Radaer api ukca side - part one run time

[Alan J Hewitt (alanjhewitt)]

PR Summary

Sci/Tech Reviewer: Mohit Dalvi (@mcdalvi)
Code Reviewer:

I developed the original lfric to radaer functionality in 2020. Like a lot of developments back then, it was needed in a hurry and so I developed a fudged solution with technical debt.

We will need user flexibility soon to be able to run radaer with different user settings, hence this part one of two development.

In part one, I have introduced the user flexibility that is required for run time. Its already a very large change, and this is a natural break point for splitting a big PR.

Some hard-coded settings remain in the development (on the ukca side, this is values like i_cpnt_index), which will be removed in the part two ticket to develop the initialisation stage functionality.

Code Quality Checklist

(Some checks are automatically carried out via the CI pipeline)

• I have performed a self-review of my own code
• My code follows the project's style guidelines
• Comments have been included that aid undertanding and enhance the
  readability of the code
• My changes generate no new warnings

Testing

• I have tested this change locally, using the UKCA rose-stem suite
• If shared files have been modified, I have run the UM and LFRic Apps rose
  stem suites
• If any tests fail (rose-stem or CI) the reason is understood and
  acceptable (eg. kgo changes)
• I have added tests to cover new functionality as appropriate (eg. system
  tests, unit tests, etc.)

trac.log

Security Considerations

• I have reviewed my changes for potential security issues
• Sensitive data is properly handled (if applicable)
• Authentication and authorisation are properly implemented (if applicable)

Performance Impact

• Performance of the code has been considered and, if applicable, suitable
  performance measurements have been conducted

AI Assistance and Attribution

• Some of the content of this change has been produced with the assistance
  of Generative AI tool name (e.g., Met Office Github Copilot Enterprise,
  Github Copilot Personal, ChatGPT GPT-4, etc) and I have followed the
  Simulation Systems AI policy
  (including attribution labels)

Documentation

• Where appropriate I have updated documentation related to this change and
  confirmed that it builds correctly

Sci/Tech Review

• I understand this area of code and the changes being added
• The proposed changes correspond to the pull request description
• Documentation is sufficient (do documentation papers need updating)
• Sufficient testing has been completed

Please alert the code reviewer via a tag when you have approved the SR

Code Review

• All dependencies have been resolved
• Related Issues have been properly linked and addressed
• CLA compliance has been confirmed
• Code quality standards have been met
• Tests are adequate and have passed
• Documentation is complete and accurate
• Security considerations have been addressed
• Performance impact is acceptable

[Alan J Hewitt (alanjhewitt)]

I currently have a microsoft 360 document to describe the development of the RADAER API. I will extract the description of the API from the document and put it into markdown format during the follow on part two ticket, when the functionality will actually function.