Coupled test with CLUBB taus code ON (but w/ #37 non-clubb tunings)

[adamrher]

Description:

Same as #394, but replacing the non-clubb tunings:

!----non-CLUBB parameters
dust_emis_fact = 0.80D0
seasalt_emis_scale=1.5
micro_mg_dcs=0.00065
micro_mg_vtrmi_factor=1.25
microp_aero_wsubi_scale=1.0
microp_aero_wsub_scale = 0.01
zmconv_dmpdz=-0.0005
cldfrc_dp2=750

With those in coupled run 37 (#367). That is, we don't want to use the above "non-CLUBB parameters". I expect this run to be out to lunch, but I want to see the impact of just the tau's code, on top of our existing coupled runs.

---

Case directory:
Locally (if still available):
/glade/p/cesmdata/cseg/runs/cesm2_0/$CASE

On github:
https://github.com/NCAR/amwg_dev/tree/$CASE

---

Sandbox:
Locally (if still available):
/glade/work/hannay/cesm_tags/cesm2_3_alpha16b

On github: https://github.com/ESCOMP/cesm/tree/cesm2_3_alpha16b

---

Diagnostics:
Diags (if available)

https://webext.cgd.ucar.edu/BLT1850/$CASE/

---

Output:
Output (if still available):
/glade/derecho/scratch/hannay/archive/$CASE/

---

Contacts:
@cecilehannay @bstephens82

---

Extra details:

[cecilehannay]

Differences between

• 37 non-clubb tunings
• and Ben's tuning:

clubb_gamma_coef       = 0.25->0.3
clubb_gamma_coefb      = 0.32->0.3

micro_mg_dcs           = 650->500.D-6
micro_mg_vtrmi_factor  = 1.25->1.0
microp_aero_wsub_scale = 0.01->0.25

cldfrc_dp2             =  750->500.0D0 
zmconv_dmpdz           =  -0.0005->-1.0E-3 

Technically, clubb_gamma_coef and clubb_gamma_coefb are clubb tuning but I didn't know if we wanted to set these as in 37 or as in Ben's run.

[adamrher]

Lets use the clubb_gamma values in 37 (0.3)

[cecilehannay]

See run #399