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

Real.exe just stops running


New member
Good day,

I am running a long WRF simulation for 1980-2014 with a nested domain. I am now at the real.exe step and after many attempts to run real.exe, I cannot figure out why the real.exe just stops without any errors. In each instance, real.exe stops on 1984-01-11 having only considered the first domain.

I searched the forum to see if there is any advice and stumbled upon this post (Real.exe stuck on particular met_em file, no errors). I followed the advice and ran real.exe for a shorter time for 1984-01 and real.exe ran successfully. I also considered disk space, but I am working on a cluster and have ample disk space. There is advice to run real.exe in smaller chunks which is something I can do, but I am hoping to run real.exe for the full period and instead make use of restart files.

I have attached my namelist.input, rsl.error.0000 and rsl.out.0000 to provide details. Please may someone assist me.



  • rsl.error.0000
    804.1 KB · Views: 7
  • rsl.out.0000
    2 MB · Views: 3
  • namelist.input
    3.9 KB · Views: 4
This is because a maximum number of time periods is specified in WRF. If you attempt to process a LARGE number of time periods beyond the specified maximum number, then the model will crash. To overcome this problem,

(1) change the value of variable "MaxTimes" in wrf_io.F90, wrf_data_pio.F90 based on your case.

(2) in input_wrf.F, you need to modify the line

DO WHILE ( ( currentTime .GE. grid%next_bdy_time ) .AND. ( icount < 10000 ) )

change it to

DO WHILE ( ( currentTime .GE. grid%next_bdy_time ) .AND. ( icount < MaxTimes ) ) (NOTE: give the value of MaxTimes here)

Then you should recompile WRF.

By the way, I would suggest you process the data periodically to avoid an extremely large wrfbdy file. It is better you can use the 'restart' capability of WRF.
Last edited:
Hi Ming,

Thanks for your helpful response. I will go with your suggestion to process the data periodically.