Improving volcanic ash simulations

[saneku]

This PR incorporates corrections and improvements to the simulation of volcanic eruptions using WRF-Chem.

TYPE: new feature

KEYWORDS: volcanic eruption, emiss_opt_vol, ash, so2, water vapor, sulfate

SOURCE: Alexander Ukhov (KAUST)

DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES:
Problem:
bug in the gravitational settling of the ash. Large ash particles have a very high falling speed.

Solution:
Fix the bug and introduce the correction factor for large ash particles.

New additions:

• Added calculation of optical properties of ash and sulfate aerosol
• Added diagnostics for ash, so2 and sulfate. This can be used for mass balance check
• Added emissions of water vapor and sulfate aerosols
• Added new emiss_opt_vol=3, which implies the new emission preprocessing method (avoiding prep_chem_source.exe)
• Many other small corrections and improvements

More details will be published in the following GMD paper:
Ukhov et al., Enhancing Volcanic Eruption Simulations with the WRF-Chem v4.8.

LIST OF MODIFIED FILES: list of changed files (use git diff --name-status master to get formatted list)
M Registry/registry.chem
M chem/aerosol_driver.F
M chem/chem_driver.F
M chem/chemics_init.F
M chem/dry_dep_driver.F
M chem/emissions_driver.F
M chem/mechanism_driver.F
M chem/module_chem_utilities.F
M chem/module_ctrans_grell.F
M chem/module_optical_averaging.F
M chem/module_vash_settling.F
A chem/module_volc_chem.F
M chem/module_wetdep_ls.F
M chem/optical_driver.F
M share/mediation_integrate.F

TESTS CONDUCTED:

1. Do mods fix problem? How can that be demonstrated, and was that test conducted?
2. Are the Jenkins tests all passing?

RELEASE NOTE: Added new capabilities to simulate volcanic eruptions. A full description of additions and changes is planned in the upcoming GMD publication.

[weiwangncar]

@saneku The regression tests failed with WRF-Chem compilation. Check your inbox and spam folder to see if you received any email and attachment from [email protected]. Or you can check the attached file.
output_1.txt

[saneku]

@jordanschnell, it looks like I have finished!

[jordanschnell]

Thanks for the packages!

[weiwangncar]

@saneku @jordanschnell What is Makefile_org used for? If it is not used, it should be removed from the repository.

[saneku]

@weiwangncar, sorry it was added accidentally. I will remove it in the next commit.

By the way, do you know by chance the next release version? is it 4.7.2 or 4.8?
I am asking, because I am finishing the paper (GMD journal), which describes the changes made in this PR.
And I need to mention the WRF-Chem version, where the changes were implemented.
Thanks!

[weiwangncar]

There are errors occurred in your updates:

Test Type              | Expected  | Received |  Failed
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =  = = = =
Number of Tests        : 23           24
Number of Builds       : 60           57
Number of Simulations  : 158           150         6
Number of Comparisons  : 95           83         0

Failed Simulations are: 
output_1:9 = STATUS test_001s chem em_real 32 1

output_1:9 = STATUS test_001s chem em_real 32 2
output_1:9 = STATUS test_001s chem em_real 32 5
output_1:11 = STATUS test_001m chem em_real 34 1
output_1:11 = STATUS test_001m chem em_real 34 2
output_1:11 = STATUS test_001m chem em_real 34 5
Which comparisons are not bit-for-bit:
None

[dudhia]

We are not yet sure if there will be a 4.7.2 next.

[saneku]

@weiwangncar Could you please send a log?

[weiwangncar]

@saneku Here is the log file:
output_1.txt

[weiwangncar]

@saneku I added a label 'Retest' and let's see if it does it. If it doesn't, what you can do is to make a trivial change to trigger another test.

[weiwangncar]

@saneku Unfortunately both tests with my label change and your change failed the same way as it did before. Can you try to compile WRF-Chem using the latest code on your local machine and see what happens? All other compilations in the tests are successful.

[weiwangncar]

@saneku Congratualtions! The regression tests have passed:

Test Type              | Expected  | Received |  Failed
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =  = = = =
Number of Tests        : 23           24
Number of Builds       : 60           57
Number of Simulations  : 158           150        0
Number of Comparisons  : 95           86        0

Failed Simulations are: 
None
Which comparisons are not bit-for-bit: 
None

[saneku]

@weiwangncar sounds good! can the code be merged into develop branch?

[weiwangncar]

@saneku It can be, after our reviews.

[weiwangncar]

@jordanschnell Can you review the PR again? Thanks.

[islas]

@saneku can you make sure to add any new source code files to the CMake build as well?

[saneku]

@islas please advice, which CMake file I need to modify?
The only one file 'chem/module_volc_chem.F' is new.

[weiwangncar]

@saneku @islas is referring to chem/CMakelists.txt file, I believe.

[saneku]

@islas i have modified the cmake file