# Questions on windblown dust and PM10 calculation by CMAQ

**URL:** <https://forum.cmascenter.org/t/questions-on-windblown-dust-and-pm10-calculation-by-cmaq/1750>\
**Category:** CMAQ\
**Created:** [September 3, 2020, 5:56pm UTC](https://forum.cmascenter.org/t/questions-on-windblown-dust-and-pm10-calculation-by-cmaq/1750 "2020-09-03T17:56:05Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 10

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![FengLiu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/49beb7/32.png) [@FengLiu](https://forum.cmascenter.org/u/FengLiu)\
**Post date:** [September 10, 2020, 7:33pm UTC](https://forum.cmascenter.org/t/questions-on-windblown-dust-and-pm10-calculation-by-cmaq/1750/10 "2020-09-10T19:33:20Z")

</div>

Hello Hosein Foroutan,  
It is nice to get your response. Thank you.

Yes, I noticed that module dust\_emis in the CMAQ system is used for re-calculating the U\*. For your question, please find some information about inputs to WRF and CMAQ as following:

1. I used WRF4.1.1.
2. geog input data for WPS: geog\_data\_res = ‘nlcd2011\_9s’.
3. The physics schemes including pbl and land surface schemes for the first WRF/CMAQ run I discussed here are:  
bl\_pbl\_physics = 2,  
sf\_sfclay\_physics = 2,  
sf\_surface\_physics = 2,
4. Land use data used in CMAQ: EPA BELD3.  
BELD4 does not work so far and please refer to the post [Errors in inline windblown dust using BELD4 data with CMAQv5.3](https://forum.cmascenter.org/t/errors-in-inline-windblown-dust-using-beld4-data-with-cmaqv5-3/1438).  
I am going to try to use “unknown” option to use MCIP land use, and have yet to get the results.
5. I also tested other schemes in WRF including ACM2  
bl\_pbl\_physics = 7,  
sf\_sfclay\_physics = 7,  
sf\_surface\_physics = 7,  
num\_soil\_layers = 2,  
In addition I also tested MYJ, MYNN2, and MYNN3 pbl schemes using the latest WRF4.2.1. Because high quality wind simulations is the most important factor in CMAQ windblown dust modeling. I did not use those WRF runs to drive CMAQ windblown dust because NONE of those WRF outputs provides satisfied wind speeds based on WRF model performance evaluation using AMET1.4 .

I have two questions after read your paper [https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2016MS000823](https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2016MS000823).

1. You mentioned in the paper that “global MODIS FPAR data in the MOD15A2 product at 1 km resolution and every 8 days [_Myneni et al_ ., [2011](https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2016MS000823#jame20374-bib-0053)] are processed and regridded onto the computational domain…” I did not find the 8-day MOD15A2 data or data processor for WRF input. I just found monthly GREENFRAC (vegetation fraction). Is that users’ responsibility to process 8-day MODIS FPAR?
2. Soil moisture from WRF/MCIP should be re-calculated by factor 0.1 according to your paper when Noah LSM land surface model is used (as my first case described in Section 4 above). Do I have to manually do that by updating the code or we have set a switch in the CMAQ system to realize that? ( I did not check the code myself).  
Thank you very much for taking the time to check and reply.  
Feng

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.cmascenter.org/t/questions-on-windblown-dust-and-pm10-calculation-by-cmaq/1750)._