Dear Karl,
In addition to the reply already given by Rich, I should probably add that
the term "ocean" be somewhat confusing in this respect. The studies focus in
general on the development on the coastal shelf, such as beach profiles,
estuaries and even rivers. In all cases the "ocean" sigma coordinate is
appropriate for the type of vertical grid that we use except for the fact
that it is not really ocean --- but that is the price we have to pay for
standard names --- and that the bed level (in CF referred to as depth)
changes.
To come up with a real ocean application outside my regular field of work,
one might be interested in doing some kind of tsunami modelling in which the
tsunami is triggered by ocean bottom changes (possible horizontal shift may
make things more complicated).
Best regards,
Bert
----- Original Message -----
From: "Karl Taylor" <taylor13 at llnl.gov>
To: "Bert Jagers" <Bert.Jagers at wldelft.nl>
Cc: <cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 6:44 PM
Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] question about sigma level vertical coordinate.
> Dear Bert,
>
> I am curious as to what sort of modeling you are doing. What is changing
> the depth of the ocean, and over what time-scale? Are you planning an
> actual simulation where you will do this?
>
> Again, I'm just curious about this, since I am unaware of any modeling
> requiring a time-dependent ocean depth. Like Jonathan, I think that if
> there is a need for it, we should extend CF to include this.
>
> Best regards,
> Karl
>
>
> Bert Jagers wrote:
>>> I should think so, if the CF document were amended accordingly. In other
>>> such cases we have not introduce new coord systems.
>>
>> Thank you for the answer. I would really appreciate if the CF document
>> were extended to include this extension of the ocean sigma coordinate
>> definition.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Bert
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CF-metadata mailing list
>> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
>> http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>>
>
Received on Tue Oct 03 2006 - 23:44:07 BST
