Closed ClaireDons closed 5 months ago
Just now I was wondering: is it useful to have multiple namelists, or are the differences small enough to have one "template" namelist, and adjust a few settings in the workflow? Just like I did initially for the geogrid/metgrid table settings, using f90nml:
Just to dissect this line:
f90nml \ # use this tool from the command line
-g geogrid \ # from the geogrid group/section
-v opt_geogrid_tbl_path="'$WPS_HOME/geogrid/'" \ # set the variable "opt_geogrid_table_path" to "some/other/path"
namelist.wps \ # starting from namelist.wps as input file
patched_nml # and writing the modified namelist to a new file called "patched_nml"
Just now I was wondering: is it useful to have multiple namelists, or are the differences small enough to have one "template" namelist, and adjust a few settings in the workflow? Just like I did initially for the geogrid/metgrid table settings, using f90nml:
Just to dissect this line:
f90nml \ # use this tool from the command line -g geogrid \ # from the geogrid group/section -v opt_geogrid_tbl_path="'$WPS_HOME/geogrid/'" \ # set the variable "opt_geogrid_table_path" to "some/other/path" namelist.wps \ # starting from namelist.wps as input file patched_nml # and writing the modified namelist to a new file called "patched_nml"
I was thinking the same thing, I think only a couple of lines change. I also think that the all of the geogrid tables are quite similar. I can have a look!
Added support for different namelists and setups to wrf-runner:
Currently the GEOGRID.TBL.ARW_WUR has hardcoded paths to the WUR specific variables, it would be nice to change this to rel_path in the future.