[Met_help] [rt.rap.ucar.edu #38240] History for RE: Wind analysis
RAL HelpDesk {for John Halley Gotway}
met_help at ucar.edu
Wed Feb 23 14:53:29 MST 2011
----------------------------------------------------------------
Initial Request
----------------------------------------------------------------
Hello,
This wind analysis continues to give us new challenging problems. I have access to 100's of towers throughout the country. The dataset consists of U,V, and Temperature measurements on wind towers at multiple levels for a given location. However when you move to a new location the height of the measurements can vary. For example, here are the heights for a small sample of towers:
[cid:image001.jpg at 01CB0274.85A695A0]
Is there any way to specify non-integer levels, or to interpolate to any levels in the dataset? The other option is rounding these to the nearest 10's of meters. Just thought I'd give this a stab before reformatting the data.
Take care,
Joe
Dr. Joseph L. Eastman
Senior Atmospheric Scientist
WindLogics Inc.
201 4th St NW
Grand Rapids, MN
55744
c - 410.279.9702
w - 651.556.4297
jeastman at windlogics.com
-----Original Message-----
From: John Halley Gotway [mailto:johnhg at ucar.edu]
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 10:59 AM
To: Joe Eastman
Cc: met_help at ucar.edu; Todd Harris
Subject: Re: [Met_help] Wind analysis
Joe,
No, L10 is fine. The Z10 vs L10 is a pretty subtle difference. Each GRIB records has a level value and level type associated with it. If you put "WIND/Z10", MET will search through the GRIB records
and only select those that have a level "type" of being a "vertical level", i.e. meters above ground. If you put "WIND/L10", it'll grab the first GRIB record that has a level value of 10, regardless
of the level type. So it really should have no impact unless you're using a GRIB record with a "weird" level type.
John
Joe Eastman wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> We followed this line of thinking and Todd has this working. For 10m winds, he used the L10. It seemed to work. Should we have used Z10 though?
>
> Take care,
> Joe
>
> Dr. Joseph L. Eastman
> Senior Atmospheric Scientist
> WindLogics Inc.
> 201 4th St NW
> Grand Rapids, MN
> 55744
>
> c - 410.279.9702
> w - 651.556.4297
> jeastman at windlogics.com
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Halley Gotway [mailto:johnhg at ucar.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 10:07 AM
> To: Joe Eastman
> Cc: Todd Harris; met_help at ucar.edu
> Subject: Re: [Met_help] Wind analysis
>
> Joe,
>
> I wanted to follow up with you on this. I spoke with Tressa Fowler, the scientist leading the MET development effort, and she informed me that it would not be advisable to add the functionality I
> suggested to the STAT-Analysis tool - to extract errors in the wind speed from the VL1L2 lines. While it's certainly possible to do mathematically, it would be much better to just evaluate the wind
> speed field as we evaluate other scalar fields. If we were to use the VL1L2 lines instead, all we have is a single measure of wind speed aggregated over the entire verification region. And there's a
> lot of canceling that would occur.
>
> My suggestion would be to add WIND (for wind speed) to your Point-Stat configuration file. Additionally, you could turn on the output of the matched pairs (MPR) line type. Since you're looking at
> individual stations, those MPR lines shouldn't be too much data. Then you can run any number of jobs in the STAT-Analysis tool that read those MPR lines for the wind speed from multiple output times
> and compute a variety of different statistics.
>
> If you have any further scientific questions, I'll refer you to Tressa, tressa at ucar.edu.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> John
>
> John Halley Gotway wrote:
>> Joe,
>>
>> MET treats wind speed as a scalar field just like any other continuous field. When you request that wind speed be verified (e.g. fcst_field = "WIND/Z2"; for 2-meter wind speed), MET looks in the
>> input forecast file for wind speed. If wind speed does not exist in the file, it instead retrieves the corresponding U and V components at that same level and derives wind speed for you.
