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

TSK field in wrfinput

D

davidwrf

Member
Hello,

I get strange TSK and SST fields when using different settings of the initial conditions.
I'm using WRF 4.1.2.
I tried the following 3 options for the initial condition:
1. ECMWF 0.1 deg withOUT the lsm field.
2. ECMWF 0.1 deg WITH the lsm field.
3. ECMWF 0.1 deg for the atmospheric fields, and GFS 0.25deg for the surface fields.

Only for the third option I get TSK and SST maps in the wrfinput files that show detailed pattern.
In the first option, the map is very coarse and no clear land-sea border is seen.
In the second option, the map is very coarse, but a clear land-sea border is seen.

The three maps are shown in the attached picture.
What can be the reason?
Few months ago I asked a similar question, and I was advised to use the lsm field for the EC.
However, it seems not to solve the problem.

David

tsk.png
 
David,
Surface information suck as skintemp, sst and landmask are important for WPS to correctly remap analysis products to WRF grids.
In your cases, if you don't have any surface data ( your first case), WPS will have to use other data to roughly represent surface condition and yield ridiculous results. I am suspicious that your SST/SKINTEMP are similar to temperature at the lowest model level.Please check and let me know.
For your second case, without detailed information of your data, I cannot say for sure why you get this weird result. However, I guess you may not have landmask information, although you have skintemp/sst in your EC data, but they are not correctly interpolated to WRF grids without landmask information.
GFS provides all data required by WPS. This is why you can get realistic output.
Basically what you have is a data issue. Please manage to provide all required data for WPS.
 
Thank you Ming Chen.

I think that also in the first and second cases I am using the surface data from ECMWF, as required/specified in the Vtable.
It is only the lsm field I am missing in the first case.
In the downloaded ECMWF data I get the following surface fields:
2d/2t/10v/10u/msl/sd/sp/skt/ci/swvl1/swvl2/swvl3/swvl4/stl1/stl2/stl3/stl4/ #### and lsm,
It includes the skt field.

Am I missing some required surface fields?

David
 
David,
Below is a list of required variables for running WRF. Please check your data and make sure all the variables are available.

1661965286483.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top