Skip to content

Add variables needed for SLUCM with 2D maps of urban parameters and anthropogenic heat#244

Merged
mgduda merged 5 commits intowrf-model:developfrom
epn09:wrf_distributed_urban_params
May 9, 2024
Merged

Add variables needed for SLUCM with 2D maps of urban parameters and anthropogenic heat#244
mgduda merged 5 commits intowrf-model:developfrom
epn09:wrf_distributed_urban_params

Conversation

@epn09
Copy link
Contributor

@epn09 epn09 commented Jan 24, 2024

Author: Do Ngoc Khanh, Shibaura Institute of Technology.

  • Related to [Resubmit for PR #1881] New option for SLUCM to use global distributed urban aerodynamic parameters WRF#1986.
  • This PR modifies GEOGRID.TBL.ARW to include variables needed for SLUCM with 2D maps of urban morphological parameters and anthropogenic heat.
  • The binary files can be downloaded from here: https://urbanclimate.tse.ens.titech.ac.jp/database/slucm_distributed_drags_static_data
    • AHE_2010s.tar.gz: 2010s anthropogenic heat. Source: [2].
    • AHE_2050s.tar.gz: Projected 2050s anthropogenic heat. Source: [2].
    • urban_parameters.tar.gz: 2010s and projected 2050s urban parameters. Source: [1].
    • Land use. Source [1, 2], default MODIS in WRF.
      • modis_landuse_20class_15s_2010s.tar.gz: The default modis_landuse_20class_15s with all grids with LandScan population density > 1000 people/km^2 converted to urban category (number 13). This was done because we found that the urban area in the default modis_landuse_20class_15s was too small. Better methods or data source are welcomed.
      • modis_landuse_20class_15s_2050s.tar.gz: Same as the above but projected 2050s population density is used.
      • modis_landuse_20class_15s_2010s_with_lakes.tar.gz, modis_landuse_20class_15s_2010s_with_lakes.tar.gz: Same as the above but using the modis with lakes version as the base for modification.
    • greenfrac_fcover_cgls.tar.gz and lai_cgls.tar.gz are the 2010-2019 averages of the CGLS green cover and LAI datasets. Because urban fraction is estimated from green fraction, using this dataset is preferable. One problem with the default MODIS greenfrac and LAI is that they have zero value for urban. They can be selected by adding +cgls_veg to the namelist.wps. Source: [3, 4]. The ensemble average is made by me.
    • The option modis_veg_no_search is the same as the default MODIS greenfrac and LAI but with the +search removed. The reason is because +search generates artificial patched vegetation patterns for urban areas.

Manual: https://urbanclimate.tse.ens.titech.ac.jp/database/slucm_distributed_drags_manual.pdf

Source:
[1] Khanh, D.N., Varquez, A. C. G., & Kanda, M. (2023). Impact of urbanization on exposure to extreme warming in megacities. Heliyon, 9(4).
[2] Varquez, A. C. G., Kiyomoto, S., Khanh, D. N., & Kanda, M. (2021). Global 1-km present and future hourly anthropogenic heat flux. Scientific Data, 8(1), 64.
[3] CGLS Fraction of Green Cover. https://land.copernicus.eu/en/products/vegetation/fraction-of-green-vegetation-cover-v2-0-1km
[4] CGLS Leaf Area Index. https://land.copernicus.eu/en/products/vegetation/leaf-area-index-v2-0-1km

@epn09 epn09 changed the title Add variables needed for SLUCM with 2D maps of urban parameters and anthropogenic heat [DON'T MERGE YET] Add variables needed for SLUCM with 2D maps of urban parameters and anthropogenic heat Feb 14, 2024
@epn09 epn09 changed the title [DON'T MERGE YET] Add variables needed for SLUCM with 2D maps of urban parameters and anthropogenic heat Add variables needed for SLUCM with 2D maps of urban parameters and anthropogenic heat Feb 16, 2024
@epn09
Copy link
Contributor Author

epn09 commented Feb 22, 2024

@cenlinhe This the static data for the SLUCM distributed drag physics.

@weiwangncar
Copy link
Collaborator

@epn09 Can you let us know the source of these files? Who produced them? Name and organization? Thanks!

@epn09
Copy link
Contributor Author

epn09 commented Apr 26, 2024

@weiwangncar I've updated the PR description. Please check. Thanks!