>>
>> I'm not entirely clear on exactly how you're using MET, so I can't say for sure how best to add wind speed into your analysis. One option would be to add wind speed to the list of "fcst_fields" being
>> verified in Point-Stat. However, you'll need to make sure that you have wind speed observations available for verifying the forecasts.
>>
>> But if you're wondering if Stat-Analysis can process VL1L2 lines and dump out stats about errors in wind speed, the answer is no. It's not currently set up to do that. However, that certainly does
>> seem a very logical and straight-forward extension of the functionality. Would you like to see that type of functionality added to the Stat-Analysis tool, read in VL1L2 lines and dump out statistics
>> about errors in wind speed similar to how we handle wind direction?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> John
>>
>>
>> Joe Eastman wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I am in the process of analyzing winds for integrations at several thousand surface stations. I had been using point stat to create the matched pairs and then used statanalysis to do the V1L1 analysis on the wind direction. This is fine for direction but we have no information for wind speed, which in our line of work is the most crucial. Operating on just UGRD or VGRID by themselves is pretty useless. I did not see in the WPP wrf_parm.ctl and option to spit out wind speed. Is there some simple solution to this? Thanks.
>>>
>>> Take care,
>>> Joe
>>>
>>> Dr. Joseph L. Eastman
>>> Senior Atmospheric Scientist
>>> WindLogics Inc.
>>> 201 4th St NW
>>> Grand Rapids, MN
>>> 55744
>>>
>>> c - 410.279.9702
>>> w - 651.556.4297
>>> jeastman at windlogics.com<mailto:jeastman at windlogics.com>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of any kind is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender via reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Met_help mailing list
>>> Met_help at mailman.ucar.edu
>>> http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/met_help
>> _______________________________________________
>> Met_help mailing list
>> Met_help at mailman.ucar.edu
>> http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/met_help
----------------------------------------------------------------
Complete Ticket History
----------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: [Met_help] Wind analysis
From: John Halley Gotway
Time: Wed Jun 02 16:46:35 2010
Joe,
Is it the case that you'd really like to verify using a range of
vertical levels? For example, be able to group together all the stats
for observations falling between 48 and 52 meters (UGRD/Z48-52)?
I went looking into the code, and the logic is a bit complex. We're
currently working on updates for the next release of MET. If we could
get this well-defined, we may be able to add some logic to handle
this.
What would really help me is:
(1) Some sample forecast and observation data. The forecast data
should have winds at multiple vertical levels. And the observation
data should be at multiple levels, like the examples you sent. You
can post it to our anonymous ftp site:
ftp ftp.rap.ucar.edu
username=anonymous
password="your email address"
cd incoming/irap/met_help/eastman_data
put "your data files"
bye
(2) A detailed description of how you'd like the matching in the
vertical to work.
If we're able to get something set up to handle this, I'd probably ask
you to build and test a beta version of METv3.0 to make sure it
handles the data the way you want.
Thanks,
John
On Wed Jun 02 15:57:12 2010, Joe.Eastman at windlogics.com wrote:
> Hello,
>
>
>
> This wind analysis continues to give us new challenging problems. I
> have access to 100's of towers throughout the country. The
dataset
> consists of U,V, and Temperature measurements on wind towers at
> multiple levels for a given location. However when you move to a
> new location the height of the measurements can vary. For
example,
> here are the heights for a small sample of towers:
>
>
>
> [cid:image001.jpg at 01CB0274.85A695A0]
>
>
>
> Is there any way to specify non-integer levels, or to interpolate to
> any levels in the dataset? The other option is rounding these to
> the nearest 10's of meters. Just thought I'd give this a stab
> before reformatting the data.
>
>
>
> Take care,
>
> Joe
>
>
>
> Dr. Joseph L. Eastman
>
> Senior Atmospheric Scientist
>
> WindLogics Inc.
