There are already standard names for the platform speed with respect to the air (platform_speed_wrt_air) and ground (platform_speed_wrt_ground), and there are standard names that I think one could use for the different components of  platform's velocity in its own local coordinates (platform_heave_rate, platform_surge_rate, and platform_sway_rate).

But, there are not standard names for all three components of the platform's velocity with respect to the air and ground. For the ground, one can represent both horizontal coordinates directly with platform_speed_wrt_ground and platform_course, but there isn't a standard name for the vertical velocity or the two horizontal components separately.

So for velocity with respect to the ground, there are two possible schemes that seem rather reasonable:

1. platform_DIRECTION_velocity
2. platform_DIRECTION_velocity_wrt_ground

where DIRECTION is "northward", "southward", "eastward", "westward", "downward", or "upward"; or potentially also "x", "y", and "z"..

The first one is shorter and looks more like the standard names for the components of the wind velocity (northward_wind/southward_wind, eastward_wind/westward_wind, and downward_air_velocity/upward_air_velocity).

The second one is more consistent with platform_speed_wrt_ground and also has the natural extension of replacing "_ground" with "_air" to consider the velocity components with respect to air.

For velocity with respect to air, the second form but with "_ground" replaced with "_air" would work for the earth frame. For the local platform frame; DIRECTION could be x, y, z or be something like fore/aft, port/starboard, and up/down.

Now, there is some duplication if standard names for velocity with respect to ground and air are added since one could use one set and the wind velocity standard names to determine the other set (for the platform local frame, the pitch, roll, and yaw variables would also be needed). So, one could add just one set and the other would not be needed at all, though it might still be convenient.

I can see the names for the velocity components with respect to air being useful for airborne instruments where the instantaneous cross-wind can be non-negligible compared to the air-speed. This is in fact the situation I am working with (large tethered balloon that re-orients slowly). There is already a solution for the horizontal components with respect to the ground, but there isn't yet one for the vertical component.

Would such additions to the standard names table be useful, or not useful enough to add? If so, which naming scheme would make the most sense for it to be descriptive and be consistent with other standard names?

--
Dr. Freja Nordsiek
Max-Planck-Institut für Dynamik und Selbstorganisation
Am Fassberg 17
37077 Göttingen
Deutschland / Germany
[email protected]
+49 551-5176-304 (phone)
+49 551-5176-302 (fax)
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

Reply via email to