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

WRFV4.0 input conversion error

This post was from a previous version of the WRF&MPAS-A Support Forum. New replies have been disabled and if you have follow up questions related to this post, then please start a new thread from the forum home page.


New member
Hi, when running wrf.exe with real BC's I've been experiencing an input conversion error (see below) immediately after WRF verifies that the boundary conditions file is acceptable to use. I've checked that the namelist.input options for wrf.exe match those used with real.exe to create the BC files, and all files were created with the same compiler setup (intel 2013). I've attached my wrf namelist, rsl.error output with max debug, as well as the wrfbdy_d01 file used here. Any help would be appreciated.

forrtl: severe (64): input conversion error, unit -5, file Internal Formatted Read
Image PC Routine Line Source
wrf.exe 0000000002DD170E Unknown Unknown Unknown
wrf.exe 0000000002DCFA4A Unknown Unknown Unknown
wrf.exe 000000000112B991 Unknown Unknown Unknown
wrf.exe 00000000011E39F0 Unknown Unknown Unknown
wrf.exe 0000000001278A7B Unknown Unknown Unknown
wrf.exe 00000000004CFC1D Unknown Unknown Unknown
wrf.exe 000000000040C2B1 Unknown Unknown Unknown
wrf.exe 000000000040C267 Unknown Unknown Unknown
wrf.exe 000000000040C1F6 Unknown Unknown Unknown 00002B86691CDD20 Unknown Unknown Unknown
wrf.exe 000000000040C0E9 Unknown Unknown Unknown


  • rsl.error.txt
    328.1 KB · Views: 48
    60.6 MB · Views: 36
  • namelist.input.txt
    6.7 KB · Views: 46
I'm not sure what that exact error is, as it's vague and given by the compiler - not the model. But I do have an idea about one thing that could be causing the problem. Your domain is 377x377, which isn't huge, but isn't small. 1 processor isn't going to be enough to run this. Take a look at this FAQ that discusses determining a reasonable number of processors:

On a side note, I would recommend turning debug_level back to 0. In recent versions we have removed this parameter from the default namelist, as it was initially put in for developmental testing purposes and is rarely useful in helping to troubleshoot. If anything, it just adds a lot of junk to the rsl* files, making them nearly impossible to read, and can sometimes even cause the rsl* files to be so large that disk space issues occur.