>
> 201 4th St NW
>
> Grand Rapids, MN
>
> 55744
>
>
>
> c - 410.279.9702
>
> w - 651.556.4297
>
> jeastman at windlogics.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Halley Gotway [mailto:johnhg at ucar.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 10:59 AM
> To: Joe Eastman
> Cc: met_help at ucar.edu; Todd Harris
> Subject: Re: [Met_help] Wind analysis
>
>
>
> Joe,
>
>
>
> No, L10 is fine. The Z10 vs L10 is a pretty subtle difference.
Each
> GRIB records has a level value and level type associated with it.
> If you put "WIND/Z10", MET will search through the GRIB records
>
> and only select those that have a level "type" of being a "vertical
> level", i.e. meters above ground. If you put "WIND/L10", it'll
> grab the first GRIB record that has a level value of 10,
regardless
>
> of the level type. So it really should have no impact unless you're
> using a GRIB record with a "weird" level type.
>
>
>
> John
>
>
>
> Joe Eastman wrote:
>
> > Hi John,
>
> >
>
> > We followed this line of thinking and Todd has this working. For
10m
> winds, he used the L10. It seemed to work. Should we have used
Z10
> though?
>
> >
>
> > Take care,
>
> > Joe
>
> >
>
> > Dr. Joseph L. Eastman
>
> > Senior Atmospheric Scientist
>
> > WindLogics Inc.
>
> > 201 4th St NW
>
> > Grand Rapids, MN
>
> > 55744
>
> >
>
> > c - 410.279.9702
>
> > w - 651.556.4297
>
> > jeastman at windlogics.com
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > -----Original Message-----
>
> > From: John Halley Gotway [mailto:johnhg at ucar.edu]
>
> > Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 10:07 AM
>
> > To: Joe Eastman
>
> > Cc: Todd Harris; met_help at ucar.edu
>
> > Subject: Re: [Met_help] Wind analysis
>
> >
>
> > Joe,
>
> >
>
> > I wanted to follow up with you on this. I spoke with Tressa
Fowler,
> the scientist leading the MET development effort, and she
informed
> me that it would not be advisable to add the functionality I
>
> > suggested to the STAT-Analysis tool - to extract errors in the
wind
> speed from the VL1L2 lines. While it's certainly possible to do
> mathematically, it would be much better to just evaluate the wind
>
> > speed field as we evaluate other scalar fields. If we were to use
> the VL1L2 lines instead, all we have is a single measure of wind
> speed aggregated over the entire verification region. And
there's
> a
>
> > lot of canceling that would occur.
>
> >
>
> > My suggestion would be to add WIND (for wind speed) to your Point-
> Stat configuration file. Additionally, you could turn on the
> output of the matched pairs (MPR) line type. Since you're
looking
> at
>
> > individual stations, those MPR lines shouldn't be too much data.
> Then you can run any number of jobs in the STAT-Analysis tool
that
> read those MPR lines for the wind speed from multiple output
times
>
> > and compute a variety of different statistics.
>
> >
>
> > If you have any further scientific questions, I'll refer you to
> Tressa, tressa at ucar.edu.
>
> >
>
> > Hope that helps.
>
> >
>
> > John
>
> >
>
> > John Halley Gotway wrote:
>
> >> Joe,
>
> >>
>
> >> MET treats wind speed as a scalar field just like any other
> continuous field. When you request that wind speed be verified
> (e.g. fcst_field = "WIND/Z2"; for 2-meter wind speed), MET looks
in
> the
>
> >> input forecast file for wind speed. If wind speed does not exist
> in the file, it instead retrieves the corresponding U and V
> components at that same level and derives wind speed for you.
>
> >>
>
> >> I'm not entirely clear on exactly how you're using MET, so I
can't
> say for sure how best to add wind speed into your analysis. One
> option would be to add wind speed to the list of "fcst_fields"
> being
>
> >> verified in Point-Stat. However, you'll need to make sure that
you
> have wind speed observations available for verifying the
forecasts.
>
> >>
>
> >> But if you're wondering if Stat-Analysis can process VL1L2 lines
> and dump out stats about errors in wind speed, the answer is no.
