NOAH land-use scheme not supported?

WRF-CMAQ
1

I had thought that one could use NOAH LSM in WRF-CMAQ. However, when I run on the SE52BENCH ICON/BCON data, I see the following error:

*** ERROR ABORT in subroutine Init_LSM on PE 000
Land use scheme not supported

Am I missing something? Can WRF-CMAQ run on NOAH? Or does this error refer to something else?

2

If you are using the sequential model (WRF then CMAQ) rather than the coupled model, then you can use the NOAH LSM. I believe that the coupled WRF-CMAQ model is intricately tied to the Pleim-Xiu LSM in WRF.

3

At the current release WRF-CMAQ coupled model does only support PX LSM. For NOAH LSM, we are considering to implement it in the future release.

4

Hi

I have the same problem. Could you guide me on how to solve it, please?

  3      000115       2
    2      000115       2
    1      000115       2
 Value for CTM_CKSUM:  Y returning TRUE
 Value for CTM_ILDEPV:  Y returning TRUE
 Value for CTM_ABFLUX:  N returning FALSE
 Value for CTM_SFC_HONO:  Y returning TRUE
 Value for CTM_MOSAIC:  N returning FALSE


 *** ERROR ABORT in subroutine Init_LSM on PE 000        
 Land use scheme not supported

Thank you

5

@esm What land use scheme are you attempting to use?

6

Hi Liz

I solved it. I changed the land use scheme.
Thank you

7

It appears noah_mp is not supported for WRF-CMAQ v 5.3.3? The coupled model (and also the WRF-only part) runs when sf_surface is set to 2 but not for 4 (noah_mp). Is there a way to get around this? What could be a limitation of noah compared to noah_mp? My runscript and rsl.*.error files are attached.
rsl.error.0000.txt (6.9 KB)
base_cplrun.txt (50.0 KB)

8

I found a paper on the WRF-CMAQ that describes how NOAH was incorporated into WRF-CMAQ.
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2018MS001422
I do not know if there is a development effort to incorporate NOAH_MP.

9

I also do not have any insights into whether there are any development efforts to incorporate NOAH_MP into the offline or coupled CMAQ model and what (if any) obstacles may exist for doing so.

Regarding the Campbell et al (2018) study, please note that most but not all of the developments described in that study are part of the WRF and CMAQ release codes. Notably, the windblown dust module in the released version of CMAQ continues to expect the first soil layer to have a depth of 1 cm which is not satisfied when using the NOAH LSM in WRF. For additional context, see this earlier discussion.