mHM issueshttps://git.ufz.de/mhm/mhm/-/issues2021-04-19T14:28:11+02:00https://git.ufz.de/mhm/mhm/-/issues/73Creation of a mHM Docker2021-04-19T14:28:11+02:00Sebastian MüllerCreation of a mHM DockerSince we rely on some dependencies, like NetCDF, we could apply the rising idea of deploying mHM as a docker-image.
A docker provides a separate environment, where a plain linux system is provided but that is not running in a virtual mac...Since we rely on some dependencies, like NetCDF, we could apply the rising idea of deploying mHM as a docker-image.
A docker provides a separate environment, where a plain linux system is provided but that is not running in a virtual machine.
This mean:
* encapsulated environment with only the necessary tools/dependencies installed
* easily deploy compiled mHM binaries
* possibility of multiple dockers with different configurations (parallel, ifort, gfortran, nag, ...)
* providing of tested and working environments with fixed version of every dependency
Dockers are running natively on Linux and Windows. On Mac it is running with a Linux kernel running in a virtual machine.
So basically there could be one docker to make everyone happy.
Maybe we could collect some opinions on that here.
References:
* [Docker website](https://www.docker.com/)
* [Getting started with Docker for Developers](https://training.play-with-docker.com/#dev)
* [nctests - Docker image containing NetCDF](https://hub.docker.com/r/unidata/nctests)wishlistSebastian MüllerSebastian Müllerhttps://git.ufz.de/mhm/mhm/-/issues/80Scripts on quality control checks (e.g. Beta parameters)2020-10-05T16:24:06+02:00Oldrich RakovecScripts on quality control checks (e.g. Beta parameters)As discussed on the last mhm meeting,
it would be nice to have some scripts for quality control checks (e.g. on the internal Beta parameters)As discussed on the last mhm meeting,
it would be nice to have some scripts for quality control checks (e.g. on the internal Beta parameters)wishlistRobert SchweppeRobert Schweppehttps://git.ufz.de/mhm/mhm/-/issues/136miss fractions of landusetype forest and perm at L1 in mHM_restart.nc2022-06-17T16:53:28+02:00Friedrich Boeingmiss fractions of landusetype forest and perm at L1 in mHM_restart.ncHello, I miss the fractions of the landusetypes forest and permeable for the gridcells at L1 in the mHM output. In prior versions this was written out as L1_fPerm and L1_fForest. It would be interesting for the interpretations of model/f...Hello, I miss the fractions of the landusetypes forest and permeable for the gridcells at L1 in the mHM output. In prior versions this was written out as L1_fPerm and L1_fForest. It would be interesting for the interpretations of model/field comparisons for single gridcells. I would be also interested if the average mineral bulk density and soil texture fractions for each grid cell at L1 could be written out.wishlistSebastian MüllerSebastian Müllerhttps://git.ufz.de/mhm/mhm/-/issues/169Spatial orientation of layers in mRM restart file2024-02-26T09:46:31+01:00sluedtkeSpatial orientation of layers in mRM restart fileExtracting the 2d var "L11_fAcc" from "./restart/mRM_restart_001.nc" and plotting it shows the layer mirrored on both axis. See the picture below, one done with R using the raster package, the other from ncview (not nice, but you get an ...Extracting the 2d var "L11_fAcc" from "./restart/mRM_restart_001.nc" and plotting it shows the layer mirrored on both axis. See the picture below, one done with R using the raster package, the other from ncview (not nice, but you get an idea).
This is not the case for "output/mHM_Fluxes_States.nc". I think it would be great if that is consistent over all files
![2021-01-08-104643_grim](/uploads/58c93fe3fb4a4d00eca8eaa34a0e2adc/2021-01-08-104643_grim.png)
![2021-01-08-104633_grim](/uploads/0f23c94189e603cb42c3d0603e54161d/2021-01-08-104633_grim.png).wishlistStephan ThoberStephan Thoberhttps://git.ufz.de/mhm/mhm/-/issues/171mHM crash when time_step_model_inputs(1) = -1 (daily)2023-05-12T15:07:54+02:00Husain Najafihusain.najafi@ufz.demHM crash when time_step_model_inputs(1) = -1 (daily)I was trying to run mHM for a long time period (1947-2019). When "_time_step_model_inputs_" in _mhm.nml _was assigned to -1 (daily time step), mHM was crashed by providing the following error
Error:
Run mHM
Could not inquire variabl...I was trying to run mHM for a long time period (1947-2019). When "_time_step_model_inputs_" in _mhm.nml _was assigned to -1 (daily time step), mHM was crashed by providing the following error
Error:
Run mHM
Could not inquire variable: pet
NetCDF: Not a valid ID
Once I investigated input data, the meteorological forcing did not have any issues. Note that there will be no error if "time_step_model_inputs(1)" is set to -2 (monthly).wishlistSebastian MüllerSebastian Müllerhttps://git.ufz.de/mhm/mhm/-/issues/189mo_sce.restart is not created2023-05-12T15:07:38+02:00Mehmet Cüneyd Demirelmo_sce.restart is not createdHi @muellese
I tried these two options with cygwin and ubuntu LTS but I couldnt find where "mo_sce.restart" is created.
```fortran
optimize = .True.
optimize_restart = .False.
```
I check output_b1 and upper folder. I could only see sc...Hi @muellese
I tried these two options with cygwin and ubuntu LTS but I couldnt find where "mo_sce.restart" is created.
```fortran
optimize = .True.
optimize_restart = .False.
```
I check output_b1 and upper folder. I could only see sce_population and sce_results files.wishlistSebastian MüllerSebastian Müllerhttps://git.ufz.de/mhm/mhm/-/issues/235Theoretical documentation of mHM and its modules2024-02-26T09:47:05+01:00Pallav Kumar Shresthapallav-kumar.shrestha@ufz.deTheoretical documentation of mHM and its modulesIf I am not wrong, as of today, the mHM documentation [page](https://mhm.pages.ufz.de/mhm/latest/) has ample content that would comprise say the "user manual" but lacks the "theoretical documentation". The only exception is an awesomely ...If I am not wrong, as of today, the mHM documentation [page](https://mhm.pages.ufz.de/mhm/latest/) has ample content that would comprise say the "user manual" but lacks the "theoretical documentation". The only exception is an awesomely compiled [chapter on mRM](https://mhm.pages.ufz.de/mhm/latest/m_r_m.html).
This lack of easy access of theory behind mHM has been commented by many external users. The current two options modellers have are 1) to dive in the source code to get the information, or 2) read [Samaniego et al. 2010 WRR paper](https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2008WR007327) where equations have been layed out but might not be best source to get hold of theory behind mHM on first try.
Questions and comments:
1. Would it make sense to compile chapters for different processes of mHM (snow, evaporation, etc.) like the one for mRM?
2. Who should compile the chapters? Perhaps the authors who are still active with us are the best fitted for this?
3. If this becomes a "multi-person" task, should there be a guideline/ general template that we follow, perhaps the mRM chapter. In my opinion this is important as the structure gives better readability? [This is a reference theoretical documentation](https://swat.tamu.edu/media/99192/swat2009-theory.pdf), which has this nice idea of tabulating the variables and parameters related to a process at end of each chapter.
I am pretty sure this will require some planning and time to complete. Just bringing up the topic so that we communicate on this matter.
Tagging @thober, @rkumar and @lese here.wishlistSebastian MüllerSebastian Müllerhttps://git.ufz.de/mhm/mhm/-/issues/240Hourly discharge simulations require that provided Qobs file starts at hour 0...2024-02-26T09:47:22+01:00Oldrich RakovecHourly discharge simulations require that provided Qobs file starts at hour 00 and end at hour 23To print out hourly discharge simulations, current implementation requires that provided Qobs file starts at hour 00 and end at hour 23,
otherwise, mHM provides only daily Qobs file without the `subdaily_discharge` output file.
We wil...To print out hourly discharge simulations, current implementation requires that provided Qobs file starts at hour 00 and end at hour 23,
otherwise, mHM provides only daily Qobs file without the `subdaily_discharge` output file.