> It's not currently set up to do that. However, that certainly
does
>
> >> seem a very logical and straight-forward extension of the
> functionality. Would you like to see that type of functionality
> added to the Stat-Analysis tool, read in VL1L2 lines and dump out
> statistics
>
> >> about errors in wind speed similar to how we handle wind
direction?
>
> >>
>
> >> Thanks,
>
> >> John
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> Joe Eastman wrote:
>
> >>> Hello,
>
> >>>
>
> >>> I am in the process of analyzing winds for integrations at
several
> thousand surface stations. I had been using point stat to create
> the matched pairs and then used statanalysis to do the V1L1
> analysis on the wind direction. This is fine for direction but we
> have no information for wind speed, which in our line of work is
> the most crucial. Operating on just UGRD or VGRID by themselves
is
> pretty useless. I did not see in the WPP wrf_parm.ctl and option
to
> spit out wind speed. Is there some simple solution to this?
Thanks.
>
> >>>
>
> >>> Take care,
>
> >>> Joe
>
> >>>
>
> >>> Dr. Joseph L. Eastman
>
> >>> Senior Atmospheric Scientist
>
> >>> WindLogics Inc.
>
> >>> 201 4th St NW
>
> >>> Grand Rapids, MN
>
> >>> 55744
>
> >>>
>
> >>> c - 410.279.9702
>
> >>> w - 651.556.4297
>
> >>> jeastman at windlogics.com<mailto:jeastman at windlogics.com>
>
> >>>
>
> >>>
>
> >>>
>
> >>> ________________________________
>
> >>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message is for the sole use
of
> the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and
> privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure
or
> distribution of any kind is strictly prohibited. If you are not
the
> intended recipient, please contact the sender via reply e-mail
and
> destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you.
>
> >>>
>
> >>>
>
> >>>
>
> >>>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> >>>
>
> >>> _______________________________________________
>
> >>> Met_help mailing list
>
> >>> Met_help at mailman.ucar.edu
>
> >>> http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/met_help
>
> >> _______________________________________________
>
> >> Met_help mailing list
>
> >> Met_help at mailman.ucar.edu
>
> >> http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/met_help
------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: [Met_help] Wind analysis
From: John Halley Gotway
Time: Wed Jun 16 16:49:38 2010
Joe,
I'm just getting back to this issue to see if we can add some logic to
the next release of MET to better handle your data. I took a look at
the GRIB files you sent me a couple of weeks ago. When I dump the
UGRD records from one of those files, I see 35 records:
- 1 record at 10 meters
- 34 records at "Hybrid Level 1" through "Hybrid Level 34"
My question for you is, how would you ideally like Point-Stat to
handle this data? Are you trying verify these "Hybrid Levels" or just
the winds at 10-meters? If you are trying to verify the hybrid
levels, I don't think we have enough information to determine which
observations should be matched to which hybrid level. Or am I missing
something?
Please advise.
John
On Wed Jun 02 16:46:35 2010, johnhg wrote:
> Joe,
>
> Is it the case that you'd really like to verify using a range of
> vertical levels? For example, be able to group together all the
> stats for observations falling between 48 and 52 meters
(UGRD/Z48-
> 52)?
>
> I went looking into the code, and the logic is a bit complex. We're
> currently working on updates for the next release of MET. If we
> could get this well-defined, we may be able to add some logic to
> handle this.
>
> What would really help me is:
> (1) Some sample forecast and observation data. The forecast data
> should have winds at multiple vertical levels. And the
observation
> data should be at multiple levels, like the examples you sent.
You
> can post it to our anonymous ftp site:
> ftp ftp.rap.ucar.edu
> username=anonymous
> password="your email address"
> cd incoming/irap/met_help/eastman_data
> put "your data files"
> bye
> (2) A detailed description of how you'd like the matching in the
> vertical to work.
>
> If we're able to get something set up to handle this, I'd probably
ask
> you to build and test a beta version of METv3.0 to make sure it
> handles the data the way you want.
