What is "AVOST IN VILKA"? Provide more helpful error messages in RUC LSM

[mkavulich]

There is a terrifying message that crops up from time-to-time in UFS runs, and almost always indicates doom for your run. But what does this message mean?

Looking in the source code (https://github.com/NCAR/ccpp-physics/blob/master/physics/module_sf_ruclsm.F90#L6547), clearly it indicates something going wrong, as it is surrounded by commented-out error messages, presumably from the original WRF implementation. But why leave such an obscure and unhelpful error message in, why let the routine continue even though it seems to be a fatal error condition in the original? There doesn't seem to be any helpful documentation on this in the git logs, so I am hoping someone can answer here.

Can we at least replace this with a more clear warning message?

[ligiabernardet]

This message was first put by @tanya Smirnova - NOAA Affiliate ***@***.***> in the WRF model. My experience is that it is triggered in the RUC LSM, but it is seldom related to a LSM problem. Typically there is a bad array coming in (e.g., temperatures out of reasonable range). That said, I agree that we should find a way to put a more informative message.

…

On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 12:17 PM Michael Kavulich ***@***.***> wrote: There is a terrifying message that crops up from time-to-time in UFS runs, and almost always indicates doom for your run. But what does this message mean? Looking in the source code ( https://github.com/NCAR/ccpp-physics/blob/master/physics/module_sf_ruclsm.F90#L6547), clearly it indicates something going wrong, as it is surrounded by commented-out error messages, presumably from the original WRF implementation. But why leave such an obscure and unhelpful error message in, why let the routine continue even though it seems to be a fatal error condition in the original? There doesn't seem to be any helpful documentation on this in the git logs, so I am hoping someone can answer here. Can we at least replace this with a more clear warning message? — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#599>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AE7WQAVJBU6NGQD3HXIVJW3TFIUEFANCNFSM4ZXZPE7A> .

[tanyasmirnova]

@ligiabernardet @mkavulich Ligia, thank you for responding to Mike's question. Your explanation is correct: this message appears when the surface energy budget could not be resolved in RUC LSM. Very often this happens because of bad input into the RUC LSM. Once I wanted to replace this message with a more informative one, but WRF developers told me that they were sad to loose this "feature" :)

[climbfuji]

@mkavulich @tanyasmirnova Is someone working on making the error message from RUC LSM more informative?

[climbfuji]

@mkavulich @tanyasmirnova Repeating my question from July 22 regarding this issue, is someone working on making the error message from RUC LSM more informative?