Inclusion of CDXWRF module #2245

LluisFB · 2025-09-05T13:46:30Z

Enhance model output to include CORDEX output demands and new potential useful diagnostics

TYPE: new feature

KEYWORDS: CORDEX, diagnostics, post-process, impact studies, scheme free diagnostics

SOURCE: Lluís Fita Centro de Investigaciones del Mar y la Atmósfera (CIMA), IRL IFAECI UBA-CONICET-CNRS-IRD, Argentina

DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES:
Problem:
The CORDEX-WRF module was initially dedicated to provide the outputs requested in any CORDEX exercise. This tends to be a tedious post-processing work, in sometimes is as long as the simulation by it self. the goal is to provide the diagnostics whilst the integration of the simulation. Enormously reducing the need for post-processing by increasing a little the integration time of the model.

Solution:
A new module has been created which adds about 150 new diagnostics to the model output.
Aside to provide an answer to an specific climate related demand from the CORDEX WRF community, it grew fast to provide:

Additional non-specific CORDEX diagnostics
Generic definitions of certain diagnostics that might be scheme dependent
Introduction of additional variables in the integration-time p-level vertical interpolation

ISSUE: For use when this PR closes an issue.
Fixes #2243

LIST OF MODIFIED FILES: list of changed files (use git diff --name-status master to get formatted list)

A       README.cordex
M       README.md
M       Registry/Registry.EM_COMMON
M       Registry/Registry.EM_COMMON.var
A       Registry/registry.cordex
M       Registry/registry.diags
M       Registry/registry.em_shared_collection
M       dyn_em/solve_em.F
M       dyn_em/start_em.F
M       frame/module_driver_constants.F
M       main/depend.common
M       phys/Makefile
A       phys/module_diag_cordex.F
M       phys/module_diag_pld.F
M       phys/module_diagnostics_driver.F
A       phys/module_diagvar_cordex.F
M       phys/module_physics_init.F

TESTS CONDUCTED:

Do mods fix problem? How can that be demonstrated, and was that test conducted?
Are the Jenkins tests all passing?
Independent tests have been performed aimed to show the correct performance of the module

RELEASE NOTE:
First version (v1.3) of the module was accompanied by an article in GMD:
Lluís Fita, Jan Polcher, Theodore M. Giannaros, Torge Lorenz, Josipa Milovac, Giannis Sofiadis, Eleni Katragkou and Sophie Bastin, 2019: CORDEX-WRF v1.3: development of a module for the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model to support the CORDEX community, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 1029-1066, 2019, doi 10.5194/gmd-12-1029-2019

Current version of the module is v.3 and it provides about 150 new diagnostics a new section in the namelist.input labelled &cdxwrf with new parameters. Outputs are grouped in 3 files:

wrfcdx_d<domain>_<date>: main output file at auxhist19 with most of the variables
wrfhfcdx_d<domain>_<date>: high-frequency (e,g, 10 minutes) output file at auxhist18 only for RAIN and COLMAX implemented to assist the tracking convective systems
wrfpress_d<domain>_<date>: p-level interpolated variables at auxhist23 with the additional variables

You can find more details in the CDXWRF WIKI

This work was made possible by the participation of the co-authors of the article, talks with a lot of different researchers from a lot of different countries and even other sciences. Thanks to all of them

…X-WRF module L. Fita, J. Polcher, T. M. Giannaros, T. Lorenz, J. Milovac, G. Sofiadis, E. Katragkou, and S. Bastin (2019): CORDEX-WRF v1.3: development of a module for the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model to support the CORDEX community, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 1029-1066, doi: 10.5194/gmd-12-1029-2019

…rvative vertical interpolation

- `var_colmax1D': Subroutine to compute 1D maximum radar reflectivity

It gets a mix of high-frequency variables, new soil variables, debugging also by time and closest point to a given coordinates

dudhia · 2025-12-17T16:14:20Z

I think PR #2247 was temporary during some compile problems, so now we can discard it.
Is everything activated by -D choices or are there namelist choices needed in combination?
If we want to test the likely most commonly used one what would you recommend?

