mitgcm.org></https:></hk2pr04mb3538d8fed28b383dc4c46bc1d4f90@hk2pr04mb3538.apcprd04.prod.outlook.com></mitgcm-support@mitgcm.org></ifanliming@outlook.com></http:></http:></mailto:mitgcm-support@mitgcm.org></https:></ifanliming@outlook.com></mmazloff@ucsd.edu></blockquote></div></body></html>