>
> Thanks,
> John
>
> On Wed Jun 02 15:57:12 2010, Joe.Eastman at windlogics.com wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> >
> >
> > This wind analysis continues to give us new challenging problems.
I
> > have access to 100's of towers throughout the country. The
> dataset
> > consists of U,V, and Temperature measurements on wind towers at
> > multiple levels for a given location. However when you move to
a
> > new location the height of the measurements can vary. For
> example,
> > here are the heights for a small sample of towers:
> >
> >
> >
> > [cid:image001.jpg at 01CB0274.85A695A0]
> >
> >
> >
> > Is there any way to specify non-integer levels, or to interpolate
to
> > any levels in the dataset? The other option is rounding these
to
> > the nearest 10's of meters. Just thought I'd give this a stab
> > before reformatting the data.
> >
> >
> >
> > Take care,
> >
> > Joe
> >
> >
> >
> > Dr. Joseph L. Eastman
> >
> > Senior Atmospheric Scientist
> >
> > WindLogics Inc.
> >
> > 201 4th St NW
> >
> > Grand Rapids, MN
> >
> > 55744
> >
> >
> >
> > c - 410.279.9702
> >
> > w - 651.556.4297
> >
> > jeastman at windlogics.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Halley Gotway [mailto:johnhg at ucar.edu]
> > Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 10:59 AM
> > To: Joe Eastman
> > Cc: met_help at ucar.edu; Todd Harris
> > Subject: Re: [Met_help] Wind analysis
> >
> >
> >
> > Joe,
> >
> >
> >
> > No, L10 is fine. The Z10 vs L10 is a pretty subtle difference.
> Each
> > GRIB records has a level value and level type associated with
it.
> > If you put "WIND/Z10", MET will search through the GRIB records
> >
> > and only select those that have a level "type" of being a
"vertical
> > level", i.e. meters above ground. If you put "WIND/L10", it'll
> > grab the first GRIB record that has a level value of 10,
> regardless
> >
> > of the level type. So it really should have no impact unless
you're
> > using a GRIB record with a "weird" level type.
> >
> >
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> > Joe Eastman wrote:
> >
> > > Hi John,
> >
> > >
> >
> > > We followed this line of thinking and Todd has this working. For
> 10m
> > winds, he used the L10. It seemed to work. Should we have used
> Z10
> > though?
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Take care,
> >
> > > Joe
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Dr. Joseph L. Eastman
> >
> > > Senior Atmospheric Scientist
> >
> > > WindLogics Inc.
> >
> > > 201 4th St NW
> >
> > > Grand Rapids, MN
> >
> > > 55744
> >
> > >
> >
> > > c - 410.279.9702
> >
> > > w - 651.556.4297
> >
> > > jeastman at windlogics.com
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > > From: John Halley Gotway [mailto:johnhg at ucar.edu]
> >
> > > Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 10:07 AM
> >
> > > To: Joe Eastman
> >
> > > Cc: Todd Harris; met_help at ucar.edu
> >
> > > Subject: Re: [Met_help] Wind analysis
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Joe,
> >
> > >
> >
> > > I wanted to follow up with you on this. I spoke with Tressa
> Fowler,
> > the scientist leading the MET development effort, and she
> informed
> > me that it would not be advisable to add the functionality I
> >
> > > suggested to the STAT-Analysis tool - to extract errors in the
> wind
> > speed from the VL1L2 lines. While it's certainly possible to
do
> > mathematically, it would be much better to just evaluate the
wind
> >
> > > speed field as we evaluate other scalar fields. If we were to
use
> > the VL1L2 lines instead, all we have is a single measure of
wind
> > speed aggregated over the entire verification region. And
> there's
> > a
> >
> > > lot of canceling that would occur.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > My suggestion would be to add WIND (for wind speed) to your
Point-
> > Stat configuration file. Additionally, you could turn on the
> > output of the matched pairs (MPR) line type. Since you're
> looking
> > at
> >
> > > individual stations, those MPR lines shouldn't be too much data.
