Meghan et. al:
I think we would be missing a great opportunity if we used only the
wave variables proposed below. We have good dynamical reasons to
think that waves are important in upper ocean dynamics and not just
for purposes of directing shipping or filling up mandated data bases.
I expect that in the future, ocean models will be coupled to wave
models (as is already done for tropical cyclone models) and that
historical wave data will be important in developing and verifying
these models. In another project we are struggling with trying to
reconstruct dynamically appropriate wave spectra from historical wave
data that is archived in such a way as to make proper reconstruction
very difficult. It would be a great waste if OceanSITES makes the
same mistake.
Variables should be added to the list that are sufficient to
1. Resconstruct the important features of the directional wave
spectrum, including energy and momentum flux and their depth profiles
2. Provide indications of the wave steepness and breaking probabilities.
Specific suggestions are perhaps better made by others (Baylor?, Jim?
Ramsey?).
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Fwd: Seeking new CF standard names (waves and biogeochem)
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 10:37:36 -0400
From: Nan Galbraith <[email protected]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: ots-dmt <[email protected]>
Hi all -
For anyone in OceanSITES who measures waves, there's a recent
discussion on the CF mailing list about new standard names. This
would be a good time to weigh in, if you haven't already, since we'll
want to use these terms in OceanSITES data files if and when we
include wave parameters.
You need to be a member of the CF list to post a reply. You can join
at
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
.
There's also been some discussion on biogeochem terms that might
be useful to some here.
Regards -
Nan
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Seeking new CF standard names (9) for sea
surface wave parameters
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 11:09:29 +1100
From: andrew walsh
<[email protected]>
Hi Jonathon and CF metadata list,
Summarising our discussions thus far we propose:
2 new Cell methods:
root_mean_square
mean_of_upper_decile
and these new standard names:
sea_surface_wave_height (common concept)
sea_surface_wave_mean_crest_period
sea_surface_wave_significant_wave_period
sea_surface_wave_period_at_second_largest_peak_of_variance_spectral_density
sea_surface_wave_variance_spectral_density_zeroth_frequency_moment
sea_surface_wave_root_mean_square_amplitude_from_variance_spectral_density
The sea_surface_wave_height is a common concept (standard name)
which may be
qualified by a cell_method attribute to realise the actual
variable. The
sea_surface_wave_height
when combined with a cell method of:
time: mean
time: maximum
time: root_mean_square
time: mean_of_upper_decile
will describe the statistical wave height variables:
sea_surface_mean_wave_height
sea_surface_maximum_wave_height
sea_surface_root_mean_square_wave_height
sea_surface_wave_mean_of_highest_one_tenth_waves
respectively.
I have attached a spreadsheet which contains the names,
descriptions and units
of the variables proposed.
Looking forward to getting final approval to add these to the CF
name lists.
Andrew Walsh
Data Facilitator AODN
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jonathan Gregory"
<[email protected]>
To: "andrew walsh"
<[email protected]>
Cc:
<[email protected]>; "Mark Kulmar"<[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 20:21
Subject: [CF-metadata] Seeking new CF standard names (9) for sea
surface wave
parameters
Dear Andrew
Yes, but depends on the community (list) accepting the idea of
having a
Good. I think we are agreed then to propose these new cell methods:
root_mean_square
mean_of_upper_decile
and these new standard names:
sea_surface_wave_height
sea_surface_wave_mean_crest_period
sea_surface_wave_significant_wave_period
sea_surface_wave_period_at_second_largest_peak_of_variance_spectral_density
sea_surface_wave_variance_spectral_density_zeroth_frequency_moment
sea_surface_wave_root_mean_square_amplitude_from_variance_spectral_density
I agree that the last will avoid confusion with the RMS of wave
height.
I agree also that this depends on users being comfortable with the
concepts
being split into two attributes, in accordance with the usual CF
practice,
but deciding on how to join them up as common_concepts will help.
Comments
from others would help. It is good that Roy supports this
compromise.
Best wishes
Jonathan
Cliquez sur l'url suivante
https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/tjkP04wPWEHTndxI!oX7UpBlscM9Pl1fAM1p1zO6h070olZRfJ6KoHxitOmXf8!eLCPtl9EVgldLRkMuvIdUTQ==
si ce message est indésirable (pourriel).
<Proposed_wave_parm_names_for_CFlist.xls><Attached Message Part.txt>
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
