Dear all,
I am a pretty seasoned land modeller but this is my first time handling an atmospheric model. I am preparing a set of WRF v4.1.3 simulations that aim to investigate land/atmosphere interactions by altering the default WRF land use map. I plan to publish the results in a research paper.
My study region is central/northeastern Brazil, with 27/9 Km nested domains and two one-year simulations (one control with default geographic data and one experiment with altered LU map). I will be using CFSv2 for the year of 2013 to drive the WRF runs.
Since I currently have no affiliation with a large institution that provides access to a HPC, I will be using some remaining student credits on AWS to set up a cluster (3 nodes with 16 real cores each) that will run WRF. I can afford to run this cluster 24/7 for around 20 days. With such tight computing resources to run these simulations, I have little margin to make mistakes.
Therefore, I was wondering if more experienced WRF users, perhaps even some staff members, would be willing to take a look at my WPS/WRF namelists to see what potentially could go wrong with my runs and where there is room for improvements. I am particularly unsure as to the which physics parameterizations to use. It doesn't seem to exist any consensus on that. Ideally, I would perform sensitivity tests to determine the best physics combinations for my specific study domain. However, spending computing resources on this is currently out of question as I have to focus on the main runs.
Hopefully there is some "safe" set of physics that produces realistic output for the domain configuration I am using (or at least that will be accepted by the usually finicky journal reviewers). So far, I have successfully used the WPS tools to prepare the input data (file "thiago_met_em_files.tar" placed in Nextcloud) and I am ready to trigger the run when I am confident to.
Hence, any comments or insights would much appreciated!
Cheers,
Thiago.
I am a pretty seasoned land modeller but this is my first time handling an atmospheric model. I am preparing a set of WRF v4.1.3 simulations that aim to investigate land/atmosphere interactions by altering the default WRF land use map. I plan to publish the results in a research paper.
My study region is central/northeastern Brazil, with 27/9 Km nested domains and two one-year simulations (one control with default geographic data and one experiment with altered LU map). I will be using CFSv2 for the year of 2013 to drive the WRF runs.
Since I currently have no affiliation with a large institution that provides access to a HPC, I will be using some remaining student credits on AWS to set up a cluster (3 nodes with 16 real cores each) that will run WRF. I can afford to run this cluster 24/7 for around 20 days. With such tight computing resources to run these simulations, I have little margin to make mistakes.
Therefore, I was wondering if more experienced WRF users, perhaps even some staff members, would be willing to take a look at my WPS/WRF namelists to see what potentially could go wrong with my runs and where there is room for improvements. I am particularly unsure as to the which physics parameterizations to use. It doesn't seem to exist any consensus on that. Ideally, I would perform sensitivity tests to determine the best physics combinations for my specific study domain. However, spending computing resources on this is currently out of question as I have to focus on the main runs.
Hopefully there is some "safe" set of physics that produces realistic output for the domain configuration I am using (or at least that will be accepted by the usually finicky journal reviewers). So far, I have successfully used the WPS tools to prepare the input data (file "thiago_met_em_files.tar" placed in Nextcloud) and I am ready to trigger the run when I am confident to.
Hence, any comments or insights would much appreciated!
Cheers,
Thiago.