UEMS/WRF EMS Unofficial Forums

Yes,
It is a general tendency. Stratus and stratocumulus cloud cover is underestimated. I have tried to increase the number of levels but it didn't help.

Hello norulz,
What version of WRF (UEMS) are you using ?
What happens if you compare with real observations, not only from other model outputs ?
Do the differences come from convective clouds only or from other types of clouds ?

Hello everybody,
Has anyone tried to post process a "standard" WRF v4.2 output file (wrfout_d01xxx) with EMS UPP ?
Thank you

wrfm_arw.exe and wrfm_real.exe
I have also tried all the available intel compiled libraries. Never tried wrfm_arw.exe alone.

Hello meteo60, I use Centos 7. I have tried the standard kernel 3.10 and also the newest kernel 5.2. No change. I can set OMP_STACKSIZE at any arbitrary high value but no change. Other strange behaviour : I have a very large domain but with DX = 25km. This one runs but all the wrfout files seem corr...

Hello meteo60, In the newest UEMS version I have a similar problem. The intel libraries worked fine by setting unlimited stack size and OMP_STACKSIZE at an arbitrary high value, for the previous UEMS version. But with this newest UEMS version, it doesn't work. I have the same 174 SIGSERV error, and ...

Thanks god it's working !!!!!!!!!! :D :mrgreen: Oh dear , I am shocked !! I mean it is working with uems intel compiled binaries ! It is approximately faster than PGI compiled binaries by approximately 20-30% on my system. I have found the solution by digging deeper and deeper into the internet. See...

@meteoadriatic

I didn't try yet...

Hello Pattim,
It is V 19.5.1.

I have asked Robert but he doesn't know how to troubleshoot it

Hello,
It still doesn't work on my machine. Intel Core i7 8086K

I have tried to compile WRF from scratch with the intel compiler, last version 2019, old version 2015 , intermediate version 2017 : but same problem. Same SIGSERV error 174.