Dear Martin

I agree with your reasoning, which is actually also the reason why incoming
and outgoing were used for the TOA fluxes - they mean downwelling and upwelling
but are more familiar terms (especially OLR), and they *don't* mean net down-
ward or net upward.

Best wishes

Jonathan

----- Forwarded message from Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC 
<[email protected]> -----

> Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2018 13:12:51 +0000
> From: Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC <[email protected]>
> To: Alison Pamment - UKRI STFC <[email protected]>,
>       "[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
>       "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Final 17 terms for CMIP6 LS3MIP: Heat flux into
>       snowpack
> 
> For the river water names we have one vote for
> > inward_water_volume_transport_along_river_channel
> > outward_water_volume_transport_along_river_channel
> and one for
> > incoming_water_volume_transport_along_river_channel
> > outgoing_water_volume_transport_along_river_channel.
> 
> 
> I will vote for incoming/outgoing. The qualifiers upward/downward are used to 
> express a sign convention, so that upward_flux_of_X is minus the downward 
> flux, and we use upwelling/downwelling to express fluxes associated with 
> photons moving in different directions. By association, I think it will be 
> clearer if we avoid the "inward" and "outward" here,
> 
> 
> regards,
> 
> Martin
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP)
> Sent: 04 July 2018 11:48:39
> To: Juckes, Martin (STFC,RAL,RALSP); [email protected]; 
> [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Final 17 terms for CMIP6 LS3MIP: Heat flux into 
> snowpack
> 
> Dear Martin and Jonathan,
> 
> Thank you both for the very useful discussion of these names. I agree with 
> Martin that the existing sensible_heat_flux names probably should become 
> turbulent_heat_flux names. There are only four of them, but I will address 
> those in a separate thread.
> 
> For the LS3MIP heat flux name we now have:
> tendency_of_thermal_energy_content_of_surface_snow_due_to_rainfall_temperature_excess_above_freezing
> 'The phrase "tendency_of_X" means derivative of X with respect to time. 
> "Content" indicates a quantity per unit area.Thermal energy is the total 
> vibrational energy, kinetic and potential, of all the molecules and atoms in 
> a substance. The phrase "surface_snow" means snow lying on the surface. The 
> quantity with standard name 
> tendency_of_thermal_energy_content_of_surface_snow_due_to_rainfall_temperature_excess_above_freezing
>  is the heat energy carried by rainfall reaching the surface. It is 
> calculated relative to the heat that would be carried by rainfall reaching 
> the surface at zero degrees Celsius. It is calculated as the product 
> QrainCpTrain, where Qrain is the mass flux of rainfall reaching the surface 
> (kg m-2 s-1), Cp is the specific heat capacity of water and Train is the 
> temperature in degrees Celsius of the rain water reaching the surface. The 
> specification of a physical process by the phrase due_to_process means that 
> the quantity named is a single term in a sum of terms whic
 h together compose the general quantity named by omitting the phrase.'
> 
> This name is accepted for publication in the standard name table and will be 
> added in the next update.
> 
> For the river water names we have one vote for
> > inward_water_volume_transport_along_river_channel
> > outward_water_volume_transport_along_river_channel
> and one for
> > incoming_water_volume_transport_along_river_channel
> > outgoing_water_volume_transport_along_river_channel.
> 
> Martin, it looks as though you will have the casting vote! Which do you 
> prefer?
> 
> Best wishes,
> Alison
> 
> ________________________________________
> From: CF-metadata <[email protected]> on behalf of Martin 
> Juckes - UKRI STFC <[email protected]>
> Sent: 03 July 2018 12:02
> To: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Final 17 terms for CMIP6 LS3MIP: Heat flux into 
> snowpack
> 
> 
> Dear Alison, Jonathan,
> 
> 
> Thanks for these final suggestions. I agree with these proposals. I have a 
> reservation about the interpretation of "sensible heat flux" which was 
> mentioned in the discussion, but that does not need to delay approval of 
> these proposed terms which neatly avoid the problem.
> 
> 
> The usage of "sensible heat flux" outside the standard name list consistently 
> refer to it as a thermodynamic property, not something which is specific to a 
> particular medium. In the existing standard names which include the phrase 
> "sensible_heat_flux" the descriptive text suggests that it applies to heat 
> flux through air alone, implicitly excluding any heat flux conveyed by 
> precipitation. It looks to me as though the wording is a reflection of the 
> state of models at the time the standard names were defined, when it may have 
> been reasonable to omit mention of transport of heat by precipitation and 
> equate sensible heat flux at the surface to turbulent heat flux at the 
> surface. As models can now, apparently, resolve the sensible heat flux 
> associated with falling rain, I can't see any reason for maintaining an 
> interpretation of "sensible_heat_flux" in standard names which conflicts with 
> the normal usage.
> 
> 
> regards,
> 
> Martin
> 
> ________________________________
> From: CF-metadata <[email protected]> on behalf of Jonathan 
> Gregory <[email protected]>
> Sent: 01 July 2018 18:27
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [CF-metadata] Final 17 terms for CMIP6 LS3MIP: Heat flux into 
> snowpack
> 
> Dear Alison and Martin
> 
> > tendency_of_thermal_energy_content_of_surface_snow_due_to_rainfall_temperature_excess_above_freezing
> 
> I think this  suggestion of Alison's is very good, to describe the rainfall
> temperature flux as a change in heat content due to X rather than as the
> problematic X heat flux. Thanks.
> 
> > inward_water_volume_transport_along_river_channel
> > outward_water_volume_transport_along_river_channel
> > OR
> > incoming_water_volume_transport_along_river_channel
> > outgoing_water_volume_transport_along_river_channel.
> 
> I prefer the latter pair still, but I don't mind.
> 
> Best wishes
> 
> Jonathan
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

----- End forwarded message -----
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

Reply via email to