<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
You are in the grey zone… I have tried both cu and no-cu. Unfortunately, results are sensitive.
<div class="">—j<br class="">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Jun 29, 2016, at 2:40 AM, Jonas Kaufmann <<a href="mailto:jonas.kaufmann@gmail.com" class="">jonas.kaufmann@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">Hello Thomas,
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">yes, I think I have to test the CU scheme in my use case - but maybe some other users were facing the same problem, too. In my current test case and for my optimization it looks like running without a CU scheme might be better. </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Thank you for your hint regarding the PBL scheme. I am looking to optimize for 10m above ground winds, for this I am using the YSU scheme (bl_pbl_scheme = 1). I am still testing with topo_wind = 1 enabled. Does anyone have experience with this
use case or maybe a hint for a better configuration?</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Best regards,</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Jonas</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br class="">
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 1:31 AM, Thomas Kloetzke <span dir="ltr" class="">
<<a href="mailto:t.kloetzke@uq.edu.au" target="_blank" class="">t.kloetzke@uq.edu.au</a>></span> wrote:<br class="">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-AU" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72" class="">
<div class="">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d" class="">Hi Jonas,<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d" class="">indeed, between 3 km (or 4 km) and 10 km it is a bit hard to find out what suits best.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d" class="">I was running WRF for a simulation of an observed tropical cyclone (for reproduction) and my domains were 10 km and 3.3 km (following the 1:3 grid ratio).
For the outer domain, I always used a cumulus scheme, for the inner domain I tried both cumulus scheme on and off and there were only tiny differences regarding track and intensity. But this may differ from case to case.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d" class="">From my personal point of view, there is no thumb rule saying: You have to use a CU scheme or not for resolutions below 10 km. As I said before, this
can be different depending what are you trying to simulate. I would recommend to try both, first leave the CU scheme on for the 4 km domain, second, turn it off and compare the results. From this sort of simulation you will learn much more about the behaviour
of the CU scheme and it’ll help you to evaluate which parameterisation might fit better.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d" class="">Which pressure levels do you use for your wind forecasts? For low-level winds, the choice of the planetary boundary layer scheme will be important as
well.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d" class="">Hope this helps. I am happy to discuss more about that, as I am in the learning process as well and I think many people might be interested in sharing
some experiences as well.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d" class="">Regards,<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d" class="">Thomas<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b class=""><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif" class="">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif" class="">
<a href="mailto:wrf-users-bounces@ucar.edu" target="_blank" class="">wrf-users-bounces@ucar.edu</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:wrf-users-bounces@ucar.edu" target="_blank" class="">wrf-users-bounces@ucar.edu</a>]
<b class="">On Behalf Of </b>Jonas Kaufmann<br class="">
<b class="">Sent:</b> Wednesday, 29 June 2016 6:09 AM<span class=""><br class="">
<b class="">To:</b> <a href="mailto:wrf-users@ucar.edu" target="_blank" class="">
wrf-users@ucar.edu</a><br class="">
<b class="">Subject:</b> [Wrf-users] cu_physics for dx = 7km<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></p>
<div class="">
<p class="MsoNormal">Hello,<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></p>
<div class="">
<div class="h5">
<div class="">
<p class="MsoNormal"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></p>
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt" class="">I have set up a domain over Europe with 7km resolution. My main focus is to generate wind forecasts with this domain.<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p>
</div>
<div class="">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p>
</div>
<div class="">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt" class="">I am comparing outputs between different physics settings, and there is one thing with Cumulus schemes that I do not understand at the moment. I have found presentations online that said that below
4km resolution you probably won't need a cumulus scheme, between 4km and 10km it is not sure and above 10km you need a cumulus scheme. However I have also found that the Grell 3D scheme (cu_physics = 5) is also supported for resolutions below 10km. <u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p>
</div>
<div class="">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p>
</div>
<div class="">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt" class="">Now I am not sure how to proceed with this. Can you give a recommendation when to use the Grell 3D scheme vs. not using a Cumulus scheme for my use case? <u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p>
</div>
<div class="">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p>
</div>
<div class="">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p>
</div>
<div class="">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt" class="">Thank you for your help!<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p>
</div>
<div class="">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p>
</div>
<div class="">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt" class="">Best regards,<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p>
</div>
<div class="">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt" class=""><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></span></p>
</div>
<div class="">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt" class="">Jonas<u class=""></u><u class=""></u></span></p>
</div>
<div class="">
<p class="MsoNormal"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></p>
</div>
<div class="">
<p class="MsoNormal"><u class=""></u> <u class=""></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">
Wrf-users mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:Wrf-users@ucar.edu" class="">Wrf-users@ucar.edu</a><br class="">
http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/wrf-users<br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</div>
<br>
<font face="Arial" size="2">PUBLIC RECORDS NOTICE: In accordance with NRS Chapter 239, this email and responses, unless otherwise made confidential by law, may be subject to the Nevada Public Records laws and may be disclosed to the public upon request.</font>
</body>
</html>