[Met_help] [rt.rap.ucar.edu #80332] History for Masking Regions
John Halley Gotway via RT
met_help at ucar.edu
Thu Jun 15 10:30:02 MDT 2017
----------------------------------------------------------------
Initial Request
----------------------------------------------------------------
John, I looked through the documentation and this didn't jump out at me on how to do. I have a list of stations to use for verification. I also have a poly region defined. If I specify both of these should the result be a union of them?
The station list is a list of all valid dust reporting stations around the world and the poly region is the area I want to verify over. When I run with both the poly region defined and the SID file included, the SID file seems to take precedence over the poly region and I am getting verification points out side of the poly region. If I remove the SID file, the observations stay within the SID region. This is on MET 6.0.
Thanks
Bob
----------------------------------------------------------------
Complete Ticket History
----------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Masking Regions
From: John Halley Gotway
Time: Tue May 02 13:45:39 2017
Bob,
These settings are defined in the "mask" section of the Point-Stat
configuration file. You can define masking regions in one of 3 ways,
as a
"grid", a "poly" line file, or a "sid" list of station ID's.
If you specify one entry for "poly" and one entry for "sid", you
should see
output for those two different masks. Note that each of these
settings is
an array of values, as indicated by the square brackets "[]" in the
default
config file. If you specify 5 grids, 3 poly's, and 2 SID lists, you'd
get
output for those 10 separate masking regions. Point-Stat does not
compute
unions or intersections of masking regions. Instead, they are each
processed separately.
Is it true that you really want to use a polyline to define an area
and
then use a SID list to capture additional points outside of that
polyline?
If so, your options are:
- Define one single SID list which include all the points currently
inside
the polyline as well as the extra ones outside.
- Continue verifying using one polyline and one SID list and write
partial
sums and contingency table counts. Then aggregate the results
together by
running a STAT-Analysis job.
Hope that helps.
Thanks,
John
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 12:36 PM, robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil via RT <
met_help at ucar.edu> wrote:
>
> Tue May 02 12:36:14 2017: Request 80332 was acted upon.
> Transaction: Ticket created by robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil
> Queue: met_help
> Subject: Masking Regions
> Owner: Nobody
> Requestors: robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil
> Status: new
> Ticket <URL:
https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=80332 >
>
>
> John, I looked through the documentation and this didn't jump out at
me on
> how to do. I have a list of stations to use for verification. I
also have
> a poly region defined. If I specify both of these should the result
be a
> union of them?
>
> The station list is a list of all valid dust reporting stations
around
> the world and the poly region is the area I want to verify over.
When I
> run with both the poly region defined and the SID file included, the
SID
> file seems to take precedence over the poly region and I am getting
> verification points out side of the poly region. If I remove the
SID file,
> the observations stay within the SID region. This is on MET 6.0.
>
> Thanks
> Bob
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [rt.rap.ucar.edu #80332] Masking Regions
From: robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil
Time: Tue May 02 14:09:47 2017
So, if I have a poly region and a SID region, and the poly region will
fall inside the SID region, then I would expect I would have only
those SID points verified which fall in the Poly region. Is that
correct? I do that because I have a list of obs that should be used
for dust verification and I only want this verification to occur in a
poly area, the opposite of how you worded it below. If I can't use
the the masking areas in this fashion then I will apply the SID list
at the stat_analysis point.
Thanks
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: John Halley Gotway via RT [mailto:met_help at ucar.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2017 2:46 PM
To: CRAIG, ROBERT J GS-12 USAF ACC 16 WS/WXN
<robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil>
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [rt.rap.ucar.edu #80332] Masking Regions
Bob,
These settings are defined in the "mask" section of the Point-Stat
configuration file. You can define masking regions in one of 3 ways,
as a "grid", a "poly" line file, or a "sid" list of station ID's.
If you specify one entry for "poly" and one entry for "sid", you
should see output for those two different masks. Note that each of
these settings is an array of values, as indicated by the square
brackets "[]" in the default config file. If you specify 5 grids, 3
poly's, and 2 SID lists, you'd get output for those 10 separate
masking regions. Point-Stat does not compute unions or intersections
of masking regions. Instead, they are each processed separately.
Is it true that you really want to use a polyline to define an area
and then use a SID list to capture additional points outside of that
polyline?
If so, your options are:
- Define one single SID list which include all the points currently
inside the polyline as well as the extra ones outside.
- Continue verifying using one polyline and one SID list and write
partial sums and contingency table counts. Then aggregate the results
together by running a STAT-Analysis job.
Hope that helps.
Thanks,
John
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 12:36 PM, robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil via RT <
met_help at ucar.edu> wrote:
>
> Tue May 02 12:36:14 2017: Request 80332 was acted upon.
> Transaction: Ticket created by robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil
> Queue: met_help
> Subject: Masking Regions
> Owner: Nobody
> Requestors: robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil
> Status: new
> Ticket <URL:
https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=80332
> >
>
>
> John, I looked through the documentation and this didn't jump out at
> me on how to do. I have a list of stations to use for verification.
> I also have a poly region defined. If I specify both of these
should
> the result be a union of them?
>
> The station list is a list of all valid dust reporting stations
> around the world and the poly region is the area I want to verify
> over. When I run with both the poly region defined and the SID file
> included, the SID file seems to take precedence over the poly region
> and I am getting verification points out side of the poly region.
If I remove the SID file,
> the observations stay within the SID region. This is on MET 6.0.
>
> Thanks
> Bob
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------
Subject: Masking Regions
From: John Halley Gotway
Time: Tue May 02 15:02:03 2017
Bob,
If you define a lat/lon polyline region, only those lat/lon locations
falling inside that region will be used for that verification task.
If you define a SID list, only those stations whose station ID's
appear in
that list will be used for that verification task.
This logic is totally independent. Here's one possible way to tackle
this:
(1) Run point_stat using only your polyline masking region and dump
the MPR
line type.
(2) Extract the observation SID (i.e. OBS_SID column) from the output
MPR
lines.
(3) Use some scripting language to take the intersection of the
OBS_SID
column and your list of dust stations.
(4) Pass that list of intersecting station id's to point_stat in the
"mask.sid" option to define the stations you'd like to keep.
Thanks,
John
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 2:09 PM, robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil via RT <
met_help at ucar.edu> wrote:
>
> <URL: https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=80332 >
>
> So, if I have a poly region and a SID region, and the poly region
will
> fall inside the SID region, then I would expect I would have only
those SID
> points verified which fall in the Poly region. Is that correct? I
do that
> because I have a list of obs that should be used for dust
verification and
> I only want this verification to occur in a poly area, the opposite
of how
> you worded it below. If I can't use the the masking areas in this
fashion
> then I will apply the SID list at the stat_analysis point.
>
> Thanks
> Bob
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Halley Gotway via RT [mailto:met_help at ucar.edu]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2017 2:46 PM
> To: CRAIG, ROBERT J GS-12 USAF ACC 16 WS/WXN
<robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil>
> Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [rt.rap.ucar.edu #80332] Masking
Regions
>
> Bob,
>
> These settings are defined in the "mask" section of the Point-Stat
> configuration file. You can define masking regions in one of 3
ways, as a
> "grid", a "poly" line file, or a "sid" list of station ID's.
>
> If you specify one entry for "poly" and one entry for "sid", you
should
> see output for those two different masks. Note that each of these
settings
> is an array of values, as indicated by the square brackets "[]" in
the
> default config file. If you specify 5 grids, 3 poly's, and 2 SID
lists,
> you'd get output for those 10 separate masking regions. Point-Stat
does
> not compute unions or intersections of masking regions. Instead,
they are
> each processed separately.
>
> Is it true that you really want to use a polyline to define an area
and
> then use a SID list to capture additional points outside of that
polyline?
>
> If so, your options are:
>
> - Define one single SID list which include all the points currently
> inside the polyline as well as the extra ones outside.
> - Continue verifying using one polyline and one SID list and write
> partial sums and contingency table counts. Then aggregate the
results
> together by running a STAT-Analysis job.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> Thanks,
> John
>
>
> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 12:36 PM, robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil via RT <
> met_help at ucar.edu> wrote:
>
> >
> > Tue May 02 12:36:14 2017: Request 80332 was acted upon.
