Dear Christiane,
thanks a lot for your comments, I will try to answer to your points below.
>> forcing
>> **********
>> toa_instantaneous_shortwave_forcing_due_to_aerosol_assuming_clear_sky
>> 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
> all ok
>
>> toa_instantaneous_longwave_forcing_due_to_aerosol
>> surface_instantaneous_longwave_forcing_due_to_aerosol_assuming_clear_sky
>> surface_instantaneous_longwave_forcing_due_to_aerosol
> the last 3 for ambient or dry aerosol?
>
ambient aerosols
>>
>> rad the units are dimensionless
>> *********************************
>> 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.
>
> 'Ambient aerosol' in CF means aerosol in the ambient atmosphere, that
> has taken up water according to the Koehler equation, i.e. the particle
> and environmental conditions.
> 'Dry aerosol' means without water.
> 'Wet aerosol' should not be used in CF
> I have corrected all names below that were incorrect in this manner.
>
> I have also delete the word 'particle'.
>
it is fine for me.
>> atmosphere_absorption_optical_thickness_due_to_ambient_aerosol
>> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_ambient_aerosol
> ok
>
>> 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
>>
>> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_sulfate_in_ambient_aerosol
>
> all above: delete the _in_ it should be
> atmosphere_absorption_optical_thickness_due_to_X_ambient_aerosol
It is fine for me.
>> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_ambient_aerosol
> ok
>
>> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_sulfate_in_ambient_aerosol
> delete the _in_ as above
>>
>> atmosphere_accumulation_mode_dry_aerosol_particle_ambient_optical_thickness
>>
> why did you change the structure? it should be
> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_X_ambient_aerosol
> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_accumulation_mode_ambient_aerosol
Yes, you are right, sorry for this confusion. I agree with
"atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_accumulation_mode_ambient_aerosol"
>> atmosphere_accumulation_mode_wet_aerosol_particle_ambient_optical_thickness
>>
>> atmosphere_coarse_mode_dry_aerosol_ambient_optical_thickness
>> atmosphere_coarse_mode_wet_aerosol_ambient_optical_thickness
> a>atmosphere_aitken_mode_dry_aerosol_ambient_optical_thickness
>> atmosphere_aitken_mode_wet_aerosol_ambient_optical_thickness
> all structures incorrect, do not use "wet" but "ambient"
> change to
> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_accumulation_mode_ambient_aerosol
> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_accumulation_mode_dry_aerosol
> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_coarse_mode_ambient_aerosol
> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_coarse_mode_dry_aerosol
> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_aitken_mode_ambient_aerosol
> atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_aitken_mode_dry_aerosol
The definition "accumulation_mode_ambient_aerosol" and
"accumulation_mode_ambient_aerosol" may be confusing, as one could
understand the difference between these two variables is just the
presence of water on the same distribution of particles. But in fact I
would like two describe two different particle distributions, both are
at ambient conditions but one is composed of particles which can uptake
water (soluble particles), and another one which cannot uptake
water in ambitn conditions (insoluble particles). So one possibility for
the variables above is:
atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_accumulation_soluble_mode_ambient_aerosol
atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_accumulation_insoluble_mode_ambient_aerosol
>>
>> atmosphere_accumulation_mode_dry_aerosol_particle_ambient_absorption_optical_thickness
>>
>> atmosphere_accumulation_mode_wet_aerosol_particle_ambient_absorption_optical_thickness
>>
>> 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
> The structure of these should be corrected as above.
>
> Discussion on the vague definition of these modes:
> Use of scalar coordinate: For PM10 we agreed on the explicitly defining
> a name for it, as Jonathan wrote in his email from 18/11. If I remember
> correctly the previous discussion, we said that this would only be done
> for very common names, otherwise scalar coordinates would be used. The
> modes you are mentioning are indeed very common names, so a
> standard-name should be defined.
>
> I think it is however impossible to prescribe the definition in CF as
> people use different limits in their model. Would it be possible to
> request the exact definition in the comment of this name?
>
>> atmosphere_aerosol_extinction_cross_section_per_particle
>> atmosphere_aerosol_extinction_cross_section_per_particle_of_atmosphere_layer
>>
>
> Why per particle? I guess in a model you would have this quantity for
> the average of particles in a grid box. If it refers to a single
> particle or to the whole population cannot be part of the standard_name
> but must be defined as a cell measure.
The difference between the two variables above is that one is 3D
(atmosphere_aerosol_extinction_cross_section_per_particle_of_atmosphere_layer),
the pther one is 2D, with weighted vertical integration. I agree we need
a better definition.
> I do not understand you layer names.
> What would be the differenct to this name?
> atmosphere_extinction_optical_thickness_of_atmospheric_layer_due_to_ambient_aerosol,
>
>
> (in this case the layer is needed as the name refers to the vertical
> length of a layer, or grid box height, but I am not sure, Jonathan what
> do you think?)
>
>
>> aerosol_asymmetry_parameter_of_atmosphere_layer
>> aerosol_asymmetry_parameter
> what is the difference? do not understand you layer-variables. and why
> not in_atmospheric_layer?
The same as for extinction cross section, the first one is 3D
(lon,lat,lev), the second 2D (lon,lat)
>> 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
>>
> Again, I do not understand the layer variables, and then they should be
> constructed at the other variables, e.g.
> atmosphere_layer_aerosol_refractive_index_imaginary_part
>
> I think it would be important to distinguish between dry and ambient
> aerosol? do not understand the layer-variables
I hope my answers can help a bit
Best regards
Luca
>
> Best wishes
> Christiane
>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CF-metadata mailing list
>> CF-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu
>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>>
>
Received on Tue Dec 02 2008 - 03:37:18 GMT