> > Then you can run any number of jobs in the STAT-Analysis tool
> that
> > read those MPR lines for the wind speed from multiple output
> times
> >
> > > and compute a variety of different statistics.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > If you have any further scientific questions, I'll refer you to
> > Tressa, tressa at ucar.edu.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Hope that helps.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > John
> >
> > >
> >
> > > John Halley Gotway wrote:
> >
> > >> Joe,
> >
> > >>
> >
> > >> MET treats wind speed as a scalar field just like any other
> > continuous field. When you request that wind speed be verified
> > (e.g. fcst_field = "WIND/Z2"; for 2-meter wind speed), MET
looks
> in
> > the
> >
> > >> input forecast file for wind speed. If wind speed does not
exist
> > in the file, it instead retrieves the corresponding U and V
> > components at that same level and derives wind speed for you.
> >
> > >>
> >
> > >> I'm not entirely clear on exactly how you're using MET, so I
> can't
> > say for sure how best to add wind speed into your analysis.
One
> > option would be to add wind speed to the list of "fcst_fields"
> > being
> >
> > >> verified in Point-Stat. However, you'll need to make sure that
> you
> > have wind speed observations available for verifying the
> forecasts.
> >
> > >>
> >
> > >> But if you're wondering if Stat-Analysis can process VL1L2
lines
> > and dump out stats about errors in wind speed, the answer is
no.
> > It's not currently set up to do that. However, that certainly
> does
> >
> > >> seem a very logical and straight-forward extension of the
> > functionality. Would you like to see that type of
functionality
> > added to the Stat-Analysis tool, read in VL1L2 lines and dump
out
> > statistics
> >
> > >> about errors in wind speed similar to how we handle wind
> direction?
> >
> > >>
> >
> > >> Thanks,
> >
> > >> John
> >
> > >>
> >
> > >>
> >
> > >> Joe Eastman wrote:
> >
> > >>> Hello,
> >
> > >>>
> >
> > >>> I am in the process of analyzing winds for integrations at
> several
> > thousand surface stations. I had been using point stat to
create
> > the matched pairs and then used statanalysis to do the V1L1
> > analysis on the wind direction. This is fine for direction but
we
> > have no information for wind speed, which in our line of work
is
> > the most crucial. Operating on just UGRD or VGRID by themselves
> is
> > pretty useless. I did not see in the WPP wrf_parm.ctl and
option
> to
> > spit out wind speed. Is there some simple solution to this?
> Thanks.
> >
> > >>>
> >
> > >>> Take care,
> >
> > >>> Joe
> >
> > >>>
> >
> > >>> Dr. Joseph L. Eastman
> >
> > >>> Senior Atmospheric Scientist
> >
> > >>> WindLogics Inc.
> >
> > >>> 201 4th St NW
> >
> > >>> Grand Rapids, MN
> >
> > >>> 55744
> >
> > >>>
> >
> > >>> c - 410.279.9702
> >
> > >>> w - 651.556.4297
> >
> > >>> jeastman at windlogics.com<mailto:jeastman at windlogics.com>
> >
> > >>>
> >
> > >>>
> >
> > >>>
> >
> > >>> ________________________________
> >
> > >>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message is for the sole
use
> of
> > the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and
> > privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,
disclosure
> or
> > distribution of any kind is strictly prohibited. If you are not
> the
> > intended recipient, please contact the sender via reply e-mail
> and
> > destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you.
> >
> > >>>
> >
> > >>>
> >
> > >>>
> >
> > >>>
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > >>>
> >
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> >
> > >>> Met_help mailing list
> >
> > >>> Met_help at mailman.ucar.edu
> >
> > >>> http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/met_help
> >
> > >> _______________________________________________
> >
> > >> Met_help mailing list
> >
> > >> Met_help at mailman.ucar.edu
> >
> > >> http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/met_help
>
>
------------------------------------------------
More information about the Met_help
mailing list