WRF & MPAS-A Support Forum

Hi, The default namelist.input file that comes with the clean code has the correct number of columns included. We instruct that if, in the default namelist, the parameter only has a single value, do not add any additional columns. If there are multiple columns set for a parameter in the default name...

Kelly, I took a look at your runs. For these 1/2 domain runs, you are using too many processors. Remember that the most you should use should be based on your smallest domain. So if you're running only d01 (388x144) and d02 (997x340), then the most processors you should be using is about (388/25) x ...

Hi, It looks like you are getting a segmentation fault, which can be related to many different things. If you are able to run this exact same case (same input data, dates, domain, namelist) without problems on another computer, it means that this must be related to the particular system on which you...

Yes, that is correct! Thank you for the update.

Hi, I would not recommend increasing the debug_level setting. This rarely provides any useful information, and will just add a lot of extra junk to your rsl files. Set that back to 0. You should start with the file where the error originates, which is phys/module_sf_noahmplsm.F, line 2096 in v4.2.1....

Hi Chris, We have a colleague who was working on this application a few years ago. I'm attaching what they gave to us. Their group developed the code, based on the WRFV3.8.1 code. If you are using newer code, you’ll have to update the files to the new code. Note that there is also a known issue with...

Hi Kelly,
As a test, you could try running a quick test with only 2 domains to make sure that it's the contrast in sizes that is causing the problem. But yes, those are the only executables you need to re-run. It's not necessary to run ungrib again, as that is independent from the domain settings.

Hi, Unfortunately I'm not aware of anyone who has done this, but I would think there are different ways you could go about doing it. You could either start with the code for hill_2dx and, using a 3d case example as a reference, modify it to have 3d components, or start from a 3d case, and, using the...

Hi, I meant that I moved the post here, as it's own topic. It's not anywhere else, but here. Thanks for sending those files. I have a few thoughts about what may be going on: 1) You have "frames_per_outfile = 1000, 1000, 1000," This means you are putting 1000 output times into each wrfout* file. It ...

Hi Thomas, In the &domains section of your namelist, you have the following settings: time_step = 5, 0, time_step_fract_num = 0, 5, time_step_fract_den = 1, 9, Each of these parameters only allows a single declaration, so you cannot set it for 2 columns (2 domains). The model will use the settings f...

Thanks for sending that. In order to get the variable WSPD10MAX, you must have nwp_diagnostics = 1 in your namelist. Take a look at this section of the WRF Users' Guide.

Hi Lin,
I believe the different commands (e.g., mpirun vs. srun) is system-specific, and related to the scheduler. If srun is the command you need to use for your system, then that is perfectly fine to run WRF/WRF-Chem with that command.

Hi, I just want to verify that you have used a netcdf diffing tool/command to confirm that the results are bit-for-bit identical (and not that they just appear identical in output plots). If you haven't, can you use the diffwrf tool found in WRF/external/io_netcdf? It can be used with a command like...

Thanks for sending that. I think the problem is almost certainly the number of processors you are using. In order to run your very large domain 3, you will need many more processor; however, running with the required amount for d03 is going to be too many processors for d01. Take a look at this FAQ ...

Hi, You mention that you've run many simulations without any problems. Was there any difference in the setup/namelists of those simulations besides the dates of the run? Were all the physics the same? I notice the error message states: TV= NaN TG= NaN It may be necessary for you to do some debugging...

Prerita,
Great! You should be okay to continue with a basic nested option. Thank you for the update!

Great! And thank you for updating the post.

Hi, I have moved this post to it's own topic since it was not related to the topic where you originally posted. I believe this error is system-related, and not related to the WRF model. Do you have rsl.error* files after the run? If so, can you package those into a single *.TAR file and attach that,...

Hi,
Can you attach your namelist.input file? Thanks!

Hi, 1) What exactly did you modify to get past the initial problem? I'd like to have a solution posted for future users who may run into a similar problem. 2) Will you please post the new question as a new topic, since it's a different problem? It helps with searching later. Please also attach your ...

Assuming that when you say "GFS forecast data of 00z," you mean the data that is initialized at 00z, then yes, that is correct. You will want the forecast from that initial time, out through 72 hours, in order to run a 72 hour forecast.

Hi,
Can you point me to your running directory on Cheyenne so that I can take a look at the output files? Thanks!

Hi, When I look at your rsl* files, I actually am seeing some CFL errors: rsl.error.0203:d01 2016-12-24_00:09:34 1 points exceeded cfl=2 in domain d01 at time 2016-12-24_00:09:34 hours rsl.error.0203:d01 2016-12-24_00:09:34 MAX AT i,j,k: 408 194 26 vert_cfl,w,d(eta)= 5.695942 9.954795 3.7109971E-02 ...

Prerita,
I believe that is what that means. Are you trying to compile with the moving nest option? In the configure.wrf files you sent, it looks like you are just compiling with the basic nesting option.

I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to do, or why. If I understand correctly, you want to simulate 2 years, but you don't want to have to actually run 2 separate years, so you are just running 2012 again, but using the values from the end of 2012 to update the values at the beginning of 20...