220 likes | 342 Views
Seasonal Modeling: Comparison of Phases 1 and 2 Emission inputs to CMAQ. Shaheen R. Tonse Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. CCOS Technical Committee Meeting Sacramento, 29 th November, 2006. Gridded Emission Comparisons.
E N D
Seasonal Modeling: Comparison of Phases 1 and 2 Emission inputs to CMAQ Shaheen R. Tonse Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory CCOS Technical Committee Meeting Sacramento, 29th November, 2006
Gridded Emission Comparisons • Compare the sums and temporal profiles of Area, Biogenic, Motor Vehicle and Point sources • Former emissions: Obtained Fall 2004 for Phase 1. For reference purposes: CCAQS4k_Ep000729_AR_rf934_V042104_R0003_SAPRCV5_CAMX • New emissions: Obtained Summer 2006 for Phase 2. For reference purposes: cc.A20000729_00.RF964.arb.20060629.CAMX.SAPRC_V1 (Claire Agnoux, visiting student from France, in summer 2006)
Gridded Emission Comparisons • Emissions summed by hour over: • SARMAP domain (96 ×117 grid) for area, biogenic and motor vehicle • CCOS domain (190 × 190 grid) for point sources emissions. • Sat July 29th to Wed August 2nd 2000 (Days 211 to 215) • Times on plots are in PDT • Units are either moles/hour or moles/s
SARMAP domain within CCOS domain Vertical resolution: 27 layers. Lowest layers: 20m thick Uppermost layer at P=100 mbar, (16km) is 2km thick CCOS 4km res. 190 x 190 SARMAP 4km res. 96 x 117
NOx emissions by category(next 3 figures from Phase 1 report)
Area Emissions Double counting of fires in two counties.
Fire Emissions • Xiao Ling Mao (visiting researcher at) and Ling Jin (UCB) compiled fires during episode, by location, duration, acreage. • Summary of sensitivity study to fire emissions: • Very high local influence on ozone and its precursor concentrations. • At upper layers large percentage change in O3 and very concentrated effects • More scattered longer-lasting effects at surface layer
Summary of comparisons Area: Wildfires need to be removed from Tuolumne and Northern Fresno counties Biogenic: VOC emissions have more than doubled in the new emissions. NOx emissions are zero Motor Vehicle: Good improvement in weekend NOx time profile. We do not see any obvious problems. Point: VOCs are down by half in the new inventory Fire: LBNL can provide useful input to improve the fire inventory
A Timing and Scalability Analysis of the Parallel Performance of CMAQ v4.5 on a Beowulf Linux Cluster Shaheen Tonse Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Berkeley, CA, USA.
Parallel Performance In general, for parallel codes, improvement in performance scales worse than linearly with number of PEs. • Parts of the code simply not parallelizable. Execute redundantly on all the PEs • Load imbalance between PEs: those with lighter loads wait for others until they have finished • Increased inter-PE communication costs relative to actual computation • Latency: Operations whose cost is dominated by startup costs eg. disk file accesses
Method • Inserted timing calls into CMAQ to measure time spent in various portions of code. • Most timing calls placed in the scientific processes subroutine (SCIPROC) or its daughter subroutines, which calculate the chemistry, horizontal/vertical diffusion, and horizontal/vertical advection. • Measurement of times spent for pure calculation, inter-PE communication, and disk access.
Single PE Benchmark Times SMVGear: dominated by CHEM only EBI: HADV, CHEM and VDIF all contribute
EBI Parallel Performance HADV: scales poorly and expensive CHEM: scales ~100% cost mid-level VDIF: scale and cost both mid-level HDIF: scales poorly but cheap ZADV: scales ~100% and cheap
SMVGear Parallel Performance • Imbalance even for 25PEs is ~20%. Scalability of the overall code good even for 25 PEs. • Chemistry imbalance accounts for much of the scalability loss (since chemistry dominates). (Also note: 100-Scalability Imbalance)