Dear Heinke,
Many thanks for this update. I split your proposals into individual
topics to facilitate the discussion. Please see the next emails.
Best regards,
Christiane
Heinke Hoeck schrieb:
> Dear Christiane and Jonathan ...,
>
> I overworked my proposal and tried to answer your question with Luca's help.
>
> I have changed the position of 'expressed as' without comments. It
> should belong
> to the species. Does everyone agree?
>
>
> atmosphere_number_content_of_X (new physical parameter)
> ******************************
> atmosphere_number_content_of_cloud_droplet
> atmosphere_number_content_of_ice_crystal
> atmosphere_number_content_of_aerosol_particle
>
> This was Jonathan's proposal.
> Christiane talked about _in_air. But I think that does not fit.
> For example _in_cloud is not in_air. Is that right, Christiane?
>
> I would eliminate the medium 'atmosphere_' in the standard name,
> but I know this is not the status quo. See my answer to Karl's proposal.
>
>
> atmosphere_mass_content_of
> ***************************
> atmosphere_mass_content_of_black_carbon_dry_aerosol
> atmosphere_mass_content_of_dust_dry_aerosol
> atmosphere_mass_content_of_particulate_organic_matter_dry_aerosol
> atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfate_dry_aerosol_expressed_as_sulfur
> atmosphere_mass_content_of_seasalt_dry_aerosol
> atmosphere_mass_content_of_water_in_ambient_aerosol
>
>
> _due_to_gravitational_settling (old _due_to_sedimentation)
> ******************
> Jonathan proposed:
> _due_to_gravitational_settling
>
> We agree.
>
>
> _due_turbulent_deposition (old _due_to_impact_and_turbulent_deposition)
> ***************************************
> Christiane proposed:
> I would summarize the impact under turbulent and just say
> _turbulent_depostion, because it applies to particles moving in
> turbulent flow.
>
> We agree.
>
> Christiane agreed:
> turbulent_dep. + sedimentation = dry_dep
>
> _due_to_dry_deposition
> **********************
> tendency_of_atmosphere_content_of_aerosol_particle_number_due_to_dry_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfate_dry_aerosol_expressed_as_sulfur_due_to_dry_deposition
>
> _due_to_emission
> ****************
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_particulate_organic_matter_dry_aerosol_due_to_emission
> Christiane said this is equal to:
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_primary_particulate_organic_matter_dry_aerosol_due_to_emission
> We agree.
>
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_dry_aerosol_sulfur_expressed_as_sulfur_due_to_emission
> (This is the total emission of Sulfur species (SO2+SO4+DMS) expressed in
> kg(S))
>
> Christiane asked:
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfur_dry_aerosol_expressed_as_sulfur_due_to_emission
> and can also be H2S and COS?
> Yes, HAMMOZ does not have H2S and COS. So in our case sulfur emissions
> are only sum of
> SO2(gas),H2SO4(gas),SO4(aerosol),DMS(gas)
>
> _due_to_gravitational_settling (old _due_to_sedimentation)
> *********************************************************
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_black_carbon_dry_aerosol_due_to_gravitational_settling
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_dust_dry_aerosol_due_to_gravitational_settling
> tendency_of_atmosphere_content_of_aerosol_particle_number_due_to_gravitational_settling
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_particulate_organic_matter_dry_aerosol_due_to_gravitational_settling
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfate_dry_aerosol_expressed_as_sulfur_due_to_gravitational_settling
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_seasalt_dry_aerosol_due_to_gravitational_settling
>
>
> _due_to_wet_deposition
> **********************
> tendency_of_atmosphere_content_of_aerosol_particle_number_due_to_wet_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfate_dry_aerosol_expressed_as_sulfur_due_to_wet_deposition
>
> Christiane said: This should be:
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfur_dry_aerosol_expressed_as_sulfur_due_to_wet_deposition
> (sulfate=sulfur?)
> We would say sulfate, because it is deposition of sulfate aerosol and
> not other sulfuric species.
> Christiane why do you think 'sulfur' is better. You probably have good
> reasons for this?
