w2w
w2w copied to clipboard
Using LCZ map via w2w caused wrf.exe to terminate
Describe your issue
Hi, when I was using the w2w tool, the pre-processing should have been done correctly. But the wrf.exe program broke at the beginning (after generating wrfout_d01, wrfout_d02). The rsl.error file has no obvious error message, only the following message is displayed on the operation interface. The version of wrf is 4.3.3, these are parameter files
namelist.input.txt
namelist.wps.txt
. The lcz map i use is from https://zenodo.org/record/7324909. How can we solve this problem?
w2w --version
0.5.0
nc-config --all
netcdf-c-4.7.2
netcdf-cxx4-4.3.0
netcdf-fortran-4.5.2
Installed Packages
Package Version
--------------- ------------
affine 2.4.0
attrs 23.1.0
certifi 2023.7.22
cftime 1.6.2
click 8.1.7
click-plugins 1.1.1
cligj 0.7.2
ecmwflibs 0.5.3
findlibs 0.0.5
h5netcdf 1.2.0
h5py 3.9.0
netCDF4 1.6.4
numpy 1.25.2
packaging 23.1
pandas 2.1.0
pip 23.2.1
pyparsing 3.1.1
pyproj 3.6.0
python-dateutil 2.8.2
pytz 2023.3.post1
rasterio 1.3.8
rioxarray 0.15.0
scipy 1.11.2
setuptools 68.0.0
six 1.16.0
snuggs 1.4.7
tqdm 4.66.1
tzdata 2023.3
w2w 0.5.0
wheel 0.38.4
xarray 2023.8.0
Traceback
No response
Hi @hwangjiacheng,
- did you check the geo_em files provided by W2W? Do they look as expected?
- Which of the files do you then use as input for the model? The geo_em.dXX_LCZ_params.nc one?
- As far as I can see, your namelist.input.txt file looks ok?
If all of the above are ok, then it seems to be an issue on the wrf-side? @andreazonato, have you seen this before?
Hi @hwangjiacheng
Actually you gave me too few information to debug.
Can you please increase the debug_level in WRF?
And...did you check if real provides correct wrfinput? And...you should turn on sf_urban_physics=3 for all the domains
Hi @hwangjiacheng,
- did you check the geo_em files provided by W2W? Do they look as expected?
- Which of the files do you then use as input for the model? The geo_em.dXX_LCZ_params.nc one?
- As far as I can see, your namelist.input.txt file looks ok?
If all of the above are ok, then it seems to be an issue on the wrf-side? @andreazonato, have you seen this before?
Thank you for your reply.
-
Yes, I have checked these files and they seem to be right? geo_em files.zip (below is the geo_em.d03 file)
-
Yes, I used the geo_em.d03_LCZ_params.nc file.
-
Here are some error logs that may provide more information. rsl.error.0000 (real.exe).txt rsl.error.0000 (wrf.exe).txt
Hi @hwangjiacheng
Actually you gave me too few information to debug.
Can you please increase the debug_level in WRF?
And...did you check if real provides correct wrfinput? And...you should turn on sf_urban_physics=3 for all the domains
Thank you for your reply.
-
Here are some files produced by the wrf that may provide more information. (wrfinput_d01 and wrfinput_d02 are too large to upload) geo_em files.zip rsl.error.0000 (real.exe).txt rsl.error.0000 (wrf.exe).txt wrfinput_d03.txt
-
Thanks for your suggestion, I will try to raise debug_level. But I don't know about this parameter, what does it control?
-
The error log of the real.exe shows that it is running correctly. But I'm just starting to learn wrf and don't know how to check wrfinput files.
-
Thanks for your suggestion, i tried to turn on sf_urban_physics=3 for all the domains, but wrf.exe still couldn't run.
Quick question: is it running without LCZS?
Quick question: is it running without LCZS?
Yes, it works. If using lczs, wrf.exe will stop after generating wrfout_d01 and wrfout_d02 for the first hour (wrfout_d03 cannot be generated).
@hwangjiacheng just checking here. Did you manage to resolve this issue?
@hwangjiacheng have you managed to solve this problem yet? I've encountered a similar issue and haven't been able to resolve it so far.
I am also facing the same issue. If you have already solve the issue @hwangjiacheng please let me know.
Which WRF versions are you running guys? Is it requiring LCZ to be 30-40 or 50-60?
@LJroy1998 I changed to a better computer and the problem was solved. Could it be related to memory performance?
@hihihiccc I changed to a better computer and the problem was solved. Could it be related to memory performance?
@andreazonato i am using WRF version 4.3.
@hwangjiacheng That could be possible i have to check
Maybe you should simply add processors to your computation. If you are using WRF version 4.3, then LCZ should go from 30 to 40
I will look into that solution @andreazonato and let you know if it works. Thank you for the help
@hwangjiacheng what is the configuration of your upgraded system?
@hwangjiacheng can you please tell me what is the configuration of your upgraded computer?