Search found 9 matches

by friedemann
Mon Aug 17, 2020 9:14 am
Forum: Special Running Options
Topic: Restart run inconsistent with continuous run
Replies: 3
Views: 535

Re: Restart run inconsistent with continuous run

Hi!
Thanks for the reply!
kwerner wrote:
Tue Aug 11, 2020 10:36 pm
1) Can you let me know which version of the model you are running?
This is with WRF 4.1.1.
kwerner wrote:
Tue Aug 11, 2020 10:36 pm
2) It seems like you are, but I just want to verify that you are starting your restarts from available boundary times.
Yes.

Best regards,
Friedemann
by friedemann
Fri Aug 07, 2020 11:02 am
Forum: Special Running Options
Topic: Restart run inconsistent with continuous run
Replies: 3
Views: 535

Restart run inconsistent with continuous run

Hi! I observed a case where restarting WRF produces output that is slightly different compared to a continuous run. Setup - 3 domains with resolutions 36 km, 12 km, 4 km - Two-way nesting (feedback=1) - Identical physics and dynamics options in all domains - Driving meteorology: ERA5 - Continuous ru...
by friedemann
Mon Jul 27, 2020 6:43 pm
Forum: Emissions
Topic: rho_phy and unit of tracers into WRF atmosphere
Replies: 0
Views: 419

rho_phy and unit of tracers into WRF atmosphere

Hi, I'm using WRF to compute transport of passive greenhouse gas tracers (chem_opt=17, emiss_opt=17). Those are usually expressed as dry air mole fractions, and I assumed WRF does the same. A student's question prompted me to look into this and now I'm not sure whether emissions are actually emitted...
by friedemann
Mon Jul 27, 2020 5:50 pm
Forum: General
Topic: WRF-Chem in OFFLINE mode
Replies: 2
Views: 591

Re: WRF-Chem in OFFLINE mode

Hi Georgii,
I had the same question last year and apparently there is no offline mode for transporting passive tracers with WRF.
Best regards,
Friedemann
by friedemann
Wed Feb 19, 2020 4:00 pm
Forum: Gas Chemistry and KPP
Topic: Chemistry and diff_6th_opt
Replies: 0
Views: 397

Chemistry and diff_6th_opt

Hi! Short version of my question: The WRF-Chem user guide recommends to set diff_6th_opt=0, but I think diff_6th_opt=2 would improve the wind fields in my simulation. So I would like to know why the user guide recommends this, and whether it's safe to turn it on in my case. And here is the long vers...
by friedemann
Mon Feb 17, 2020 9:59 am
Forum: Meteorological Input Data
Topic: ERA5: RH not used, surface level of SPECHUMD is -1
Replies: 6
Views: 821

Re: ERA5: RH not used, surface level of SPECHUMD is -1

Thanks for the feedback and suggestions!

So to be clear, the surface level of SPECHUMD being -1 everywhere is not an issue? The only check for that I have so far is that I looked at QVAPOR after 1 day of simulation, and the surface level looks reasonable compared to levels above.
by friedemann
Tue Feb 11, 2020 5:03 pm
Forum: Meteorological Input Data
Topic: ERA5: RH not used, surface level of SPECHUMD is -1
Replies: 6
Views: 821

Re: ERA5: RH not used, surface level of SPECHUMD is -1

Hi kwerner!
I uploaded the files to Nextcloud:
f34t8842_01.tar - case without concatenating intermediate files
f34t8842_02.tar - case with concatenating intermediate files

Thanks,
Friedemann
by friedemann
Mon Feb 10, 2020 11:31 am
Forum: Meteorological Input Data
Topic: ERA5: RH not used, surface level of SPECHUMD is -1
Replies: 6
Views: 821

ERA5: RH not used, surface level of SPECHUMD is -1

Hi! I would like to drive WRF 4.1.1 with ERA5, following the instructions here: https://dreambooker.site/2018/04/20/Initializing-the-WRF-model-with-ERA5/. While ungrib.exe, metgrid.exe and real.exe all run successfully, I get this message in rsl.error.0000 from real.exe: Fatal error BAD VARIABLE DIM...

Go to advanced search