The current simulation with wrf.exe (WRFV3.9.1.1 + WRFIO_NCD_LARGE_FILE_SUPPORT=1) is generating 12G nc files. Content of first nc file (say wrfout_d01_2018-07-24_00:00:00.nc) is good but subsequent files ( wrfout_d01_2018-07-24_01:00:00.nc, wrfout_*_02:00:00.nc) have too many NaNf .
I tried GNU as well as INTEL (v17) version of the binary, the NaNf behavior is same. Here is the namelist file -
- Code: Select all
&time_control
run_hours = 75,
start_year = 2018, 2000, 2000,
start_month = 04, 01, 01,
start_day = 27, 24, 24,
start_hour = 00, 12, 12,
start_minute = 00, 00, 00,
start_second = 00, 00, 00,
end_year = 2018, 2000, 2000,
end_month = 04, 01, 01,
end_day = 30, 25, 25,
end_hour = 06, 12, 12,
end_minute = 00, 00, 00,
end_second = 00, 00, 00,
interval_seconds = 21600
input_from_file = .true.,.true.,.true.,
history_interval = 60, 60, 60,
history_outname = "wrfout_d<domain>_<date>.nc"
frames_per_outfile = 1, 1, 1,
restart = .false.,
restart_interval = 10800,
io_form_history = 2
io_form_restart = 2
io_form_input = 2
io_form_boundary = 2
debug_level = 0
/
&domains
time_step = 12,
time_step_fract_num = 0,
time_step_fract_den = 1,
max_dom = 1,
s_we = 1, 1, 1,
e_we = 1951, 1321, 199,
s_sn = 1, 1, 1,
e_sn = 1851, 1321, 199
s_vert = 1, 1, 1
e_vert = 45, 30, 30,
p_top_requested = 5000,
num_metgrid_levels = 27,
num_metgrid_soil_levels = 4,
dx = 3000, 10000, 3333.33,
dy = 3000, 10000, 3333.33,
grid_id = 1, 2, 3,
parent_id = 0, 1, 2,
i_parent_start = 1, 31, 30,
j_parent_start = 1, 17, 30,
parent_grid_ratio = 1, 3, 3,
parent_time_step_ratio = 1, 3, 3,
p_top_requested = 5000,
eta_levels = 1.000, 0.995, 0.988, 0.980, 0.970, 0.960, 0.945, 0.930, 0.910, 0.890, 0.870, 0.850, 0.820, 0.790, 0.760, 0.730, 0.690, 0.650, 0.610, 0.570, 0.530,0.490, 0.450, 0.410, 0.370, 0.340, 0.310, 0.280, 0.260, 0.240, 0.220, 0.200, 0.180, 0.160, 0.140, 0.120, 0.100, 0.082, 0.066, 0.052, 0.040, 0.030, 0.020, 0.010, 0.000,
feedback = 1,
smooth_option = 1
/
&physics
mp_physics = 4, 4, 8,
ra_lw_physics = 5, 4, 4,
ra_sw_physics = 5, 4, 4,
radt = 9, 9, 10,
sf_sfclay_physics = 2, 2, 2,
sf_surface_physics = 2, 2, 2,
bl_pbl_physics = 2, 2, 2,
bldt = 0, 0, 0,
cu_physics = 5, 5, 0,
cudt = 5, 5, 5,
isfflx = 1,
ifsnow = 0,
icloud = 1,
surface_input_source = 1,
num_soil_layers = 4,
mp_zero_out = 0,
maxiens = 1,
maxens = 3,
maxens2 = 3,
maxens3 = 16,
/
&fdda
/
&dynamics
w_damping = 1,
diff_opt = 1, 1, 1,
km_opt = 4, 4, 4,
diff_6th_opt = 2, 0, 0,
diff_6th_factor = 0.12, 0.12, 0.12,
base_temp = 290.
damp_opt = 3,
zdamp = 5000., 5000., 5000.,
dampcoef = 0.3, 0.3, 0.3
khdif = 0, 0, 0,
kvdif = 0, 0, 0,
non_hydrostatic = .true., .true., .true.,
moist_adv_opt = 1, 1, 1,
scalar_adv_opt = 1, 1, 1,
/
&bdy_control
spec_bdy_width = 5,
spec_zone = 1,
relax_zone = 4,
specified = .true., .false.,.false.,
nested = .false., .true., .true.,
/
&grib2
/
&namelist_quilt
nio_tasks_per_group = 0,
nio_groups = 1,
/
The met*nc files also seem okay (checked with xconv/ncdump)
met_em.d01.2018-04-27_00:00:00.nc
met_em.d01.2018-04-27_06:00:00.nc
Earlier i was suspecting the netcdf library, but the first file was good . Now i am suspecting the input conditions.
What could be the potential reason behind this behavior (simulation messing up after first time-step)?.
Please let me know if i can provide more further information on this issue.