@weiwangncar
Copy link
Collaborator

@epn09 Thanks! Another question: what's the diff between AHE 2-byte and 3-byte datasets? Resolution?

@weiwangncar
Copy link
Collaborator

I have run a test to process the new data, and it seems to work fine. I placed the data in a subdirectory under WPS_GEOG/slucm/. This requires the change of the location for the data in geogrid/GEOGRID.TBL. Suggestions are welcome.

@cenlinhe
Copy link
Contributor

I have run a test to process the new data, and it seems to work fine. I placed the data in a subdirectory under WPS_GEOG/slucm/. This requires the change of the location for the data in geogrid/GEOGRID.TBL. Suggestions are welcome.

putting it to WPS_GEOG/slucm/ sounds good to me.

@cenlinhe
Copy link
Contributor

we will also need to upload it to the wps_geog data website.

@epn09
Copy link
Contributor Author

epn09 commented Apr 26, 2024

@epn09 Thanks! Another question: what's the diff between AHE 2-byte and 3-byte datasets? Resolution?

@weiwangncar in most location, AHE can be represented using only 2 bytes. For very few big cities like Tokyo, 3 bytes are needed. Therefore, we separated them to save storage space. There is no tile having data in both 2- and 3-byte format.

@weiwangncar
Copy link
Collaborator

@epn09 If you also agree we can put all the new data under a directory slucm/, can you please add slucm/ to the data path such that, for example, rel_path = y2010_ahe:AHE_2010s/2_bytes/ will become rel_path = y2010_ahe:slucm/AHE_2010s/2_bytes/. Can you make the change in the GEOGRID.TBL.ARW file? Thanks.

@epn09
Copy link
Contributor Author

epn09 commented May 1, 2024

@weiwangncar

Is it directory structure satisfactory? I feel like putting green fraction, LAI and modis landuse to slucm folder is a little bit weird.

WPS_GEOG/
├── greenfrac_fcover_cgls
├── lai_cgls
├── modis_landuse_20class_15s_2010s
├── modis_landuse_20class_15s_2050s
├── modis_landuse_20class_15s_with_lakes
├── modis_landuse_20class_30s_with_lakes
└── slucm
     ├── AHE_2010s
     │   ├── 2_bytes
     │   └── 3_bytes
     ├── AHE_2050s
     │   ├── 2_bytes
     │   └── 3_bytes
     └── urban_params
         ├── 2010
         │   ├── d
         │   ├── H_avg
         │   ├── lambda_f
         │   ├── lambda_p
         │   └── z_0
         └── 2050
             ├── d
             ├── H_avg
             ├── lambda_f
             ├── lambda_p
             └── z_0

@weiwangncar
Copy link
Collaborator

@epn09 The advantage to place all of the relevant files together is for a user to consider them together.
@cenlinhe What do you think?

@epn09
Copy link
Contributor Author

epn09 commented May 6, 2024

@cenlinhe What's your opinion?

@cenlinhe
Copy link
Contributor

cenlinhe commented May 6, 2024

I think Wei's suggestion might be better, since your LAI and MODIS data are designed to work with your urban modifications. We do not want to mess up with the standard WRF/WPS MODIS dataset. I would suggest putting your data under SLUCM or even rename the folder as something like SLUCM_EPN (as a identifier for your scheme's dataset)

@mgduda mgduda self-requested a review May 6, 2024 21:19
@mgduda mgduda changed the base branch from master to develop May 6, 2024 21:19
@epn09
Copy link
Contributor Author

epn09 commented May 7, 2024

@weiwangncar @cenlinhe I've modified GEOGRID.TBL.ARW so that all new static data are under slucm_kvnk subdirectory. The manual pdf file is also updated to reflect this. Please check. https://urbanclimate.tse.ens.titech.ac.jp/database/slucm_distributed_drags_manual.pdf

@mgduda mgduda requested a review from weiwangncar May 7, 2024 01:32
@weiwangncar
Copy link
Collaborator

@epn09 Does kvnk mean something?
@mgduda Should the branch this PR is compared to different than develop?

@epn09
Copy link
Contributor Author

epn09 commented May 7, 2024

@weiwangncar kvnk is the combination of the initials of the people who developed this model (Khanh, Varquez, Nakayoshi, and Kanda). I have no specific preference for this naming. If you have suggestions about other user-friendly names, please let me know.

@weiwangncar
Copy link
Collaborator

@dudhia @cenlinhe Are you ok with this subdirectory name?

@cenlinhe
Copy link
Contributor

cenlinhe commented May 7, 2024

I would suggest using the paper-related name, something like: slucm_Khanh2023 (if the paper is Khanh et al., 2023), just my two cents

@dudhia
Copy link

dudhia commented May 7, 2024

I think just slucm is fine. Wasn't that the original name in this commit?

@epn09
Copy link
Contributor Author

epn09 commented May 7, 2024

So, what's the final decision about naming?

@weiwangncar
Copy link
Collaborator

@cenlinhe @dudhia I'm ok with just slucm, or slucm_Khanh2023. If slucm serves the purpose, I'd say we should go for something simpler.

@cenlinhe
Copy link
Contributor

cenlinhe commented May 8, 2024

I am fine with slucm. The original reason for me to suggest put a suffix after slucm (e.g., slucm_K23) is to differentiate it from any potential future SLUCM-related data. If this is not a concern, then we can go with slucm for now.

@epn09
Copy link
Contributor Author

epn09 commented May 9, 2024

@cenlinhe @weiwangncar I've changed the directory name to slucm.

Copy link
Collaborator

@weiwangncar weiwangncar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Still wonder why the some of the changed files are not related to the table change.

@epn09
Copy link
Contributor Author

epn09 commented May 9, 2024

Still wonder why the some of the changed files are not related to the table change.

@weiwangncar Those changes are due to the difference between the master and the develop branch. My changes are based on the master branch but the merging target of this PR was set to develop by @mgduda.

@mgduda
Copy link
Collaborator

mgduda commented May 9, 2024

Still wonder why the some of the changed files are not related to the table change.

@weiwangncar Those changes are due to the difference between the master and the develop branch. My changes are based on the master branch but the merging target of this PR was set to develop by @mgduda.

I'm not quite sure what's going on. The master branch was merged into the develop branch (81fc0d8), and so the commits b07ae29 .. 5a2ae63 that GitHub is showing as new in this PR are already on develop. I'll try changing the base branch to something other than develop, then back to develop again to see if GitHub recognizes the commits already on develop. Otherwise, I can verify the merge-base is actually correct (in spite of what GitHub says) on the command-line.

@mgduda mgduda changed the base branch from develop to master May 9, 2024 03:18
@mgduda mgduda changed the base branch from master to develop May 9, 2024 03:18
@mgduda mgduda merged commit 0ab1372 into wrf-model:develop May 9, 2024
@epn09 epn09 deleted the wrf_distributed_urban_params branch May 10, 2024 00:31
@imreduzmat
Copy link

Hello, I accidentally came across this link and decided to ask you.. Is it possible to add data with a resolution of 10m on the land surface. Similar to CORINE Land Cover (https://land.copernicus.eu/en/products/corine- land-cover/clc2018) but with a resolution of 10m, taking the data from CLC+Backbone
(https://land.copernicus.eu/en/products/clc-backbone?fbclid=IwAR29NU-6vwFBBxYfadQpB2B8NG9F3ZTj3LpjXFSeZjkUC2RdyMn7qYFb98k) The aim is to simulate the influence of roads, buildings and clutter, but with a resolution of 10m. It may be included in the SLUCM (urban WRF) package, but I am not aware of it.

Thank you for your attention

@zhouleo0619-maker
Copy link

Hello, I noticed that after enabling distributed_aerodynamics_option, the following code in module_sf_urban.F is executed:

IF (distributed_aerodynamics_option) THEN ZDC = 0. IF (Z0_URB > MH_URB) THEN FATAL_ERROR("Z0_URB is larger than MH_URB") END IF ZR = MAX(MH_URB, 3.5) Z0C = MAX(Z0_URB, 0.1) ... END IF

Could you please explain why ZDC is forced to 0 here, instead of being read from the corresponding grid value zd in the met_em* files?

@epn09
Copy link
Contributor Author

epn09 commented Sep 11, 2025

@zhouleo0619-maker Hello. Because under this option, Displacement height in met_em* files is added directly to topography in the real.exe step (see the code here: https://github.com/wrf-model/WRF/blob/f52c197ed39d12e087d02c50f412d90d418f6186/dyn_em/module_initialize_real.F#L626-L633). Therefore, we don't consider it once more in the urban module.

@zhouleo0619-maker
Copy link

zhouleo0619-maker commented Sep 11, 2025 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants