Dear Alison
Thanks - that's right.
Best wishes
Jonathan
----- Forwarded message from Alison Pamment - UKRI STFC <alison.pamment at stfc.ac.uk> -----
> Date: Wed, 29 May 2019 14:44:17 +0000
> From: Alison Pamment - UKRI STFC <alison.pamment at stfc.ac.uk>
> To: "cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu" <cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu>
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] too many eddies in standard names
>
> Dear Jonathan, Martin and Karl,
>
> Martin's email about stresses at the liquid ocean surface reminded me that in March we had also agreed to change the OMIP eddy_dianeutral_mixing names to remove the word 'eddy' and amend the definitions accordingly:
>
> tendency_of_sea_water_conservative_temperature_expressed_as_heat_content_due_to_parameterized_eddy_dianeutral_mixing -> tendency_of_sea_water_conservative_temperature_expressed_as_heat_content_due_to_parameterized_dianeutral_mixing
>
> tendency_of_sea_water_potential_temperature_expressed_as_heat_content_due_to_parameterized_eddy_dianeutral_mixing -> tendency_of_sea_water_potential_temperature_expressed_as_heat_content_due_to_parameterized_dianeutral_mixing
>
> tendency_of_sea_water_salinity_expressed_as_salt_content_due_to_parameterized_eddy_dianeutral_mixing -> tendency_of_sea_water_salinity_expressed_as_salt_content_due_to_parameterized_dianeutral_mixing.
>
> The reference to eddies will be removed from the definitions and replaced with the text suggested by Martin:
> ' "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.'
>
> These changes are accepted for publication in the standard name table and will be added in the June update.
>
> Best wishes,
> Alison
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065
> NCAS/Centre for Environmental Data Analysis Email: alison.pamment at stfc.ac.uk
> STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
> R25, 2.22
> Harwell Oxford, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CF-metadata <cf-metadata-bounces at cgd.ucar.edu> On Behalf Of Taylor, Karl E.
> Sent: 06 March 2019 19:59
> To: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] too many eddies in standard names
>
> Sounds fine to me.
> Karl
>
> On 3/6/19 6:19 AM, Jonathan Gregory wrote:
> > 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.pamment at 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.pamment at stfc.ac.uk
> >> STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
> >> R25, 2.22
> >> Harwell Oxford, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K.
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: CF-metadata <cf-metadata-bounces at cgd.ucar.edu> On Behalf Of
> >> Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC
> >> Sent: 04 March 2019 19:36
> >> To: Jonathan Gregory <j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk>;
> >> cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> >> Cc: stephen.griffies at 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-bounces at cgd.ucar.edu> on behalf of
> >> Jonathan Gregory <j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk>
> >> Sent: 04 March 2019 17:52
> >> To: cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> >> Cc: stephen.griffies at 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_cont
> >> ent_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_param
> >> eterized_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.juckes at stfc.ac.uk> -----
> >>
> >>> Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2019 21:40:02 +0000
> >>> From: Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC <martin.juckes at stfc.ac.uk>
> >>> To: Jonathan Gregory <j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk>, "cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu"
> >>> <cf-metadata at 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/1Enafy971fSF3mNJb5MObm3buH2y
> >>> Am
> >>> 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-bounces at cgd.ucar.edu> on behalf of
> >>> Jonathan Gregory <j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk>
> >>> Sent: 01 March 2019 17:45
> >>> To: cf-metadata at 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.juckes at stfc.ac.uk> -----
> >>>
> >>>> Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2019 08:39:54 +0000
> >>>> From: Martin Juckes - UKRI STFC <martin.juckes at stfc.ac.uk>
> >>>> To: "Taylor, Karl E." <taylor13 at llnl.gov>, "cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu"
> >>>> <cf-metadata at 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-bounces at cgd.ucar.edu> on behalf of
> >>>> Taylor, Karl E. <taylor13 at llnl.gov>
> >>>> Sent: 27 February 2019 21:47
> >>>> To: cf-metadata at 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_advec
> >>>> t
> >>>> 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 at cgd.ucar.edu
> >>>>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> CF-metadata mailing list
> >>>> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> >>>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> CF-metadata mailing list
> >>>> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> >>>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
> >>> ----- End forwarded message -----
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> CF-metadata mailing list
> >>> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> >>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
> >> ----- End forwarded message -----
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> CF-metadata mailing list
> >> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> >> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> CF-metadata mailing list
> >> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> >> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
> >>
> > ----- End forwarded message -----
> > _______________________________________________
> > CF-metadata mailing list
> > CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> > http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
----- End forwarded message -----
Received on Wed May 29 2019 - 10:33:32 BST