LluisFB · 2025-12-17T16:17:03Z

Aside of the pre-compilation flags, it has namelist parameters. I included default values in order to simplify its use.

I would recommend to use CXWRF=3 and activate the diagnose of the convective extremes. So in the namelist:

&cordex
 output_cordex              = 1 
 output_wb                  = 0
 convxtrm_diag              = 1
/

dudhia · 2026-01-08T17:30:14Z

We have tried all the CDXWRF levels. 2 and 3 worked.
WRFCDX_1 and_ WRFCDX_All have the same variables causing the compile error. 'press' may only be defined above CDXWRF=2
WRFCDX_4 seems to not be activating this code and DIABH is not showing up for compile. This is the only #elif, so maybe it is related to that.
#ifdef CDXWRF

#if CDXWRF>=1

#elif CDXWRF>=4

                ,DIABH=grid%h_diabatic                                 &

                ,QVTTEND=grid%qvttend, QCTTEND=grid%qcttend            & 

                ,QRTTEND=grid%qrttend, QSTTEND=grid%qsttend            &

LluisFB · 2026-01-09T18:21:08Z

my apologies, I revised the compilation for CDXWRF=4, there were some mistakes. I fixed them and pushed into my fork

Lluís

smileMchen · 2026-01-09T23:58:02Z

@LluisFB
Can you clarify what you have changed for CDXWRF=4?
Any changes for CDXWRF=1?
Thanks.

LluisFB · 2026-01-12T13:37:52Z

HI @smileMchen,

These are only changes to compile when CXWRF=4, there where some mistakes in the configuration of the pre-compilation ifs. These are the changes regarding the code

I just modified the following:

Last commit

$ git diff HEAD^..HEAD
diff --git a/phys/module_diagnostics_driver.F b/phys/module_diagnostics_driver.F
index 4e151e38..13bfffb0 100644
--- a/phys/module_diagnostics_driver.F
+++ b/phys/module_diagnostics_driver.F
@@ -1415,8 +1415,8 @@ CONTAINS
                     ,FRACSOIL10CM=grid%fracsoil10cm                        &
 #ifdef CDXWRF
 #if CDXWRF>=1
-
-#elif CDXWRF>=4
+#endif
+#if CDXWRF>=4
                     ,DIABH=grid%h_diabatic                                 &
                     ,QVTTEND=grid%qvttend, QCTTEND=grid%qcttend            & 
                     ,QRTTEND=grid%qrttend, QSTTEND=grid%qsttend            &

Previous last commit

$ git diff HEAD~2
diff --git a/Registry/registry.diags b/Registry/registry.diags
index 90c5b0fd..4e28b3b7 100644
--- a/Registry/registry.diags
+++ b/Registry/registry.diags
@@ -9,19 +9,18 @@ dimspec    np      2     namelist=num_press_levels         z     num_press_level
 #### Added for CORDEX!
 ## L. Fita 2 grid coordinates for the londbg,latdbg
 dimspec    iit     2     constant=2                        z     iit
-ifdef CDXWRF=3
+
 ## L. Fita. This should work, but WRF is not prepared for 4D output variables like this
-dimspec    ht      2     namelist=nhtasrng                 c     nhtasrng
-dimspec    hh      2     namelist=nhhursrng                c     nhhursrng
-dimspec    lt      2     namelist=nltasrng                 c     nltasrng
-dimspec    lh      2     namelist=nlhursrng                c     nlhursrng
-dimspec    wd      2     namelist=nwbdsrng                 c     nwbdsrng
-dimspec    ws      2     namelist=nwssrng                  c     nwssrng
+dimspec    ht      2     namelist=nhtasrng                 z     nhtasrng
+dimspec    hh      2     namelist=nhhursrng                z     nhhursrng
+dimspec    lt      2     namelist=nltasrng                 z     nltasrng
+dimspec    lh      2     namelist=nlhursrng                z     nlhursrng
+dimspec    wd      2     namelist=nwbdsrng                 z     nwbdsrng
+dimspec    ws      2     namelist=nwssrng                  z     nwssrng
 ## L. Fita, so, WRF output will provide a (n[h/l]tasrng*n[h/l]hursrng) 3D variable instead
 dimspec    hth     2     namelist=nhtashursrng             z     nhtashursrng
 dimspec    lth     2     namelist=nltashursrng             z     nltashursrng
 dimspec    wds     2     namelist=nwbdswssrng              z     nwbdswssrng
-endif

