Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Bug fix for overwriting of LCZ urban cells in LU_INDEX with default USGS urban category. #2153

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 17, 2025

Conversation

lpilz
Copy link
Contributor

@lpilz lpilz commented Jan 8, 2025

TYPE: bug fix

KEYWORDS: LCZ, USGS

SOURCE: Lukas Pilz (Heidelberg University)

DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES:
Problem:
As shown in #2152, for USGS data the wrfinput LU_INDEX field has major differences to the met_em LU_INDEX field. Cells in LU_INDEX which have LCZ categories (>30) were overwritten with the default USGS urban category (1) where FRC_URB2D > 0.5.

Solution:
Add a check similar to the MODIS case above.

ISSUE:
Fixes #2152

LIST OF MODIFIED FILES:
M dyn_em/module_initialize_real.F

TESTS CONDUCTED:

  1. Did local tests, the only differences between wrfinput and met_em which remain are changing LU_INDEX 28 to 16, which is a water body redesignation as to my knowledge.
  2. Jenkins tests have passed.

RELEASE NOTE: Bug fix for wrfinput where LCZ urban cells in LU_INDEX were overwritten with default USGS urban category.

@lpilz
Copy link
Contributor Author

lpilz commented Jan 9, 2025

Sorry about that, it was late...

@weiwangncar
Copy link
Collaborator

The regression test results:

Test Type              | Expected  | Received |  Failed
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =  = = = =
Number of Tests        : 23           24
Number of Builds       : 60           57
Number of Simulations  : 158           150        0
Number of Comparisons  : 95           86        0

Failed Simulations are: 
None
Which comparisons are not bit-for-bit: 
None

Copy link
Collaborator

@dudhia dudhia left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

looks safe

@weiwangncar weiwangncar merged commit d96478d into wrf-model:develop Jan 17, 2025
3 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants