Recommended WRF configuration for FastEddy downscaled simulations #120
Unanswered
gioviciconte
asked this question in
General
Replies: 1 comment
-
|
There is no such thing as optimal WRF configuration to use to drive your FastEddy simulations. There are many sensitivities to physics parameterization schemes and other options from the mesoscale side, and the specific choice depends on the application, location of interest, ICs, and many more. Ensembles are always a good way to have an understanding of these uncertainties. Also, comparisons to observations, especially when few and localized present additional challenges that need to be considered. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
I am following the steps in the tutorial for running a real‑world downscaled FastEddy simulation, and I am comparing the results with met mast measurements. At the moment, the downscaled results show some discrepancies compared to the measurements, and I’m trying to identify the source of the issue.
Should I consider any specific WRF settings when using WRF outputs as input for FastEddy?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions