[Met_help] [rt.rap.ucar.edu #78708] History for finding NA bmodel lines with tc_stat

[John Halley Gotway via RT]

----------------------------------------------------------------
  Initial Request
----------------------------------------------------------------

Hi,

I need to count all .tcst lines where amodel >=64 knots and bmodel has no
storm at all.

Back in METv4.1, I used tc_stat, but it doesn't seem to work with met-5.2.

I used tc_stat to filter by adding

-column_thresh amax_wind ge64 -column_str max_wind NA

 to the -job filter.

This worked nicely.  But in met-5.2, it doesn't find these times.  Is "NA"
being treated differently? Is there any way to do it in met-5.2?

Thanks for your time,
Dave


----------------------------------------------------------------
  Complete Ticket History
----------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: finding NA bmodel lines with tc_stat
From: John Halley Gotway
Time: Thu Nov 17 13:38:01 2016

Hi Dave,

We it looks like we tried to get too fancy in the code, automatically
converting NA values to bad data values (-9999).

The following works, but sure looks a bit clumsy:

-column_thresh amax_wind ge64 -column_str blat -9999

John

On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 11:58 AM, David Ahijevych via RT
<met_help at ucar.edu>
wrote:

>
> Thu Nov 17 11:58:52 2016: Request 78708 was acted upon.
> Transaction: Ticket created by ahijevyc
>        Queue: met_help
>      Subject: finding NA bmodel lines with tc_stat
>        Owner: Nobody
>   Requestors: ahijevyc at ucar.edu
>       Status: new
>  Ticket <URL:
https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=78708 >
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I need to count all .tcst lines where amodel >=64 knots and bmodel
has no
> storm at all.
>
> Back in METv4.1, I used tc_stat, but it doesn't seem to work with
met-5.2.
>
> I used tc_stat to filter by adding
>
> -column_thresh amax_wind ge64 -column_str max_wind NA
>
>  to the -job filter.
>
> This worked nicely.  But in met-5.2, it doesn't find these times.
Is "NA"
> being treated differently? Is there any way to do it in met-5.2?
>
> Thanks for your time,
> Dave
>
>

------------------------------------------------
Subject: finding NA bmodel lines with tc_stat
From: David Ahijevych
Time: Thu Nov 17 15:44:48 2016

Hi John,
Thanks for the reply,  I was trying all the combinations of
column_str,
column_thresh and columns and values and I didn't think to try '-9999'
as a
string value to test.  But that's exactly what I needed.
Thanks!

Dave


On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 1:38 PM, John Halley Gotway via RT <
met_help at ucar.edu> wrote:

> Hi Dave,
>
> We it looks like we tried to get too fancy in the code,
automatically
> converting NA values to bad data values (-9999).
>
> The following works, but sure looks a bit clumsy:
>
> -column_thresh amax_wind ge64 -column_str blat -9999
>
> John
>
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 11:58 AM, David Ahijevych via RT <
> met_help at ucar.edu>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > Thu Nov 17 11:58:52 2016: Request 78708 was acted upon.
> > Transaction: Ticket created by ahijevyc
> >        Queue: met_help
> >      Subject: finding NA bmodel lines with tc_stat
> >        Owner: Nobody
> >   Requestors: ahijevyc at ucar.edu
> >       Status: new
> >  Ticket <URL:
https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=78708 >
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I need to count all .tcst lines where amodel >=64 knots and bmodel
has no
> > storm at all.
> >
> > Back in METv4.1, I used tc_stat, but it doesn't seem to work with
> met-5.2.
> >
> > I used tc_stat to filter by adding
> >
> > -column_thresh amax_wind ge64 -column_str max_wind NA
> >
> >  to the -job filter.
> >
> > This worked nicely.  But in met-5.2, it doesn't find these times.
Is
> "NA"
> > being treated differently? Is there any way to do it in met-5.2?
> >
> > Thanks for your time,
> > Dave
> >
> >
>
>

------------------------------------------------
Subject: finding NA bmodel lines with tc_stat
From: John Halley Gotway
Time: Fri Nov 18 09:21:40 2016

Dave,

When MET reads the NA in a numeric column, like OBS_LAT and OBS_LON,
it
converts them into the internal bad data value of -9999.

I think using "-column_thresh OBS_LAT ==NA" would be most intuitive
right?
But STAT-Analysis doesn't like that.  If you agree, I can add a future
development task to enhance STAT-Analysis to handle this.

Thanks,
John

On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 3:44 PM, David Ahijevych via RT
<met_help at ucar.edu>
wrote:

>
> <URL: https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=78708 >
>
> Hi John,
> Thanks for the reply,  I was trying all the combinations of
column_str,
> column_thresh and columns and values and I didn't think to try '-
9999' as a
> string value to test.  But that's exactly what I needed.
> Thanks!
>
> Dave
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 1:38 PM, John Halley Gotway via RT <
> met_help at ucar.edu> wrote:
>
> > Hi Dave,
> >
> > We it looks like we tried to get too fancy in the code,
automatically
> > converting NA values to bad data values (-9999).
> >
> > The following works, but sure looks a bit clumsy:
> >
> > -column_thresh amax_wind ge64 -column_str blat -9999
> >
> > John
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 11:58 AM, David Ahijevych via RT <
> > met_help at ucar.edu>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Thu Nov 17 11:58:52 2016: Request 78708 was acted upon.
> > > Transaction: Ticket created by ahijevyc
> > >        Queue: met_help
> > >      Subject: finding NA bmodel lines with tc_stat
> > >        Owner: Nobody
> > >   Requestors: ahijevyc at ucar.edu
> > >       Status: new
> > >  Ticket <URL:
https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=78708
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I need to count all .tcst lines where amodel >=64 knots and
bmodel has
> no
> > > storm at all.
> > >
> > > Back in METv4.1, I used tc_stat, but it doesn't seem to work
with
> > met-5.2.
> > >
> > > I used tc_stat to filter by adding
> > >
> > > -column_thresh amax_wind ge64 -column_str max_wind NA
> > >
> > >  to the -job filter.
> > >
> > > This worked nicely.  But in met-5.2, it doesn't find these
times.  Is
> > "NA"
> > > being treated differently? Is there any way to do it in met-5.2?
> > >
> > > Thanks for your time,
> > > Dave
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

------------------------------------------------