Dear Jonathan,
I agree, most people use radiative flux density. From my point of view we
do not need to define a standard name for irradiance. A remark in the
info column (for e.g. surface downwelling flux density) of the standard
name table would be helpful.
Radiative flux is radiative energy per time (units: W). Radiative flux
density is radiative energy per time and area (units: W m-2)
By the way I have taken the definitions from an old copy of "Terminology
and units of radiation quantities and measurements, Radiation Commission
of the IAMAP, ed. E. Raschke, 1978.
Regards
Burkhardt
Jonathan Gregory <j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk>
Gesendet von: cf-metadata-bounces at cgd.ucar.edu
26.08.2003 11:12
An: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
Kopie:
Thema: [CF-metadata] standard name proposals
Dear Burkhardt
> Irradiance is defined as "Radiant flux of any origin INCIDENT onto an
area
> element".
> Radiant flux density is defined as "Radiant flux of any origin CROSSING
> an area element".
> Both have units W m-2.
>> Is there any difference between irradiance and radiative flux density?
That's interesting. I've just received other advice from a radiation
modeller
that irradiance and radiative flux density are really the same thing, with
irradiance being a newer, recommended, term. I agree that I have only seen
irradiance used in the context of incident flux, as you suggest.
In practice, people *do* describe an incident flux as "surface downwelling
[or downward, or total downward] flux [density]", which apparently is the
same thing as irradiance. If that is true, I think we should not define
standard names for irradiance, or alternatively define them as aliases to
standard names of radiative flux. What do you think?
Thanks. Best wishes
Jonathan
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/attachments/20030826/ca4a9e50/attachment.html>
Received on Tue Aug 26 2003 - 03:38:03 BST