> > Transaction: Ticket created by robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil
> > Queue: met_help
> > Subject: Masking Regions
> > Owner: Nobody
> > Requestors: robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil
> > Status: new
> > Ticket <URL:
https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=80332
> > >
> >
> >
> > John, I looked through the documentation and this didn't jump out
at
> > me on how to do. I have a list of stations to use for
verification.
> > I also have a poly region defined. If I specify both of these
should
> > the result be a union of them?
> >
> > The station list is a list of all valid dust reporting stations
> > around the world and the poly region is the area I want to verify
> > over. When I run with both the poly region defined and the SID
file
> > included, the SID file seems to take precedence over the poly
region
> > and I am getting verification points out side of the poly region.
If I
> remove the SID file,
> > the observations stay within the SID region. This is on MET 6.0.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Bob
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [rt.rap.ucar.edu #80332] Masking Regions
From: robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil
Time: Tue May 02 15:07:26 2017
John,
I think the simplest way is to use the SID list in stat_analysis based
on what you have said.
Thanks
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: John Halley Gotway via RT [mailto:met_help at ucar.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2017 4:02 PM
To: CRAIG, ROBERT J GS-12 USAF ACC 16 WS/WXN
<robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil>
Subject: Re: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [rt.rap.ucar.edu #80332] Masking
Regions
Bob,
If you define a lat/lon polyline region, only those lat/lon locations
falling inside that region will be used for that verification task.
If you define a SID list, only those stations whose station ID's
appear in that list will be used for that verification task.
This logic is totally independent. Here's one possible way to tackle
this:
(1) Run point_stat using only your polyline masking region and dump
the MPR line type.
(2) Extract the observation SID (i.e. OBS_SID column) from the output
MPR lines.
(3) Use some scripting language to take the intersection of the
OBS_SID column and your list of dust stations.
(4) Pass that list of intersecting station id's to point_stat in the
"mask.sid" option to define the stations you'd like to keep.
Thanks,
John
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 2:09 PM, robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil via RT <
met_help at ucar.edu> wrote:
>
> <URL: https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=80332 >
>
> So, if I have a poly region and a SID region, and the poly region
will
> fall inside the SID region, then I would expect I would have only
> those SID points verified which fall in the Poly region. Is that
> correct? I do that because I have a list of obs that should be used
> for dust verification and I only want this verification to occur in
a
> poly area, the opposite of how you worded it below. If I can't use
> the the masking areas in this fashion then I will apply the SID list
at the stat_analysis point.
>
> Thanks
> Bob
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Halley Gotway via RT [mailto:met_help at ucar.edu]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2017 2:46 PM
> To: CRAIG, ROBERT J GS-12 USAF ACC 16 WS/WXN
> <robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil>
> Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [rt.rap.ucar.edu #80332] Masking
Regions
>
> Bob,
>
> These settings are defined in the "mask" section of the Point-Stat
> configuration file. You can define masking regions in one of 3
ways,
> as a "grid", a "poly" line file, or a "sid" list of station ID's.
>
> If you specify one entry for "poly" and one entry for "sid", you
> should see output for those two different masks. Note that each of
> these settings is an array of values, as indicated by the square
> brackets "[]" in the default config file. If you specify 5 grids, 3
> poly's, and 2 SID lists, you'd get output for those 10 separate
> masking regions. Point-Stat does not compute unions or
intersections
> of masking regions. Instead, they are each processed separately.
>
> Is it true that you really want to use a polyline to define an area
> and then use a SID list to capture additional points outside of that
polyline?
>
> If so, your options are:
>
> - Define one single SID list which include all the points currently
> inside the polyline as well as the extra ones outside.
> - Continue verifying using one polyline and one SID list and write
> partial sums and contingency table counts. Then aggregate the
results
> together by running a STAT-Analysis job.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> Thanks,
> John
>
>
> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 12:36 PM, robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil via RT <
> met_help at ucar.edu> wrote:
>
> >
> > Tue May 02 12:36:14 2017: Request 80332 was acted upon.