Lluís

smileMchen · 2026-01-12T18:17:50Z

@ LluisFB
Thanks for the clarification. I have tried to compileCDXWRF with options 1,2,3, and 4. While options 2-4 can be done successfully, option 1 still doesn't work. Below are part of the errors I have seen during compiling:

module_diag_cordex.f90:811:59:

811 | CALL var_press(p(i,:,j), pb(i,:,j), dimz, press(i,:,j))

Error: Syntax error in argument list at (1)

module_diag_cordex.f90:814:75:
814 | CALL var_zg(ph(i,:,j), phb(i,:,j), dimz1, dimz, stzg(i,:,j), zg(i,:,j))

Error: Syntax error in argument list at (1)

module_diag_cordex.f90:816:31:

816 | geopoth(i,:,j) = zg(i,:,j)*g

There are more errors similar to above shown during compiling .....

LluisFB · 2026-01-13T17:57:29Z

Dear @smileMchen,

My apologies. There was an issue in the pre-compilation flags. I just committed the fix.

I should checked all the combinations.

Sorry,

Lluís

weiwangncar · 2026-01-13T21:55:26Z

@LluisFB Have you tried to compile the modified code on your system? The regression tests returned some syntax errors in module_diag_cordex.F. See one of the test output files here.
output_3.txt

LluisFB · 2026-01-14T15:00:04Z

Dear @weiwangncar,

In my system (personal computer with Debian 12and gcc compilers) I just finished to successfully re-compile with CDXWRF=2, CDXWRF=3, CDXWRF=4. CDXWRF=1 test was successfully performed yesterday (Jan 13th) and any further changes were made in the code.

weiwangncar · 2026-01-14T16:02:32Z

@LluisFB The regression tests do not test your particular option but for standard compilation and runs. So can you take a look at the attached file from above (output_3.txt), see if there is anything you can change. I tested your code with standard compilation on our computer with gfortran, it failed and pointed to the same syntax errors as shown in output_3.txt file. Thanks.

LluisFB · 2026-01-14T17:02:52Z

@weiwangncar I understand.

So, in your compilation / execution tests, which branch are you using? Do you activate any of the pre-compilation flags?

I will reproduce the compilation in my system and come back with the solution.

Thanks

weiwangncar · 2026-01-14T17:17:16Z

@LluisFB I cloned your code and checked out cdxwrf branch. I'm not using any of your options. I am only trying to compile default WRF code, without using any of your pre-compilation flags. This is to make sure your modification would not affect default use of the model.

LluisFB · 2026-01-14T18:38:55Z

HI @weiwangncar

I see what happens. The module is compiled even if the pre-compilation flags are not activated.

I do not know if it is an 'elegant' solution, but in my last commit, I emptied the module when the main flag is not activated

MODULE module_diag_cordex
#ifdef CORDEXDIAG

(....)
#endif
END MODULE module_diag_cordex

My apologies, for all the troubles I am making.I should have made all these tests before submitting the Pull Request. Sorry for making waste your time.

I am re-compiling again with CDXWRF=4 to see if it does crashes the compilation

Lluís

LluisFB · 2026-01-14T19:09:58Z

Re-compilation for CDXWRF=4 worked.

I assume it will work for the rest.

Lluís

weiwangncar · 2026-01-14T19:19:20Z

@LluisFB Will compilation work if you do not use any CDXWRF pre-compilation flags?

smileMchen · 2026-01-14T19:20:16Z

Re-compilation for CDXWRF=4 worked.

I assume it will work for the rest.

Lluís

Yes I can confirm that this option works. But the option CDXWRF=1 still failed. I will try the newly committed codes after the MPAS tutorial and keep you updated.