>
>
>
> _due_to_turbulent_deposition (old _due_to_impact_and_turbulent_deposition)
> ***************************************
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_black_carbon_dry_aerosol_due_to_turbulent_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_dust_dry_aerosol_due_to_turbulent_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_content_of_aerosol_particle_number_due_turbulent_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_particulate_organic_matter_dry_aerosol_due_to_turbulent_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_sulfate_dry_aerosol_expressed_as_sulfur_due_to_turbulent_deposition
> tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_seasalt_dry_aerosol_due_to_turbulent_deposition
>
>
> _in_air
> *******
> mass_fraction_of_formaldehyde_in_air
> mass_fraction_of_methyl_hydroperoxide_in_air
> mass_fraction_of_carbon_monoxide_in_air
> mass_fraction_of_hydrogen_peroxide_in_air
> mass_fraction_of_sulfuric_acid_in_air
> mass_fraction_of_nitric_acid_in_air
> mass_fraction_of_hydroperoxyl_in_air
> mass_fraction_of_dinitrogen_pentoxide_in_air
> mass_fraction_of_nitrogen_monoxide_in_air
> mass_fraction_of_nitrogen_dioxide_in_air
> mass_fraction_of_hydroxide_in_air
>
>
> _in_air_of_atmosphere_layer
> ***************************
> mass_fraction_of_ozone_in_air_of_atmosphere_layer
> mass_fraction_of_nitrogen_dioxide_in_air_of_atmosphere_layer
> mass_fraction_of_nitrogen_monoxide_in_air_of_atmosphere_layer
> mass_fraction_of_carbon_monoxide_in_air_of_atmosphere_layer
> mass_fraction_of_sulfur_dioxide_in_air_of_atmosphere_layer
>
> mass_concentration_of_pm2p5_in_air_of_atmosphere_layer
> mass_concentration_of_pm1_in_air_of_atmosphere_layer
> mass_concentration_of_sulfate_dry_aerosol_of_atmosphere_layer
> mass_concentration_of_dust_dry_aerosol_of_atmosphere_layer
> mass_concentration_of_seasalt_dry_aerosol_of_atmosphere_layer
> mass_concentration_of_black_carbon_dry_aerosol_of_atmosphere_layer
> mass_concentration_of_particulate_organic_matter_dry_aerosol_of_atmosphere_layer
>
> Christiane asked:
> I do not understand the sense of these names? why layer?
> atSurfaceLayer??
> atSurfaceLayer was a comment. Sorry for that.
>
> Why do you change the unit from kg to ug?
> We changed the units to micrograms/m3 because these fields are hourly
> averaged values of PM and PM
> components which will be tipically compared to measurements which are
> normally expressed in micrograms/m3.
> In the same dataset there is anyway the variable rhoam1, which is air
> denisty [kg/m3] which can be
> used to convert back aerosol concentration to mass mixing ration
> [kg/kg]. If micrograms is not accepted
> we can use kg/m3, but we should correct the variables in the data set.
> I would like to discuss micrograms. I was not able to find it in
> http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/software/udunits/udunits-1/udunits.txt ?
> Is it in udunits-2. Is a link available? If micrograms is part of it we
> can use kg for the standard name list. If not
> we should discuss this.
>
> forcing
> **********
> toa_instantaneous_shortwave_forcing_due_to_aerosol_assuming_clear_sky
> toa_instantaneous_shortwave_forcing_due_to_aerosol
> surface_instantaneous_shortwave_forcing_due_to_aerosol_assuming_clear_sky
> surface_instantaneous_shortwave_forcing_due_to_aerosol
> toa_instantaneous_longwave_forcing_due_to_aerosol_assuming_clear_sky
> toa_instantaneous_longwave_forcing_due_to_aerosol
> surface_instantaneous_longwave_forcing_due_to_aerosol_assuming_clear_sky
> surface_instantaneous_longwave_forcing_due_to_aerosol
>
> Christiane said:
> I do not think that _total_ is needed, as it is not used in other names that
> are the sum of different components.
> We agree.
>
> rad the units are dimensionless
> *********************************
> atmosphere_absorption_optical_thickness_due_to_ambient_aerosol
> atmosphere_absorption_optical_thickness_due_to_dust_in_ambient_aerosol
> atmosphere_absorption_optical_thickness_due_to_particulate_organic_matter_in_ambient_aerosol
> atmosphere_absorption_optical_thickness_due_to_sulfate_in_ambient_aerosol
> atmosphere_absorption_optical_thickness_due_to_seasalt_in_ambient_aerosol
> atmosphere_absorption_optical_thickness_due_to_water_in_ambient_aerosol
> atmosphere_absorption_optical_thickness_due_to_black_carbon_in_ambient_aerosol
>
> coarse_mode_dry_aerosol_particle_ambient_absorption_optical_thickness
> coarse_mode_wet_aerosol_particle_ambient_absorption_optical_thickness
> aitken_mode_dry_aerosol_particle_ambient_absorption_optical_thickness
> aitken_mode_wet_aerosol_particle_ambient_absorption_optical_thickness
>
> Christiane said:
> There is not exact definition for Aitken, Coarse mode particles, hence I
> would suggest to avoid these names in CF.
>
> We agree that there isn't clear definition for these aerosol classes.
> Alternative
> could be to give the exact distribution properties in the CF name, for
> example coarse
> mode can be described as particles with number median radius greater
> than 0.5 micrometers.
>
> Could we use a scalar coordinate variable for the radius?
>
>
> aerosol_asymmetry_parameter_of_atmosphere_layer
> aerosol_asymmetry_parameter
>
> Christianes question was:
>> aerosol_asymmetry_parameter_at_atmosphere_layer
>> at_atmosphere_layer?
> Sorry, of_atmosphere_layer
>
>
> atmosphere_aerosol_refractive_index_imaginary_part
> aerosol_refractive_index_imaginary_part_of_atmosphere_layer
> atmosphere_aerosol_refractive_index_real_part
> aerosol_refractive_index_real_part_of_atmosphere_layer
> atmosphere_aerosol_single_scattering_albedo
> aerosol_single_scattering_albedo_of_atmosphere_layer
>
> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_ambient_aerosol
> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_sulfate_in_ambient_aerosol
>
> atmosphere_accumulation_mode_dry_aerosol_particle_ambient_optical_thickness
> atmosphere_accumulation_mode_wet_aerosol_particle_ambient_optical_thickness
>
> atmosphere_coarse_mode_dry_aerosol_ambient_optical_thickness (old
> atmosphere_coarse_mode_dry_aerosol_particle_ambient_optical_thickness)
> atmosphere_coarse_mode_wet_aerosol_ambient_optical_thickness (")
> atmosphere_aitken_mode_dry_aerosol_ambient_optical_thickness (")
> atmosphere_aitken_mode_wet_aerosol_ambient_optical_thickness (")
>
> Christiane asked:
> Why aerosol_particle and not _aerosol_ ?
> What is a wet/dry_aerosol_particle_ambient_aerosol?
> Luca answered:
> Yes, now I realize we used _particle_ only for this group of variables.
> We can omit 'particle'.
> Also, wet/dry distinguish between soluble and insoluble particles which
> can uptake or not ambient
> water. So the definition wet_aerosol_ambient is maybe redundant, as
> ambient aerosol means aerosol
> that has taken up ambient water through hygroscopic growth.
>
> atmosphere_accumulation_mode_dry_aerosol_particle_ambient_absorption_optical_thickness
> atmosphere_accumulation_mode_wet_aerosol_particle_ambient_absorption_optical_thickness
>
> atmosphere_aerosol_extinction_cross_section_per_particle
> atmosphere_aerosol_extinction_cross_section_per_particle_of_atmosphere_layer
>
> Best wishes
> Heinke
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CF-metadata mailing list
> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>
--
======================================================================
Christiane Textor
Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l'Environnement
Unite Mixte de Recherche CEA-CNRS-UVSQ
LSCE/IPSL, CEA Saclay, Orme des Merisiers,
Bat. 701, Piece 3b, Point Courrier 129
F-91191 Gif-sur-Yvette Cedex
FRANCE
mailto: christiane.textor at lsce.ipsl.fr
Tel ++33 1 69 08 34 07 Fax ++33 1 69 08 77 16
GEOmon scientific coordinator http://www.geomon.eu
======================================================================
Received on Sun Nov 23 2008 - 10:14:19 GMT
