Dear Alison Yes, that's right, just the three dianeutral mixing terms. The names should have _eddy removed, and Martin's deletion of "eddy" from the definitions looks good to me. Sorry I didn't notice this before. Many thanks.
Best wishes Jonathan ----- Forwarded message from Alison Pamment - UKRI STFC <alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk> ----- > > Dear Jonathan, Martin, Karl, > > Thanks for discussing these names - I am always keen to make standard names > and their definitions as accurate as possible, including making corrections > if we don't get everything right in the original discussion. If I understand > correctly, it is now only the dianeutral mixing terms that are being > revisited and the other eddy terms introduced for OMIP should stay as > originally agreed - is that right? > > I am not an expert in these quantities, but I am happy to update the > dianeutral mixing definitions as suggested by Martin if others are in > agreement. > > Best wishes, > Alison > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Alison Pamment Tel: > +44 1235 778065 > NCAS/Centre for Environmental Data Analysis Email: > alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk > STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory > R25, 2.22 > Harwell Oxford, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: CF-metadata <cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu> On Behalf Of Martin > Juckes - UKRI STFC > Sent: 04 March 2019 19:36 > To: Jonathan Gregory <j.m.greg...@reading.ac.uk>; cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu > Cc: stephen.griff...@noaa.gov > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] too many eddies in standard names > > Hello Jonathan, > > > I agree that using "eddy" in terms which relate to vertical mixing is not > ideal. It is not entirely incorrect, but I I think most people associate the > term "eddy" with horizontal motions and so it is likely to cause confusion. > > > The current definition: > > '"Eddy dianeutral mixing" means dianeutral mixing, i.e. mixing across neutral > directions caused by the unresolved turbulent motion of eddies of all types > (e.g., breaking gravity waves, boundary layer turbulence, etc.).' > > would then need to be replaced with something like: > > '"Dianeutral mixing" refers to mixing across surfaces of neutral bouyancy. > "Parameterized" means the part due to a scheme representing processes which > are not explicitly resolved by the model.' > > regards, > Martin > > > > ________________________________ > From: CF-metadata <cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu> on behalf of Jonathan > Gregory <j.m.greg...@reading.ac.uk> > Sent: 04 March 2019 17:52 > To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu > Cc: stephen.griff...@noaa.gov > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] too many eddies in standard names > > Dear Martin, Alison, Steve et al. > > You're quite right. I had completely forgotten this discussion. That reduces > my concern a lot! Thanks. On 19 May 2017 > (http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2017/019440.html, subject > "New standard names for OMIP: physics" for this and related emails) I agreed > with Alison and Steve Griffies that parameterized mesoscale advection (often > Gent-McWilliams in ocean models) and parameterized submesoscale advection > should have "eddy" included because they are contributions to parameterized > eddy advection, and that parameterized mesoscale diffusion (often called > "isopycnal diffusion" in ocean models) could also have eddy included by > analogy. However this email didn't talk about inserting "eddy" in the > dianeutral mixing names. Alison suggested this on 12 Oct 2017 > (http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2017/019683.html) > and I didn't notice - sorry about that. There are three such names: > > tendency_of_sea_water_conservative_temperature_expressed_as_heat_content_due_to_parameterized_eddy_dianeutral_mixing > tendency_of_sea_water_potential_temperature_expressed_as_heat_content_due_to_parameterized_eddy_dianeutral_mixing > tendency_of_sea_water_salinity_expressed_as_salt_content_due_to_parameterized_eddy_dianeutral_mixing > > which as proposed did not contain "eddy". These quantities do not refer to > eddies in the sense of the other ones, and I suggest we should remove the > eddy in the standard names. I wonder what you all think. > > Best wishes > > Jonathan > > > ----- Forwarded message from Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC > <martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk> ----- > > > Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2019 21:40:02 +0000 > > From: Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC <martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk> > > To: Jonathan Gregory <j.m.greg...@reading.ac.uk>, "cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu" > > <cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu> > > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] too many eddies in standard names > > > > Dear Jonathan, > > > > > > The CMIP6 Data Request uses the terms which are in the CF Standard Name > > list ... with "eddy_advection". > > > > > > The CF Standard Name editor link for one of the terms is here: > > <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Enafy971fSF3mNJb5MObm3buH2yAm > > amMkRcj5h9WmJM/edit#slide=id.p> > > http://cfeditor.ceda.ac.uk/proposal/1795.<http://cfeditor.ceda.ac.uk/p > > roposal/1795> > > > > > > The email thread is here (the link from the editor is broken): > > http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2017/019691.html > > .<http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2017/019691.html> > > > > > > I'm not sure if I've followed all the details ... but it looks as though > > Alison proposed adding "eddy" and her proposal was accepted. > > > > > > regards, > > > > Martin > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: CF-metadata <cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu> on behalf of > > Jonathan Gregory <j.m.greg...@reading.ac.uk> > > Sent: 01 March 2019 17:45 > > To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu > > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] too many eddies in standard names > > > > Dear Martin > > > > The names did get approved on the email list in the usual way. > > However, some- thing must have gone wrong somewhere. Either the names > > we asked to be approved were wrong (not the same as the ones in the > > papers, which is what we intended), or the names in the standard_name > > table aren't the ones that were approved - which seems unlikely. I'm > > quite prepared to find that it was my mistake some- where! Anyway, I > > think it could be put right with aliases. What do we have in the CMIP6 data > > request? > > > > Best wishes > > > > Jonathan > > > > ----- Forwarded message from Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC > > <martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk> ----- > > > > > Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2019 08:39:54 +0000 > > > From: Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC <martin.juc...@stfc.ac.uk> > > > To: "Taylor, Karl E." <taylo...@llnl.gov>, "cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu" > > > <cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu> > > > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] too many eddies in standard names > > > > > > Hello Jonathan, Karl, > > > > > > > > > I don't understand why this is considered an "error" in the standard > > > names. There are many cases where people have put terms in their GMD > > > papers and claimed that they are "CF standard names" without taking the > > > trouble to put them through the discussion and approval process of the CF > > > Convention. This is a clear procedural error which happened in several > > > MIPs ... we obviously need to improve communication on the procedures. > > > > > > > > > In answer to Karl's question: there are no approved or aliased terms of > > > the form "....mesoscale_advection" in the CF Standard Name list. The > > > approved terms consistently use the form > > > "mesoscale/submesoscale_eddy_advection". > > > > > > > > > I didn't follow the discussion on these terms when they were added > > > .. Alison may be able to say more about why the "eddy" term is > > > included, > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: CF-metadata <cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu> on behalf of > > > Taylor, Karl E. <taylo...@llnl.gov> > > > Sent: 27 February 2019 21:47 > > > To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu > > > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] too many eddies in standard names > > > > > > Hi Jonathan, > > > > > > One could conceivably want to distinguish between, for example, > > > > > > northward_ocean_heat_transport_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_a > > > dvection > > > > > > and > > > > > > northward_ocean_heat_transport_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_advect > > > ion > > > > > > or does "mesoscale" imply "eddy" and for that reason "eddy" can be > > > removed? If "mesocale eddy advection" and mesocale advection" are not > > > identical, we could leave the already defined variables as is and add a > > > companion set with "eddy" omitted. > > > > > > Of course for CMIP6, we would want to request only one of the two types > > > of advection; from your reference to GMD, I assume you want the quantity > > > without "eddy" in the name. > > > > > > best regards, > > > Karl > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2/27/19 10:46 AM, Jonathan Gregory wrote: > > > > Dear Alison, Martin et al. > > > > > > > > I have noticed that several of the new ocean tendency diagnostics > > > > we have added to the standard name table for CMIP6 contain "eddy", but > > > > should not do. > > > > The word "eddy" should appear only in > > > > parameterized_eddy_advection, not in mesoscale advection, > > > > mesoscale diffusion, submesoscale advection or dianeutral mixing. > > > > I think _eddy should be deleted from all of the names listed > > > > below. I don't know how we got this wrong! The standard names appear > > > > correctly in the two relevant GMD papers. > > > > > > > > Best wishes > > > > > > > > Jonathan > > > > > > > > northward_ocean_heat_transport_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy > > > > _advection > > > > northward_ocean_heat_transport_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy > > > > _diffusion > > > > northward_ocean_heat_transport_due_to_parameterized_submesoscale_e > > > > ddy_advection > > > > ocean_meridional_overturning_mass_streamfunction_due_to_parameteri > > > > zed_mesoscale_eddy_advection > > > > ocean_meridional_overturning_mass_streamfunction_due_to_parameteri > > > > zed_submesoscale_eddy_advection > > > > ocean_tracer_biharmonic_diffusivity_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale > > > > _eddy_advection > > > > ocean_tracer_diffusivity_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_advec > > > > tion > > > > ocean_tracer_laplacian_diffusivity_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_ > > > > eddy_advection > > > > ocean_y_overturning_mass_streamfunction_due_to_parameterized_mesos > > > > cale_eddy_advection > > > > ocean_y_overturning_mass_streamfunction_due_to_parameterized_subme > > > > soscale_eddy_advection > > > > tendency_of_sea_water_conservative_temperature_expressed_as_heat_c > > > > ontent_due_to_parameterized_eddy_dianeutral_mixing > > > > tendency_of_sea_water_conservative_temperature_expressed_as_heat_c > > > > ontent_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_advection > > > > tendency_of_sea_water_conservative_temperature_expressed_as_heat_c > > > > ontent_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_diffusion > > > > tendency_of_sea_water_conservative_temperature_expressed_as_heat_c > > > > ontent_due_to_parameterized_submesoscale_eddy_advection > > > > tendency_of_sea_water_potential_temperature_expressed_as_heat_cont > > > > ent_due_to_parameterized_eddy_dianeutral_mixing > > > > tendency_of_sea_water_potential_temperature_expressed_as_heat_cont > > > > ent_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_advection > > > > tendency_of_sea_water_potential_temperature_expressed_as_heat_cont > > > > ent_due_to_parameterized_mesoscale_eddy_diffusion > > > > tendency_of_sea_water_potential_temperature_expressed_as_heat_cont > > > > ent_due_to_parameterized_submesoscale_eddy_advection > > > > tendency_of_sea_water_salinity_expressed_as_salt_content_due_to_pa > > > > rameterized_eddy_dianeutral_mixing > > > > tendency_of_sea_water_salinity_expressed_as_salt_content_due_to_pa > > > > rameterized_mesoscale_eddy_advection > > > > tendency_of_sea_water_salinity_expressed_as_salt_content_due_to_pa > > > > rameterized_mesoscale_eddy_diffusion > > > > tendency_of_sea_water_salinity_expressed_as_salt_content_due_to_pa > > > > rameterized_submesoscale_eddy_advection > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > CF-metadata mailing list > > > > CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu > > > > http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > CF-metadata mailing list > > > CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu > > > http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata > > > _______________________________________________ > > > CF-metadata mailing list > > > CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu > > > http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata > > > > ----- End forwarded message ----- > > _______________________________________________ > > CF-metadata mailing list > > CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu > > http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata > > ----- End forwarded message ----- > _______________________________________________ > CF-metadata mailing list > CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu > http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata > _______________________________________________ > CF-metadata mailing list > CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu > http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata > ----- End forwarded message ----- _______________________________________________ CF-metadata mailing list CF-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