LluisFB · 2026-01-14T19:21:14Z

Yes @weiwangncar, I compiled as it is without using any flag

LluisFB · 2026-01-14T19:22:02Z

Hi @smileMchen,

Did you tried the last version? With all the new commits? I will re-check for CDXWRF=1

weiwangncar · 2026-01-14T19:27:01Z

It looks like the last commit worked for regression tests:

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

LluisFB · 2026-01-14T19:35:05Z

Well, good news!

Again apologies for all the foreseeable issues.

Lluís

smileMchen · 2026-01-14T20:37:11Z

Hi @smileMchen,

Did you tried the last version? With all the new commits? I will re-check for CDXWRF=1

I used the 2nd latest commit. I haven't tried the latest one.

islas · 2026-01-15T19:59:58Z

README.cordex

The two README.* files added should be moved to the doc/ folder, and ideally reworded to the instructions that would be used with https://github.com/wrf-model/WRF instead of still pointing to the fork branch. Could the two be combined into one README?

islas · 2026-01-15T20:02:11Z

README.md

 Information regarding WRF Model citations (including a DOI) can be found here: [https://www2.mmm.ucar.edu/wrf/users/citing_wrf.html](https://www2.mmm.ucar.edu/wrf/users/citing_wrf.html).

 The WRF Model is open-source code in the public domain, and its use is unrestricted. The name "WRF", however, is a registered trademark of the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research. The WRF public domain notice and related information may be found here: [https://www2.mmm.ucar.edu/wrf/users/public.html](https://www2.mmm.ucar.edu/wrf/users/public.html).
-


Please revert this change. It will help with tracking file history to have only changes that meaningfully change the file, unless the whitespace edits are deliberate.

islas · 2026-01-15T20:09:43Z

README.LluisFB

+cp configure.cordex.wrf configure.wrf
+```
+
+3. edit the `configure.wrf` and add the line (after the line `-DNETCDF` and/or `-DCLWRFGHG`)


I'd like to explore other configuration methods other than needing to directly modify the configure.wrf file. Perhaps doing something similar to kpp/titan/venus in ./configure would be more appealing?

islas · 2026-01-15T20:16:44Z

README.LluisFB

+```   
+cp Registry/registry.cordex Registry/registry.cordex_comp
+```
+   2. modify the `Registry/registry.cordex_comp` accordingly to the value of `CDXWRF`:


The registry supports ifdef, ifndef, endif constructs. This doesn't immediately work for the exact logic laid out here since the define is hierarchical but this were broken out into 4 individual defines automatically during ./configure then users would not need to modify the registry each time.

islas · 2026-01-15T20:19:44Z

Registry/registry.diags

 state    real   s_pl   i{np}j   misc    1  Z   h{23}  "S_PL"    "Pressure level data, Speed"                 "m s-1"
 state    real   td_pl  i{np}j   misc    1  Z   h{23}  "TD_PL"   "Pressure level data, Dew point temperature" "K"
-state    real   q_pl   i{np}j   misc    1  Z   h{23}  "Q_PL"    "Pressure level data, Mixing ratio"          "kg/kg"
+state    real   q_pl   i{np}j   misc    1  Z   h{23}  "Q_PL"    "Pressure level data, water vapour Mixing ratio"          "kg/kg"


Was changing the description intentional?

islas · 2026-01-15T20:29:12Z

phys/module_diag_cordex.F

This file could instead be conditionally be compiled (see frame/Makefile RSL_OBJS for an example on control of this via a variable). Likewise, the compile logic and file additions should be equally done in the CMake build as well.

LluisFB and others added 30 commits June 20, 2025 18:33

Adding registry specific for CORDEX-WRF module

e64b5ae

Adding diagnostics from CORDEX-WRF module

51d9889

Adding main subroutines with all CORDEX-WRF diagnostics

7859f1a

Adding modifications for the CORDEX-WRF module

20b6178

Adding CORDEX-WRF modifications: new p-level variables and mass-conse…

a292b77

…rvative vertical interpolation

Initializing CORDEX-WRF diagnostics

cd221e2

Adding CORDEX-WRF water budget related diagnostics

278e341

Adding CORDEX-WRF constants

c579f74

Adding compilation of the CORDEX-WRF module

95a9bb0

Adding CORDEX-WRF compilation

742af22

Adding high-frequency variables: prhf & colmax on auxhist8

7d731cf

Adding high-frequency CORDEX-WRF output

1512c58

Adding:

