[Wrf-users] landuse, tmn, changing to land points

[Michael John Shaw]

Hi.

I have a few questions.

First, lu_index seems to only indicate seaice versus non-seaice in my
output, and like seaice is incorporated as "permanent ice".  It does not
appear that there is another reasonable landuse variable to check this
(xlus e.g.?) in my output or input files.  It does appear that vegcat
could serve as landuse, though from a quick look into the code, it looks
more like lu_index is important to have correct.  Incidentally, the
output file indicates that mminlus is "USGS" (if I ncdump, e.g.), at
least when I've tried using ncep1 data (which was processed with
mm5pconvert), but not with ncep2 data (which was processed
with wrfsi all the way through).  Perhaps relatedly, this is echoed by
wrf:



WRF V2.1.1 MODEL
 DYNAMICS OPTION: Eulerian Mass Coordinate
 med_initialdata_input: calling input_model_input
 INPUT LANDUSE =
 LANDUSE IN INPUT FILE DOES NOT MATCH LUTABLE: TABLE NOT USED
 INITIALIZE THREE Noah LSM RELATED TABLES
  INPUT LANDUSE = USGS
  LANDUSE TYPE = USGS FOUND           27  CATEGORIES
  INPUT SOIL TEXTURE CLASSIFICAION = STAS



which seems to indicate that there is a landuse mismatch, yet USGS landuse
IS being obtained.  Any thoughts on this?

I also get lots of tmn errors echoed by real.exe, yet my tmn looks ok in
output.  In the input files (wrf_real...), tmn looks very different
from the output values - it's a nearly uniform field that gets
slightly cooler toward the pole.  The errors are, e.g.,



i,j=            5           11
 landmask=    1.000000
 tsk, sst, tmn=    273.1546        273.1154        0.000000
 error in the TMN
 is the echo by real.exe.



Any thoughts?

Finally, real.exe echoes a bunch of this:



 changing to land at point             6           10
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18 19
20  21  22  23  24
  0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0   0  0
0   0   0   0   0



followed immediately by this:



forcing artificial silty clay loam at 2035 points, out of   3726



Any thoughts?  I'd love to get some feedback before digging much more into
the code, e.g..

It is hard to tell from any other output whether landuse is being properly
utilized (though lu_index being such a mess does not look like a good
sign!).

Thanks.