[CF-metadata] new standard name requests

Hello: My group is producing a climate data record (CDR) of satellite-based cloud property retrievals in support of the NOAA CDR program. When we do our retrievals, we do not directly retrieve parameters at cloud top but rather at some depth within the cloud where the infrared radiation is emi

[CF-metadata] new standard name requests

Dear Kris Thanks for your email. > My group is producing a climate data record (CDR) of satellite-based cloud > property retrievals in support of the NOAA CDR program. When we do our > retrievals, we do not directly retrieve parameters at cloud top but rather at > some depth within the cloud

[CF-metadata] new standard name requests

ce Phone: (757) 864-5798 Secondary Office Phone: (757) 951-1920 Fax: (757) 951-1902 kristopher.m.be...@nasa.gov = Message: 3 Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 16:48:07 + From: Jonathan Gregory To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu Subject:

[CF-metadata] new standard name requests

Dear Kris > We thought the "cloud radiative center" terminology was more descriptive, but > not as widely used as "effective". I agree with that. Cloud radiative center is fine. Since I don't know this subject, my question was just to make sure that it is a term that is in common use (even if not

[CF-metadata] new standard name requests

M. (LARC-E302)[SCIENCE SYSTEMS AND APPLICATIONS, INC] Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2014 12:29 PM To: CF Metadata Mail List Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] new standard name requests Charlie: I am supportive of: height_at_effective_cloud_top_defined_by_infrared_radiation Kris

[CF-metadata] new standard name requests

nto my files ASAP. > > Kris > > > From: Bedka, Kristopher M. (LARC-E302)[SCIENCE SYSTEMS AND APPLICATIONS, INC] > Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2014 12:29 PM > To: CF Metadata Mail List > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] new standard

Re: [CF-metadata] new standard name requests

Kris, Also, height of what? Jim Visit us on FacebookJim Biard Research Scholar Cooperative Institute for Climate and Satellites NC North Carolina State University NOAA's National Climatic Data Center 151 Patton Ave, Asheville, NC 28801 e: jbi...@cicsnc.org o: +1 828 271 4900 On Feb 1

Re: [CF-metadata] new standard name requests

Hi. Do you need a standard name for the height? Is this considered a scientific quantity in itself, or is it simply the vertical coordinate for the other two quantities? If it is a scientific quantity in its own right, then I’d suggest cloud_radiative_center_height or height_of_the_cloud_radi

Re: [CF-metadata] new standard name requests

ka, Kristopher M. (LARC-E302)[SCIENCE SYSTEMS AND APPLICATIONS, INC]" mailto:kristopher.m.be...@nasa.gov>> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] new standard name requests Hi. Do you need a standard name for the height? Is this considered a scientific quantity in itself, or is it simply the v

Re: [CF-metadata] new standard name requests

= > > > From: Jim Biard > Date: Tuesday, February 11, 2014 1:42 PM > To: "cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu" > Cc: "Bedka, Kristopher M. (LARC-E302)[SCIENCE SYSTEMS AND APPLICATIONS, > INC]" > > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] new standard name request

Re: [CF-metadata] new standard name requests

To: "Bedka, Kristopher M. (LARC-E302)[SCIENCE SYSTEMS AND APPLICATIONS, INC]" mailto:kristopher.m.be...@nasa.gov>> Cc: "cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu<mailto:cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu>" mailto:cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu>> Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] new standard na

Re: [CF-metadata] new standard name requests

ax: (757) 951-1902 kristopher.m.be...@nasa.gov = -Original Message- From: Jonathan Gregory Date: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 11:47 AM To: "cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu" Subject: [CF-metadata]new standard name requests

Re: [CF-metadata] new standard name requests

ook/14.3.9.131030 > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] new standard name requests > > "height_at" is fine by me which matches a greater number of the examples > you provide. Since I haven't heard any major disagreements with my > proposal, what's

Re: [CF-metadata] new standard name requests

Hello Kristopher, The proposed names seem to contain an ambiguity: > We thought the "cloud radiative center" terminology was more > descriptive, but not as widely used as "effective" What exactly is cloud radiative center? It sounds like it should mean the geometric average of the cloud base and

Re: [CF-metadata] new standard name requests

Charlie: Your statement: "Whereas I suspect the quantity you are trying to name is the height above which enough photons are emitted/scattered into a satellite sensor to trigger the detection algorithm to identify the presence of a cloud." is a decent description of our product. The "radiative c

Re: [CF-metadata] new standard name requests

Hi Kris, Try to pick a name that matches what the algorithm retrieves. What you have described seems much closer to an effective cloud top height for 11 um photons. So first I would replace the word "center" with something like "top". As you note, satellites traditionally use IR techniques to est

Re: [CF-metadata] new standard name requests

On Feb 12, 2014, at 21:31, Charlie Zender wrote: > I think that the name should encode the method if the result is sensitive to > the method. Here there be dragons. Can it be said that this is not a different measurement of the same thing, but a measurement of a different property? If you go

Re: [CF-metadata] new standard name requests

Charlie and John: Thanks for the discussion, this is really good background information for the list. The "effective" or "radiative center" height that we retrieve can be at least 1 km below the true cloud top as measured by a lidar. We also produce a cloud top height product that matches well

Re: [CF-metadata] new standard name requests

Dear Kris, John, et al. > If you go this route, a perhaps clearer option for the name is suggested by > an existing pattern: > height_at_cloud_top_defined_by_infrared_radiation (or > _infrared_reflection, or something similar) > > This has the added benefit that it puts the emphasis on what

Re: [CF-metadata] new standard name requests

>> I think that the name should encode the method if the result is >> sensitive to the method. > Here there be dragons. Can it be said that this is not a different > measurement of the same thing, but a measurement of a different > property? Yes. Kris says it is not adjusted to be a "true" cloud-

Re: [CF-metadata] new standard name requests

tion: University of California, Irvine Date: Thursday, February 13, 2014 12:23 PM To: CF Metadata Mail List Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] new standard name requests >> I think that the name should encode the method if the result is >> sensitive to the method. > Here there be dragons. Can it b

[CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

Hello CF, I am sending this request on behalf of Odele Coddington, Peter Pilewskie and Judith Lean (all copied). Please address your questions to them. Thanks, Phil -- We are proposing two new standard names for Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) and Solar Spectral Irradiance (SSI) at the top of the a

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

Hi. The definition of toa_solar_spectral_irradiance should be modified to read: standard name: toa_solar_spectral_irradiance definition: The solar power per unit area per unit wavelength that is incident at the top of the Earth’s atmosphere, at a standard distance of one Astro

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

I can't find any other cases where CF includes the units explicitly in the definition, since they are given explicitly by the canonical units entry. So I suggest the "in units of..." phrase be removed from both definitions. John On May 1, 2015, at 10:01, Jim Biard wrote: > Hi. > > The defin

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

Hi. I also just noticed that I changed the canonical units in my suggestion to "W m-2 nm-1". It should be "W m-2 m-1" as in the original submission. Jim On 5/1/15 2:03 PM, John Graybeal wrote: I can't find any other cases where CF includes the units explicitly in the definition, since they a

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

Dear Odele et al. Thanks for your proposals. I'm not sure whether by TOA irradiance you mean the flux incident normal to the Earth's surface or parallel to the vector between Sun and Earth. If it is the former, we already have a standard name for it viz toa_incoming_shortwave_flux If it is the

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

. Best wishes, Alison -- Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065 NCAS/Centre for Environmental Data ArchivalEmail: alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory R25, 2.22 Harwell Oxford, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K. > -Original Message-

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

a radiative flux is sometimes called "irradiance".' Again, comments are welcome. Best wishes, Alison -- Alison Pamment Tel: +44 1235 778065 NCAS/Centre for Environmental Data ArchivalEmail: alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk STFC Rutherford Appleton L

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

Forwarded message from Peter Pilewskie - > Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 07:11:16 -0600 > From: Peter Pilewskie > To: Jim Biard , "alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk" > , "j.m.greg...@reading.ac.uk" > , "cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu" > ,

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

Dear Peter and Judith We are all specialists in our own fields. I didn't mean to imply that your field is any more or less esoteric! I was just making the point that standard name are often not the terms customarily employed. They aim to be more self- explanatory for a wide range of disciplines. A

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

sage in geophysical disciplines, "flux" implies per unit area, called "flux density" in physics. When thought of as being incident on a surface, a radiative flux is sometimes called "irradian ce".' Again, comments are welcome. Best wishes, Alison -- A

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

indicates that the named quantity is the value which would obtain if all aspects of the system were unaltered except for the assumption of the circumstances specified by the condition. In accordance with common usage in geophysical disciplines, "flux" implies per unit area, called "

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

Dear Judith and Jim Thanks for sticking with this process, Judith, though it may be hard work. Thanks for your ideas, Jim. I largely agree with your arguments and so largely reach the same conclusions. There are two points on which we differ. * I prefer radiative_flux[_density] to irradiance bec

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

lto:odele.codding...@lasp.colorado.edu>>, Peter Pilewskie <mailto:peter.pilews...@lasp.colorado.edu>>, Daniel Wunder - NOAA Affiliate mailto:daniel.wun...@noaa.gov>>, "philip.jo...@noaa.gov <mailto:philip.jo...@noaa.gov>" mailto:philip.jo...@noaa.gov>> Su

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

gd.ucar.edu>" > mailto:cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu>>, Peter Pilewskie > mailto:peter.pilews...@lasp.colorado.edu>>, > Daniel Wunder - NOAA Affiliate > mailto:daniel.wun...@noaa.gov>>, > "philip.jo...@noaa.gov<mailto:philip.jo...@noaa.gov>" >

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

Dear Odele > Just to clarify, are you asking only the members of the CF working group > for their view on whether a change from flux to flux_density should be > made in the standard names? The question is for everyone on the CF email list. > Also, could you provide an example where a standard na

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

I don't think we have any cases exactly like the one being proposed, but I agree that in this case a 1 AU default with a specific way to override it is exactly the right way to go. John On May 20, 2015, at 06:17, Jonathan Gregory wrote: > Dear Odele > >> Just to clarify, are you asking only

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

Hi. There are a number of these standard names. It's easier to find them using the Standard Name Browser http://mmisw.org/cfsn/#/ where you can put 'coordinate' in as a search term in the definition field. One example is atmosphere_convective_available_potential_energy

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

Dear all Few opinions still have been given about whether we should change flux to flux_density in standard names, and those few are a majority against doing so. Since the proposers aren't happy with "flux" for "irradiance" in W m-2, I think the best compromise is solar_irradiance (W m-2) solar_i

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

I second that emotion. On 6/1/15 12:39 PM, Jonathan Gregory wrote: Dear all Few opinions still have been given about whether we should change flux to flux_density in standard names, and those few are a majority against doing so. Since the proposers aren't happy with "flux" for "irradiance" in W

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

: CF-metadata [mailto:cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu] On Behalf Of Jonathan Gregory Sent: Monday, June 01, 2015 6:39 PM To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu Cc: odele.codding...@lasp.colorado.edu Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI Dear all Few opinions still have been

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

Dear Tim > Just a quick comment on the proposed standard name > >distance_from_sun (m) > > It seems ambiguous to me, as a distance implies a measurement between two > points, and this specifies only one. In this case, the other point is the place where the measurement applies, so the

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

+1 On 6/3/15 9:12 AM, Jonathan Gregory wrote: Dear Tim Just a quick comment on the proposed standard name distance_from_sun (m) It seems ambiguous to me, as a distance implies a measurement between two points, and this specifies only one. In this case, the other point is the place

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

[mailto:cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu] On Behalf Of Jonathan Gregory Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2015 3:13 PM To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI Dear Tim > Just a quick comment on the proposed standard name > >distance_fr

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

ehalf > Of Jonathan Gregory > Sent: 01 June 2015 17:39 > To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu > Cc: odele.codding...@lasp.colorado.edu > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI > > Dear all > > Few opinions still have been given about whether

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

-Original Message- From: CF-metadata [mailto:cf-metadata-boun...@cgd.ucar.edu] On Behalf Of Jonathan Gregory Sent: 01 June 2015 17:39 To: cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu Cc: odele.codding...@lasp.colorado.edu Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI Dear all Few op

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

r - NOAA Affiliate; Philip Jones - NOAA Affiliate > Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI > > Thank you, Alison. Indeed, we agree these are good names and are very > happy with the outcome. Echoing Jim¹s sentiments, thanks to all for the > hard work! &g

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

lasp.colorado.edu Cc: daniel.wun...@noaa.gov Subject: Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI Looks great to me! Thanks for all the hard work! On 6/4/15 10:11 AM, alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk<mailto:alison.pamm...@stfc.ac.uk> wrote: Dear All, I agree with Jonathan's recen

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

pleton Laboratory R25, 2.22 Harwell Oxford, Didcot, OX11 0QX, U.K. From: Cameron-smith, Philip [mailto:cameronsmi...@llnl.gov] Sent: 06 June 2015 03:18 To: Jim Biard; Pamment, Alison (STFC,RAL,RALSP); cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu; odele.codding...@lasp.colorado.edu; judith.l...@nrl.navy.mil; peter.pilews...@lasp.c

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

y, June 08, 2015 9:27 AM To: Cameron-smith, Philip; jbi...@cicsnc.org; cf-metadata@cgd.ucar.edu; odele.codding...@lasp.colorado.edu; judith.l...@nrl.navy.mil; peter.pilews...@lasp.colorado.edu Cc: daniel.wun...@noaa.gov Subject: RE: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI Dear P

Re: [CF-metadata] New standard name requests for TSI and SSI

Dear All, More than seven days have passed without any further comment in this thread. Philip's comments are the most recent and he has indicated that the compromise of using 'irradiance' is acceptable, even though 'flux' would be preferable for consistency. I think, therefore, that this discu