General troubleshooting for instability issues

Any issues with the actual running of the WRF.

General troubleshooting for instability issues

Postby donmorton » Wed Oct 07, 2009 2:28 pm

Hello,

I am a computer scientist (with numerical methods and HPC background) who pretends to know weather modeling with WRF. I have run into the following issue so many times that I thought I'd post a query about it. Often, as is the case right now, I'm doing this on a huge domain (2000x2000x45) on a busy supercomputer, so I don't have a lot of trial and error time. Sometimes I can "play" with a smaller domain at 1km resolution in the rugged region, just to gain insight, and then successfully apply my findings to the larger domain.

I'm often trying to run cases at 1km resolution (using 30s topography) in rugged regions like Montana and Alaska (more Alaska these days). I'll often initialize with FNL or NARR and, very frequently my run stops at whatever value I set for radt (or cudt, if I've forgotten to set cu_physics to 0. Although this "might" suggest issues with whatever LW/SW schemes I'm using (typically RRTM/Dudhia), I've often been told that the problem is more likely that those schemes are getting bad input. One knowledgeable person has suggested the problem likely comes in as the input data at coarse resolution is being scaled down to my grid, causing all sorts of instabilities (he mentioned, in particular, vertical velocities), in the midst of wildly varying terrain.

I can often solve this problem by using a coarser topography (like 2m or, in the case of trying the Mt. McKinley area, 5m), but in some respects this kind of defeats the fun and purpose of doing 1km simulations. And/or, smaller timesteps will sometimes help, and in one case I was able to get this working (in the Alaska Range) by using the 5m topography AND cutting my timestep down to 1/20s (for a 1km grid). Once I got it to run for an hour so, I could then restart it with larger timesteps, but I was still stuck with the 5m topography.

I'm just wondering how folks have typically gotten around these issues. I don't "think" that an initial nesting down from coarse to fine resolution helps (e.g. nest down from 27km, to 9, to 3, to 1km). It seems like any initial instabilities are still present. But, I've wondered about doing a spinup simulation at coarser resolution, hoping to get the instabilities out of there, and then using that to initialize and drive my 1km resolution. It sounds like a royal pain, but maybe I just need to accept this is the way to go about it?!

Just wondering if folks have "tricks of the trade" they're willing to share :)

Thanks,

Don Morton
Arctic Region Supercomputing Center
http://www.arsc.edu/~morton/
donmorton
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 2:16 pm

Re: General troubleshooting for instability issues

Postby donmorton » Wed Oct 07, 2009 2:53 pm

Here's a quick followup on my own post (don't you hate it when people do that?).

After thinking a little more on this, and talking with a colleague, I've realized that there are a couple of logical avenues. They actually seem like no-brainers right now

1) I didn't realize that I can set up nesting so that an inner nest doesn't start until 3 or 6 or whatever hours into the simulation. So, this gives the model time to "get stable." I guess those three columns of start/stop times are in the namelist.input for a reason, eh?

2) What I'm going to try now is just using ndown - I'll try running my simulation over the 2000x2000km region at maybe 4km resolution, and then maybe use that output with ndown.exe to hopefully generate a more stable 1km resolution package.

Any other comments based on experience are welcome!

Don Morton
Arctic Region Supercomputing Center
http://www.arsc.edu/~morton/
donmorton
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 2:16 pm

Re: General troubleshooting for instability issues

Postby kwthomas » Wed Oct 14, 2009 6:51 pm

Hi Don...

I ran WRF 3.0.1.1 this past spring on KRAKEN. I used a 3600x2688x50 domain, 1 km resolution, over the eastern 3/4's of the U.S. I had to use a 6 second timestep, but the jobs ran fine. Forecast length was 30 hours.

Kevin Thomas
Center for Analysis and Prediction of Storms
University of Oklahoma
Kevin W. Thomas
Center for Analysis and Prediction of Storms
University of Oklahoma
kwthomas
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 6:53 pm


Return to Runtime Problems

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests