This archive contains answers to questions sent to Unidata support through mid-2025. Note that the archive is no longer being updated. We provide the archive for reference; many of the answers presented here remain technically correct, even if somewhat outdated. For the most up-to-date information on the use of NSF Unidata software and data services, please consult the Software Documentation first.
Hi Randy- > Last December you were helping us with an issue we had when displaying cross > sectional data from wrf. I am enclosing a screen shot of the problem. Last > year you wrote: > > "The blank line is a function of the sampling that we have > to do between the native coordinates and the calculated lat/lon/alt > values. I don't have a good solution for that." > > Since it is very important for us to display this data in its entirety, can > you elaborate on your statement above so we can think about how it might be > corrected. The problem is that with the staggered native netCDF WRF grids, we have to create a lookup between the native coords and lat/lon/alt. This results in a huge memory allocation which you see. The other side effect is that the lookup is not always accurate. Is there a reason you don't run the WRF post processor on these grids to convert to pressure coordinates? That would create a great memory savings and allow you to do the cross sections. Don Murray > --- On Fri, 12/14/07, Unidata IDV Support <address@hidden> wrote: > > > From: Unidata IDV Support <address@hidden> > > Subject: [Support #YRR-987022]: Fwd: issue displaying 3D fields overlayed > > on terrain > > To: address@hidden > > Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden > > Date: Friday, December 14, 2007, 3:18 PM > > Hi Randy- > > > > > we have WRF output in netcdf that we are reading into > > > IDV (actually its Mcidas-V). We have been trying to > > > display the 2D terrain as a surface. Then, we want to > > > display a cross section (east-west) as a function of > > > height of let's say u-component of the wind. This > > also > > > works, however, the bottom few model levels are > > > displayed "below" the terrain surface. The > > wrf output > > > is on a sigma level coordinate system and the terrain > > > is in meters above sealevel. We believe IDV is > > > plotting the data wrong because it is incorrectly > > > calculating the heights of the sigma-levels. We know > > > this because when we do an independent calculation > > > outside of IDV the lowest layer in the model matches > > > the terrain height. You will also notice that some of > > > the data does not plot correctly east of the mountains > > > that when displayed in matlab plots correctly. > > > I am enclosing a image of the display rotated to show > > > both the sub-terrain plotting and the missing stripe > > > of data on the right side. > > > > > > > The staggered WRF grids are problematic in many ways - > > there is a lot of overhead in resampling from one > > staggering > > to another, it uses a lot more memory because we have to > > keep both the staggered grids and the normalized grids in > > memory, etc. We recommend that people use the WRF-Post > > options > > to convert their data to pressure coordinates and calculate > > the most commonly used met variables. But we also realize > > that > > some need to have the staggered coordinates so we allow for > > that. > > > > For variables like U which are on a vertical Pressure > > coordinate, the height > > is determined through a transformation of pressure to > > height. The default > > is to use the standard atmophere, but you can change to use > > a logarithmic > > transform (Vis5D) in the Formats & Data section of the > > User Preferences. > > > > The formula we use for calculating the height for the > > variables (e.g. W) on > > the staggered Z (height) coordinate is: > > > > height(x,y,z) = (PH(x,y,z)+ PHB(x,y,z)) / 9.81 > > > > > > So, for comparison of the first 10 values in your file that > > are calculated vs HGT > > we get: > > > > HGT: > > 1575.897, 1580.329, 1584.752, 1590.211, 1596.429, 1602.936, > > 1609.786, > > 1616.844, 1624.55, 1633.135 > > > > (W) (PH(x,y,z)+ PHB(x,y,z)) / 9.81: > > > > 1575.897, 1580.3292, 1584.7522, 1590.2109, 1596.4291, > > 1602.9358, 1609.7863 > > 1616.8439, 1624.5498, 1633.1349 > > > > (U) Pa -> m using standard atmosphere: > > > > 1524.0593, 1528.1156, 1532.2056, 1536.9418, 1542.4225, > > 1548.4596, 1554.9199, > > 1561.5878, 1568.6985, 1576.4624 > > > > So, for the variables with a pressure vertical coordinate, > > you will see > > some differences. Plotting a cross section of W lines up > > pretty nicely > > with the terrain. > > > > The blank line is a function of the sampling that we have > > to do between > > the native coordinates and the calculated lat/lon/alt > > values. I don't > > have a good solution for that. > > > > Don Murray > > > > > > Ticket Details > > =================== > > Ticket ID: YRR-987022 > > Department: Support IDV > > Priority: Normal > > Status: Open > > > > Ticket Details =================== Ticket ID: YRR-987022 Department: Support IDV Priority: Normal Status: Open