Meghan et. al:
I think we would be missing a great opportunity if we used only the
wave variables proposed below. We have good dynamical reasons to
think that waves are important in upper ocean dynamics and not just
for purposes of directing shipping or filling up mandated data bases.
I expect that in the future, ocean models will be coupled to wave
models (as is already done for tropical cyclone models) and that
historical wave data will be important in developing and verifying
these models. In another project we are struggling with trying to
reconstruct dynamically appropriate wave spectra from historical wave
data that is archived in such a way as to make proper reconstruction
very difficult. It would be a great waste if OceanSITES makes the
same mistake.
Variables should be added to the list that are sufficient to
1. Resconstruct the important features of the directional wave
spectrum, including energy and momentum flux and their depth profiles
2. Provide indications of the wave steepness and breaking probabilities.
Specific suggestions are perhaps better made by others (Baylor?, Jim?
Ramsey?).
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Fwd: Seeking new CF standard names (waves and biogeochem)
>> Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 10:37:36 -0400
>> From: Nan Galbraith <ngalbraith at whoi.edu>
>> Reply-To: ngalbraith at whoi.edu
>> To: ots-dmt <oceansites-dmt at jcommops.org>
>>
>> Hi all -
>>
>> For anyone in OceanSITES who measures waves, there's a recent
>> discussion on the CF mailing list about new standard names. This
>> would be a good time to weigh in, if you haven't already, since we'll
>> want to use these terms in OceanSITES data files if and when we
>> include wave parameters.
>>
>> You need to be a member of the CF list to post a reply. You can join
>> at
>> http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
>> .
>>
>> There's also been some discussion on biogeochem terms that might
>> be useful to some here.
>>
>> Regards -
>> Nan
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] Seeking new CF standard names (9) for sea
>> surface wave parameters
>> Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 11:09:29 +1100
>> From: andrew walsh
>> <awalsh at metoc.gov.au>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Jonathon and CF metadata list,
>>
>> Summarising our discussions thus far we propose:
>>
>> 2 new Cell methods:
>>
>> root_mean_square
>> mean_of_upper_decile
>>
>> and these new standard names:
>>
>> sea_surface_wave_height (common concept)
>> sea_surface_wave_mean_crest_period
>> sea_surface_wave_significant_wave_period
>> sea_surface_wave_period_at_second_largest_peak_of_variance_spectral_density
>> sea_surface_wave_variance_spectral_density_zeroth_frequency_moment
>> sea_surface_wave_root_mean_square_amplitude_from_variance_spectral_density
>>
>> The sea_surface_wave_height is a common concept (standard name)
>> which may be
>> qualified by a cell_method attribute to realise the actual
>> variable. The
>> sea_surface_wave_height
>> when combined with a cell method of:
>>
>> time: mean
>> time: maximum
>> time: root_mean_square
>> time: mean_of_upper_decile
>>
>> will describe the statistical wave height variables:
>>
>> sea_surface_mean_wave_height
>> sea_surface_maximum_wave_height
>> sea_surface_root_mean_square_wave_height
>> sea_surface_wave_mean_of_highest_one_tenth_waves
>>
>> respectively.
>>
>> I have attached a spreadsheet which contains the names,
>> descriptions and units
>> of the variables proposed.
>>
>> Looking forward to getting final approval to add these to the CF
>> name lists.
>>
>>
>> Andrew Walsh
>> Data Facilitator AODN
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Jonathan Gregory"
>> <j.m.gregory at reading.ac.uk>
>>
>> To: "andrew walsh"
>> <awalsh at metoc.gov.au>
>>
>> Cc:
>> <cf-metadata at cgd.ucar.edu>; "Mark Kulmar"<Mark.Kulmar at mhl.nsw.gov.au>
>>
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 20:21
>> Subject: [CF-metadata] Seeking new CF standard names (9) for sea
>> surface wave
>> parameters
>>
>>
>>> Dear Andrew
>>>
>>>> Yes, but depends on the community (list) accepting the idea of
>>>> having a
>>>
>>> Good. I think we are agreed then to propose these new cell methods:
>>>
>>> root_mean_square
>>> mean_of_upper_decile
>>>
>>> and these new standard names:
>>>
>>> sea_surface_wave_height
>>> sea_surface_wave_mean_crest_period
>>> sea_surface_wave_significant_wave_period
>>> sea_surface_wave_period_at_second_largest_peak_of_variance_spectral_density
>>> sea_surface_wave_variance_spectral_density_zeroth_frequency_moment
>>> sea_surface_wave_root_mean_square_amplitude_from_variance_spectral_density
>>>
>>> I agree that the last will avoid confusion with the RMS of wave
>>> height.
>>>
>>> I agree also that this depends on users being comfortable with the
>>> concepts
>>> being split into two attributes, in accordance with the usual CF
>>> practice,
>>> but deciding on how to join them up as common_concepts will help.
>>> Comments
>>> from others would help. It is good that Roy supports this
>>> compromise.
>>>
>>> Best wishes
>>>
>>> Jonathan
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Cliquez sur l'url suivante
>>
>> https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/tjkP04wPWEHTndxI!oX7UpBlscM9Pl1fAM1p1zO6h070olZRfJ6KoHxitOmXf8!eLCPtl9EVgldLRkMuvIdUTQ==
>>
>> si ce message est ind?sirable (pourriel).
>>
>>
>> <Proposed_wave_parm_names_for_CFlist.xls><Attached Message Part.txt>
>
>
Received on Tue Oct 26 2010 - 23:24:43 BST