We will provide with @shresthp test datawishlistSebastian MüllerSebastian Müllerhttps://git.ufz.de/mhm/mhm/-/issues/242How to silence warnings (e.g. 'tmax smaller than tmin' when using Hargreaves-...2023-08-23T16:28:01+02:00Peter MierschHow to silence warnings (e.g. 'tmax smaller than tmin' when using Hargreaves-Samani equation)When estimating evapotranspiration using the Hargreaves-Samani equation (processCase(5) = 1) using observational data (e.g. E-OBS gridded data), sometimes tmin is larger than tmax (especially for regions and time periods with poor weathe...When estimating evapotranspiration using the Hargreaves-Samani equation (processCase(5) = 1) using observational data (e.g. E-OBS gridded data), sometimes tmin is larger than tmax (especially for regions and time periods with poor weather station coverage, this issue is recognized by data curators). This leads to the warning `WARNING: tmax smaller than tmin at doy xxx in year xxxx at cell xxx!`. While this warning is helpful in most cases, for optimization runs in large catchments (~10000km2) with spotty data, this severely slows down mHM by writing to increasingly large log files (log files after an optimization run around 50 gigabytes in some cases). Leading to my question:
Is it possible to silence specific or all warnings in mHM through a 'verbosity setting' that I'm unable to find?wishlisthttps://git.ufz.de/mhm/mhm/-/issues/243Multiple inflow gauges in a single grid is not yet allowed in mHM2024-02-26T09:47:30+01:00Pallav Kumar Shresthapallav-kumar.shrestha@ufz.deMultiple inflow gauges in a single grid is not yet allowed in mHM**Background**
Currently mHM only accepts one inflow gauge per L11 grid.
**Issue**
If there are more than one inflow gauge per L11 grid, it only takes one of the inflow gauge. This obviously leads to error.
Seems we need to add this...**Background**
Currently mHM only accepts one inflow gauge per L11 grid.
**Issue**
If there are more than one inflow gauge per L11 grid, it only takes one of the inflow gauge. This obviously leads to error.
Seems we need to add this feature in the [add_inflow subroutine](https://git.ufz.de/mhm/mhm/-/blob/develop/src/mRM/mo_mrm_pre_routing.f90#L179) ??
Tagging subroutine author @thober here :)wishlistSebastian MüllerSebastian Müllerhttps://git.ufz.de/mhm/mhm/-/issues/247L2/L1 and L11/L1 cell-factors are never checked to be integer2023-05-12T15:04:36+02:00Sebastian MüllerL2/L1 and L11/L1 cell-factors are never checked to be integerAll levels are created from L0 but they are never checked to have matching cell-sizes.
This creates miscalculations for example when (dis-)aggregating meteo-data from for example a 3km grid (L2) to a 2km grid (L1).
Both grids are totall...All levels are created from L0 but they are never checked to have matching cell-sizes.
This creates miscalculations for example when (dis-)aggregating meteo-data from for example a 3km grid (L2) to a 2km grid (L1).
Both grids are totally fine for a 100m grid on L0 but the averaging of the meteo-data is wrongly calculated.
Same is true for the routing resolutions (L11).wishlisthttps://git.ufz.de/mhm/mhm/-/issues/255Checks: MPI problems with case 04, 05, 07 and 112024-02-27T14:13:36+01:00Sebastian MüllerChecks: MPI problems with case 04, 05, 07 and 11- case 05 and 07 don't work with MPI in general as the used objective functions are not parallelized
- case 04 and 11 are occasionally failing with the intel compilers (always when coming to the write-out routines)
Related:
- https://gi...- case 05 and 07 don't work with MPI in general as the used objective functions are not parallelized
- case 04 and 11 are occasionally failing with the intel compilers (always when coming to the write-out routines)
Related:
- https://git.ufz.de/mhm/mhm/-/issues/93
- https://git.ufz.de/mhm/mhm/-/issues/192
- https://git.ufz.de/mhm/mhm/-/merge_requests/28
- https://git.ufz.de/mhm/mhm/-/merge_requests/170wishlist