chenjunwen
New member
One bug was found in the Noah LSM code (module_sf_noahdrv.F), with Line 1633 (in WRF v4.1.2) showing below:
rl_up_rural=-emiss_rural(i,j)*sigma_sb*(tsk_rural(i,j)**4.)-(1.-emissi)*glw(i,j)
and it was correct before WRF v4.0, showing below:
rl_up_rural=-emiss_rural(i,j)*sigma_sb*(tsk_rural(i,j)**4.)-(1.-emiss_rural(i,j))*glw(i,j).
When I used the multi-layer urban canopy model (UCM) BEP-BEM in WRF v4.1.2, the simuldated surface skin temperature has mosaic pattern over the urban area (Fig. b in the attachment). It would be fine if I used the single-layer UCM (Fig. a). When I changed the wrong code above to the code before WRF v4.0, the surface skin temperature looked fine (Fig. c). Please fix the bug in next release. Thanks.
Junwen Chen
The Chinese University of Hong Kong
rl_up_rural=-emiss_rural(i,j)*sigma_sb*(tsk_rural(i,j)**4.)-(1.-emissi)*glw(i,j)
and it was correct before WRF v4.0, showing below:
rl_up_rural=-emiss_rural(i,j)*sigma_sb*(tsk_rural(i,j)**4.)-(1.-emiss_rural(i,j))*glw(i,j).
When I used the multi-layer urban canopy model (UCM) BEP-BEM in WRF v4.1.2, the simuldated surface skin temperature has mosaic pattern over the urban area (Fig. b in the attachment). It would be fine if I used the single-layer UCM (Fig. a). When I changed the wrong code above to the code before WRF v4.0, the surface skin temperature looked fine (Fig. c). Please fix the bug in next release. Thanks.
Junwen Chen
The Chinese University of Hong Kong