Hi all,
the WDCC (
http://cera-www.dkrz.de/) describes the sensor(instrument) and
source(platform) metadata with the
nasa dif.
http://gcmd.nasa.gov/User/suppguide/instruments/instrument_identification.html
(
http://gcmd.nasa.gov/User/difguide/sensor_name.html)
http://gcmd.nasa.gov/User/suppguide/platforms/platform_identification.html
(
http://gcmd.nasa.gov/User/difguide/source_name.html)
This is done for a project (
http://umwelt.wikidora.com/wikidora/)
together with the
Meteorological Institute of the University of Bonn.
It is not possible to view this information in the our user interface.
(The system is not ready.)
Our project partner at the University of Bonn agreed that the dif sensor
and source description is
sufficient for their need.
I would like to translate the nasa dif for sensor and source to a cf
example, but I need help.
Problems are:
The sensor and source metadate are hierarchic
and it would be good give a reference to
http://gcmd.nasa.gov
This is a first quick try:
dimensions:
sample = 1000;
wind_vector = 3;
inst_name_strlen = 1000;
platform_name_strlen = 1000;
variables:
float wind(sample, wind_vector);
wind:long_name = "3D wind";
wind:units = "m/s";
wind:coordinates = "lon lat z time";
char inst_name(sample, inst_name_strlen);
inst_name:reference =
"
http://gcmd.nasa.gov/User/suppguide/instruments/instrument_identification.html";
inst_name:long_name =
"[Instrument_Category=...][Instrument_Class=...][Instrument_Type=...]
[Instrument_Subtype=...][Short_Name=...][Long_Name=...]";
inst_name:coordinates = "lon lat z time" ;
char platform_name(sample, platform_name_strlen);
platform_name:reference =
"
http://gcmd.nasa.gov/User/suppguide/platforms/platform_identification.html";
platform_name:long_name =
"[Platform_Category=...][Platform_Series_or_Entity=...][Short_Name=...][Long_Name=...]";
platform_name:coordinates = "lon lat z time" ;
I started with an example see:
http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/staff/caron/papers/obs2.pdf
Best wishes
Heinke
On 02/09/2011 09:02 PM, Steve Hankin wrote:
> Hi Eli,
>
> There is a CF convention for storing multiple observations that is
> under development at https://cf-pcmdi.llnl.gov/trac/ticket/37. The
> details are still subject to changes, but the changes will probably be
> relatively small. The spec that is on-line is a little out of date --
> to be updated as soon as the next editorial pass is ready. Meantime
> if you are interested in following this approach, then please write
> back off-line and I'll send you the latest rough draft.
>
> - Steve
>
> ======================================
>
> On 2/8/2011 11:22 PM, Ateljevich, Eli wrote:
>> Hi, I am modeling the San Francisco Bay-Delta an estuary with several
>> tributaries including the Sacramento River, San Joaquin River and
>> numerous smaller streams. The boundary data are time series of
>> cross-sectional velocity profiles across each channel. The
>> cross-sections for different sensors are different and each
>> cross-section contains numerous points.
>> I would like to retain the information about which velocities come
>> from which sensors, and also add some attributes about the sensors.
>> Can anyone comment on which of these possibilities is best:
>> 1. Each sensor is an independent file. Then the variable would be
>> water_velocity_x and _y, the transect locations would be included as
>> a coordinate and the sensor station name such as sacramento_rsac075
>> would be an attribute. It is unclear to me that there is a standard
>> nomenclature for the sensor name.
>> 2. Each variable is a sensor station-variable pair:
>> sacramento_rsac075_velocity. I don't see anything that looks like
>> this in the CF examples, but the standard does not address variable
>> names. I would use an attribute to identify the sensor name
>> redundantly, and again I am not clear if there is a standard for
>> this. The hitch seems to be that each station would have a different
>> set of cross-section locations so the file would have a location
>> coordinate for each sensor.
>> 3.The data could be velocity(time,station). The "station" coordinate
>> would be associated with lat, long and sensor names. This lumps all
>> the data in one variable. The sensor used for each data point can be
>> identified, but there is no clear slot for sensor metadata.
>> Thanks,
>> Eli
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
Received on Thu Feb 10 2011 - 02:48:42 GMT
