[icoads_usa] Test for Tair
scott.d.woodruff at noaa.gov
Wed Feb 5 16:40:37 MST 2014
Hi Shawn and all,
Thanks for separating out this discussion of the IVAD attm status, from
the Beaufort wind topics etc.
Attached is the C96/C96a document with several additional comments
marked on top of your version.
After Sandy and I considered the detailed (including rdimma1-related
software) issues today, several additional changes are suggested in
Table C96 as attached (yellow highlighted, e.g. a couple of minor new
field abbreviation changes).
We do need a new IMMA document like the old Supplement D to start
defining all the new field values, both for the IVAD attm and various
other new/improved fields/attms. Thanks for offering to work on this,
particularly for the IVAD portions. -Scott
On 2/4/14 9:19 AM, Shawn R. Smith wrote:
> Hey All,
> I wanted to break off the discussion of the IVAD attm status from the
> emails related to the Lindau correction work we are starting. Attached
> please find Scott's C96/C96a document with my comments. Overall, I
> agree that we are ready to lock down the IVAD attm format and let
> Sandy procede with the necessary changes to the rdimma1 code. Aside
> from a few minor edits that I have noted, the only big question I see
> is whether we have agreement on the format for the scaling factors. I
> have included Dave's suggestion and ask that you all give me your yea
> or nea on this.
> Once we are in agreement, I think it would be beneficial to start a
> document that defines the IVAD elements and their possible values.
> Something akin to Supplement D: Field Configurations in the R2.5 imma
> documentation. This will allow us to pull all the details out of the
> various meeting notes and create a "how to" for IVAD developers. I am
> willing to work on this and can create it in the appropriate ICOADS
> document as needed (a start on R3.0 documentation?).
> If you all can review the attached and respond with your
> agreement/disagreement by the end of the week (7 Feb), that would be
> Dave - if we can agree to lock this down by 7 Feb, how long will it
> take you to revise your code an rerun the IVAD attms for the Tair
> data? Looks like we are considering 1970-2007 for the prototype, but
> jsut having a few years would be fine. This would allow us to address
> Steve's comments below about a potential test to output Core+IVAD
> records for a user (in this case FSU).
> On Jan 31, 2014, at 8:00 AM, Steve Worley wrote:
>> How much different is the current /Ivad /format compared to the
>> sample sent by Dave B.?
>> Is the/Ivad /format settled, i.e. fields name, field length, and ATTL?
>> Do we have a large enough sample for a Tair test?
>> If we have a near-final sufficient /Ivad /sample for Tair we could
>> probably do something /ad hoc/ to
>> create what Shawn needs. By that I mean, ingest the /Ivad /into the
>> IVAD-DB and write
>> out all the Tair /Ivad/ and the necessary parts of the /Core/ in a
>> one-off ASCII records so
>> the science test can go forward. Certainly, if the write IMMA1
>> software is ready to handle
>> /Ivad /then we could remove the /ad hoc /nature of this test.
>> On Jan 30, 2014, at 2:58 PM, Shawn R. Smith <smith at coaps.fsu.edu
>> <mailto:smith at coaps.fsu.edu>> wrote:
>>> Hey Steve,
>>> As Scott noted, yes it was Bill Murray at CPO I was thinking about.
>>> As for opening a discussion, I would like to start by asking him if
>>> he sees any future opportunities in his program for IVAD. I never
>>> had a chance to ask him why they rejected our LOI, but I expect it
>>> has to do with program priorities (maybe they are getting too land
>>> focused). Either way, it would be good to know for the future.
>>> For part 3, the scientific IVAD demonstration, we do have some ideas
>>> along that line and plan to complete something before our present
>>> IVAD funding terminates (in August or maybe later if we get a
>>> no-cost extension). Ideas at present include:
>>> 1. Calculating psuedo-fluxes (like those in da silva) with and
>>> without the corrections in the IVAD attm.
>>> 2. Comparing adjusted and unadjusted winds to satellite wind values
>>> What would really help us exercise the science would be to have a
>>> mechanism whereby we can extract both the ICOADS core record and the
>>> IVAD attm for a set of UIDs. As it is now, we have sample IVAD attm
>>> from Dave, but do not have the associated core records. We would
>>> have to develop a code to search through the IMMA2.5.1records to
>>> find the matching core records for each UID. If there is a way we
>>> could use the IVAD at NCAR to make this easier, that would be great
>>> (and would be a much better demonstration of the power of the tool).
>>> I assume this would require Dave to create a year (or so) of IVAD
>>> attm that we could import into the IVAD. Then we would just need a
>>> mechanism to export "all" records with an IVAD attm along with the
>>> associated core record (or for that matter, just export the full
>>> IMMA1 record for the subset that have IVAD attms).
>>> I certainly would like to discus this further. I will be focusing
>>> more time in IVAD in the next month or so (in prep for Ocean
>>> Sciences and CLIMAR4), so now would be a great time.
>>> Let us keep the discussion going. Feel free to call me if you want
>>> to discuss this further on Friday.
>>> On Jan 28, 2014, at 4:27 PM, Steve Worley wrote:
>>>> What thoughts do you have in opening a discussion with CPO? Our
>>>> fell into disarray, and CPO rejected our recent LOI. I sure would
>>>> like to see the
>>>> 3rd part, scientific IVAD demonstration, be done, but I have no
>>>> ideas. Once the
>>>> IMMA formatting has been finalized, the DB should work will be
>>>> trivial. The GUI
>>>> to IVAD will take some work, careful documentation, and testing.
>>>> On Jan 28, 2014, at 12:16 PM, Scott Woodruff
>>>> <scott.d.woodruff at noaa.gov <mailto:scott.d.woodruff at noaa.gov>> wrote:
>>>>> Thanks for drafting these. Attached includes a number of
>>>>> suggestions/questions you can consider, building on top of Shawn's
>>>>> While hopefully we will have the bulk of the IVAD infrastructure
>>>>> (e.g. at NCAR in the DBMS; and in terms of the supporting IMMA
>>>>> format and software revisions) in place around the time the
>>>>> funding runs out, I agree with Shawn that we need to discuss with
>>>>> CPO sometime (note: possibly_Bill_Murray was intended?) future
>>>>> funding prospects. -Scott
>>>> Steven Worley / NCAR
>>>> worley at ucar.edu <mailto:worley at ucar.edu>
>>>> rda.ucar.edu <http://rda.ucar.edu/>
>>>> Wrk: 303.497.1248
>>>> Mobile: 720.468.1961
>>>> icoads_usa mailing list
>>>> icoads_usa at mailman.ucar.edu <mailto:icoads_usa at mailman.ucar.edu>
>> Steven Worley / NCAR
>> worley at ucar.edu <mailto:worley at ucar.edu>
>> rda.ucar.edu <http://rda.ucar.edu/>
>> Wrk: 303.497.1248
>> Mobile: 720.468.1961
> icoads_usa mailing list
> icoads_usa at mailman.ucar.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 57759 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.ucar.edu/pipermail/icoads_usa/attachments/20140205/1a998150/attachment-0001.bin
More information about the icoads_usa