Scheduled Downtime
On Friday 21 April 2023 @ 5pm MT, this website will be down for maintenance and expected to return online the morning of 24 April 2023 at the latest

Low Ozone concentration

Naser

Member
Hello,

I am using WRf-Chem 3.9.1 with chem_opt=108 (RACM_MADe/VBS). my Ozone concentration is quiet low. I used phot_opt 1,2 and 3. but in all, ozone is low. I checked my emission. it is correct.

Do you have any Idea to increase Ozone concentration?

Thank you
Naser
 
Hello dear Jordan
As you can see in the attached files, there are two name lists. The only differences are as follows:
namelist_OLD:
mp_physics = 3,
ra_lw_physics = 1,
ra_sw_physics = 2,

namelist_O3input:
mp_physics = 6,
ra_lw_physics = 4,
ra_sw_physics = 4,
o3input = 2,

In Both Namelists, I used the same phot_opt.
phot_opt = 3,

Please consider that each figure has 5 lines. I presented phot_opt=1,2 and 3 together plus observation

As can you see in NO2, the Diurnal variation is clear. But I don't know why O3 is weird and is extremely low.

I hope you can help me to figure it out.

Thank you
Naser
 

Attachments

  • Time_series_OBSMOD_O3_1JAN-2019.png
    Time_series_OBSMOD_O3_1JAN-2019.png
    78.6 KB · Views: 11
  • Time_series_OBSMOD_O3_1JAN-2019_withoutOBS.png
    Time_series_OBSMOD_O3_1JAN-2019_withoutOBS.png
    92.1 KB · Views: 11
  • namelist_O3input.input
    9.3 KB · Views: 5
  • namelist_OLD.input
    9.3 KB · Views: 6
  • Time_series_OBSMOD_NO2_1JAN-2019.png
    Time_series_OBSMOD_NO2_1JAN-2019.png
    88.3 KB · Views: 11
Hi Naser,

Phot_opt = 1 is the recommended photolysis scheme for this chemical option. Please try setting chemdt = 0 and turning off all interactions with physics/aerosols, leaving only gas chemistry on.

Also, what do your initial conditions look like? Have you performed more than one day of simulations?

Jordan
 
Hello Dear Jordan

Thank you for your reply.

As you can see in my figure, the result of Phot_opt=3 is better than Phot_opt=1. Why do you say that Phot_opt = 1 is better?
And about physics/aerosols, do you mean I turn off (mp_physics=0)?
For the Initial condition, I used FNL data, and in the case of the "day of simulations", this time (uploaded figures), I just ran for 1 day and checked the result. Does it have a problem?

I hope I have answered your questions perfectly.

I am looking forward to your kind response.
Thank you.
 
Hello Dear Jordan

Thank you for your reply.

As you can see in my figure, the result of Phot_opt=3 is better than Phot_opt=1. Why do you say that Phot_opt = 1 is better?
And about physics/aerosols, do you mean I turn off (mp_physics=0)?
For the Initial condition, I used FNL data, and in the case of the "day of simulations", this time (uploaded figures), I just ran for 1 day and checked the result. Does it have a problem?

I hope I have answered your questions perfectly.

I am looking forward to your kind response.
Thank you.
Hi Naser,I have the same problem as you, did you find the cause? What's the solution?
 
Hi Hasaki

Yes, I found. YOu have to apply mozbc for your simulation. it is going to solve your problem.

Yours
Naser
 
11z to 23z every day, does it mean Ozone is zero from 11 AM to 23 PM each day?
What about simple running (without using mozbc)? Value is not zero?
If just when you are using mozbc, ozone is zero, maybe some part of the name list is changed.
I recommend you compare wrfinput between On-mozbc and Off-mozbc. Then you will understand how much mozbc changed your wrfinput file.

Naser
 
11z to 23z every day, does it mean Ozone is zero from 11 AM to 23 PM each day?
What about simple running (without using mozbc)? Value is not zero?
If just when you are using mozbc, ozone is zero, maybe some part of the name list is changed.
I recommend you compare wrfinput between On-mozbc and Off-mozbc. Then you will understand how much mozbc changed your wrfinput file.

Naser
Thanks, when I don't apply mozbc the zones aren't all zeros, it's confusing, I'll make a new post for help!
 
Top