add surface water outflow parameter

[swensosc]

Description of changes

change hard coded constant to a parameter on the parameter file

Specific notes

netcdf file was modified by adding the following:
h2osfc_outflow_scalar = 0.002
double h2osfc_outflow_scalar ;
h2osfc_outflow_scalar:long_name = "h2osfc outflow scalar" ;
h2osfc_outflow_scalar:units = "unitless"
Contributors other than yourself, if any:

CTSM Issues Fixed (include github issue #):

Are answers expected to change (and if so in what way)?
when use_hillslope = .true. surface water outflow will change. The original constant was 1e-4, the new parameter value is currently 2e-3
Any User Interface Changes (namelist or namelist defaults changes)?

Does this create a need to change or add documentation? Did you do so?

Testing performed, if any:

[ekluzek]

This is great. Always better to have parameters on the parameter file rather than hardcoded in.

I asked for a commented out line to be deleted. And we'll need to have a new parameter file to point to for this in bld/namelist_files/namelist_defaults_ctsm.xml. So that's required.

The other suggestion I have though is that we rebase this to b4b-dev rather than master and bring it in with a parameter file with the same value. Then as an answer changing tag we'll update the parameter file as a separate thing. One reason to do that is that it's easier to bring something in on b4b-dev, and we could do that right away, whereas master is frozen right now until cesm3_0_beta01 is done, and that will be near the end of the month. How does that sound?

[swensosc]

that sounds good. I have created a parameter file: /scratch/cluster/swensosc/ctsm60_params.c240208_kwet_params.nc with the new value, and with the old: /scratch/cluster/swensosc/ ctsm60_params.c240208_kwet_params_1e-4.nc I compared using the old value via the parameter file, and I think it had roundoff differences.

…

On Wed, Jun 5, 2024 at 12:13 PM Erik Kluzek ***@***.***> wrote: ***@***.**** requested changes on this pull request. This is great. Always better to have parameters on the parameter file rather than hardcoded in. I asked for a commented out line to be deleted. And we'll need to have a new parameter file to point to for this in bld/namelist_files/namelist_defaults_ctsm.xml. So that's required. The other suggestion I have though is that we rebase this to b4b-dev rather than master and bring it in with a parameter file with the same value. Then as an answer changing tag we'll update the parameter file as a separate thing. One reason to do that is that it's easier to bring something in on b4b-dev, and we could do that right away, whereas master is frozen right now until cesm3_0_beta01 is done, and that will be near the end of the month. How does that sound? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2581 (review)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AGRN57EOPABREH4IPAUACMDZF5IMDAVCNFSM6AAAAABI3ERDWKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMZDAOJZHEZDENZWGM> . You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[ekluzek]

@samsrabin volunteered for this since it's hillslope. He'd like to bring it in as it's own answer changing tag, since it's tiny. So he'll just make it it's own tag on master. So we won't do the b4b-dev thing I suggested above.