ehsantaghizadeh
Member
Hi everybody,
I hope you are doing great.
May I ask your idea about negative values for RAINC in WRF outputs? I've seen this link "https://forum.mmm.ucar.edu/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=9631&p=18685&hilit=rainc+negative#p18685" and found similar problem. I might continue at that page, however my physics is different. Also, I've seen similar problem at this page "https://mailman.ucar.edu/pipermail/wrf-users/2016/004063.html".
I've attached namelist.input and our WRF version is under 4 (I'm not sure which version of 3, I only use WRF outputs!). Schemes have been used are Lin et al. scheme (mp_physics), Eta similarity (sf_sfclay_physics), Noah Land Surface Model (sf_surface_physics).
I should mention those negative values are an order of 10^(-7) and so they are so little, but when they are summed, that could be an order of 10^(-1). So, I think these small negative values should be noticed.
I appreciate any help.
Ehsan Taghizadeh
I hope you are doing great.
May I ask your idea about negative values for RAINC in WRF outputs? I've seen this link "https://forum.mmm.ucar.edu/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=9631&p=18685&hilit=rainc+negative#p18685" and found similar problem. I might continue at that page, however my physics is different. Also, I've seen similar problem at this page "https://mailman.ucar.edu/pipermail/wrf-users/2016/004063.html".
I've attached namelist.input and our WRF version is under 4 (I'm not sure which version of 3, I only use WRF outputs!). Schemes have been used are Lin et al. scheme (mp_physics), Eta similarity (sf_sfclay_physics), Noah Land Surface Model (sf_surface_physics).
I should mention those negative values are an order of 10^(-7) and so they are so little, but when they are summed, that could be an order of 10^(-1). So, I think these small negative values should be noticed.
I appreciate any help.
Ehsan Taghizadeh