andreazonato

Those are not modifications I implemented. I'll forward it to Alberto Martilli asking for clarifications

OK, I spoke with Alberto. He said he discussed this term with Mike Barlage and he said it was the same. Anyway, Alberto is OK with this modification you suggest.

Hello everyone, Yes @matthiasdemuzere, now the 4.5* version uses 50-61 LCZ instead of 30-41, in order to avoid the overlapping with NLCD landuse categories. So, @VladimirSobral you have 2 possibilities...

Hi @wefoust Actually, LANDUSEF is not used by WRF. You should modify LU_INDEX and IVGTYP (AND NUM_LAND_CAT=61 to make them readable by WRF Andrea

Hi @dargueso , I do not think the NoUrban file should be the problem. The params too is strange! What are the errors?

No, it doesn't use LANDUSEF. It is used just for tiling NOAH in case you use the MOSAIC approach. BUT it is the variable I'm using in WRF to use...

Yes! Defininetely makes sense. Thanks @matthiasdemuzere ! I'l try it tomorrow

> Hmmm the truth is that the new version doesn't calculate the NoUrban well, my guess is that it is looking for the previous categories. I'll need to fix that....

Hi guys, @matthiasdemuzere , thank you for summarizing. I do not think there are additional issues. Maybe we will still reply and help W2W users until the W2W is inside...

@matthiasdemuzere I think there is no need to add additional variables. @dargueso is simply taking advantage of this variable (LANDUSEF, B.2: geog_data_res = “cglc_modis_lcz+default”) , to derive the percentage of...