a731fd9

- `var_colmax1D': Subroutine to compute 1D maximum radar reflectivity

Adding CDXLON, CDXLAT into auxhist8

42cbe89

Getting XLAT, XLONG in auxhist23

b66773f

Fixing some variables

6a5c4ae

Fixing some errors comparing with working version

06f25d5

Adding high-frequency CORDEX-WRF diagnostics

b8f530a

Setting up CDXWRF version 3.1, from Eskilstua, Sweden. July 2023

9cb452c

It gets a mix of high-frequency variables, new soil variables, debugging also by time and closest point to a given coordinates

Adding into collection the 'registry.cordex' file

e6f416c

Updating README.cordex and moving PRHF to CDXWRF=1

d12df9b

Merge branch 'cdxwrf' of github.com:LluisFB/WRF into cdxwrf

9ee7623

Adding debugging based in time and coordinates

94f6ff4

Updating README

56a20fc

Updating README adding the new variables

c9c036d

Updating README

15eebe6

Updating text of README

1ceb654

Adding README.cordex into the README.md

e4c92a4

Formatting the README

65a5378

Lluis Fita Borrell added 4 commits January 9, 2026 10:54

Creation of a new README and moving staff from README.md

3765fca

Adding sed instruction into the compilation explanation

c6fcc6e

Fix dimension definition

e899e06

Fixing use of pre-compilation flag. It must be CDXWRF>=3 !!

48f4738

Fixing pre-compilation flags for CDXWRF=1

b755d45

Adding complete installation steps from Lluis Fita's WRF fork

45d409f

Empting module_diag_cordex.F when '-DCORDEXDIAG' is not used

0298e88

islas requested changes Jan 15, 2026

View reviewed changes

		Information regarding WRF Model citations (including a DOI) can be found here: [https://www2.mmm.ucar.edu/wrf/users/citing_wrf.html](https://www2.mmm.ucar.edu/wrf/users/citing_wrf.html).

		The WRF Model is open-source code in the public domain, and its use is unrestricted. The name "WRF", however, is a registered trademark of the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research. The WRF public domain notice and related information may be found here: [https://www2.mmm.ucar.edu/wrf/users/public.html](https://www2.mmm.ucar.edu/wrf/users/public.html).

Inclusion of CDXWRF module #2245

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Inclusion of CDXWRF module #2245

Uh oh!

Conversation

LluisFB commented Sep 5, 2025

Uh oh!

dudhia commented Dec 17, 2025

Uh oh!

LluisFB commented Dec 17, 2025

Uh oh!

dudhia commented Jan 8, 2026

Uh oh!

LluisFB commented Jan 9, 2026

Uh oh!

smileMchen commented Jan 9, 2026

Uh oh!

LluisFB commented Jan 12, 2026

Uh oh!

smileMchen commented Jan 12, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

LluisFB commented Jan 13, 2026

Uh oh!

weiwangncar commented Jan 13, 2026

Uh oh!

LluisFB commented Jan 14, 2026

Uh oh!

weiwangncar commented Jan 14, 2026

Uh oh!

LluisFB commented Jan 14, 2026

Uh oh!

weiwangncar commented Jan 14, 2026

Uh oh!

LluisFB commented Jan 14, 2026

Uh oh!

LluisFB commented Jan 14, 2026

Uh oh!

weiwangncar commented Jan 14, 2026

Uh oh!

smileMchen commented Jan 14, 2026

Uh oh!

LluisFB commented Jan 14, 2026

Uh oh!

LluisFB commented Jan 14, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

weiwangncar commented Jan 14, 2026

Uh oh!

LluisFB commented Jan 14, 2026

Uh oh!

smileMchen commented Jan 14, 2026

Uh oh!

islas Jan 15, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

islas Jan 15, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

islas Jan 15, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

islas Jan 15, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

islas Jan 15, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

islas Jan 15, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

smileMchen commented Jan 12, 2026 •

edited

Loading

LluisFB commented Jan 14, 2026 •

edited

Loading