> > Transaction: Ticket created by robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil
> > Queue: met_help
> > Subject: Masking Regions
> > Owner: Nobody
> > Requestors: robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil
> > Status: new
> > Ticket <URL:
> > https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=80332
> > >
> >
> >
> > John, I looked through the documentation and this didn't jump out
at
> > me on how to do. I have a list of stations to use for
verification.
> > I also have a poly region defined. If I specify both of these
> > should the result be a union of them?
> >
> > The station list is a list of all valid dust reporting stations
> > around the world and the poly region is the area I want to verify
> > over. When I run with both the poly region defined and the SID
file
> > included, the SID file seems to take precedence over the poly
region
> > and I am getting verification points out side of the poly region.
> > If I
> remove the SID file,
> > the observations stay within the SID region. This is on MET 6.0.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Bob
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------
Subject: Masking Regions
From: John Halley Gotway
Time: Tue May 02 15:27:17 2017
Bob,
OK, works for me. Whatever is simplest to implement.
So I still have 5 total met-help tickets from you open. And I'm not
sure
which issues we still have to resolve.
Can you please let me know if you waiting for any additional
information on
them? Or should I resolve them?
Thanks,
John
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 3:07 PM, robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil via RT <
met_help at ucar.edu> wrote:
>
> <URL: https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=80332 >
>
> John,
>
> I think the simplest way is to use the SID list in stat_analysis
based on
> what you have said.
>
> Thanks
> Bob
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Halley Gotway via RT [mailto:met_help at ucar.edu]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2017 4:02 PM
> To: CRAIG, ROBERT J GS-12 USAF ACC 16 WS/WXN
<robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil>
> Subject: Re: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [rt.rap.ucar.edu #80332] Masking
Regions
>
> Bob,
>
> If you define a lat/lon polyline region, only those lat/lon
locations
> falling inside that region will be used for that verification task.
>
> If you define a SID list, only those stations whose station ID's
appear in
> that list will be used for that verification task.
>
> This logic is totally independent. Here's one possible way to
tackle this:
>
> (1) Run point_stat using only your polyline masking region and dump
the
> MPR line type.
> (2) Extract the observation SID (i.e. OBS_SID column) from the
output MPR
> lines.
> (3) Use some scripting language to take the intersection of the
OBS_SID
> column and your list of dust stations.
> (4) Pass that list of intersecting station id's to point_stat in the
> "mask.sid" option to define the stations you'd like to keep.
>
> Thanks,
> John
>
> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 2:09 PM, robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil via RT <
> met_help at ucar.edu> wrote:
>
> >
> > <URL: https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=80332 >
> >
> > So, if I have a poly region and a SID region, and the poly region
will
> > fall inside the SID region, then I would expect I would have only
> > those SID points verified which fall in the Poly region. Is that
> > correct? I do that because I have a list of obs that should be
used
> > for dust verification and I only want this verification to occur
in a
> > poly area, the opposite of how you worded it below. If I can't
use
> > the the masking areas in this fashion then I will apply the SID
list at
> the stat_analysis point.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Bob
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Halley Gotway via RT [mailto:met_help at ucar.edu]
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2017 2:46 PM
> > To: CRAIG, ROBERT J GS-12 USAF ACC 16 WS/WXN
> > <robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil>
> > Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [rt.rap.ucar.edu #80332] Masking
Regions
> >
> > Bob,
> >
> > These settings are defined in the "mask" section of the Point-Stat
> > configuration file. You can define masking regions in one of 3
ways,
> > as a "grid", a "poly" line file, or a "sid" list of station ID's.
> >
> > If you specify one entry for "poly" and one entry for "sid", you
> > should see output for those two different masks. Note that each
of
> > these settings is an array of values, as indicated by the square
> > brackets "[]" in the default config file. If you specify 5 grids,
3
> > poly's, and 2 SID lists, you'd get output for those 10 separate
> > masking regions. Point-Stat does not compute unions or
intersections
> > of masking regions. Instead, they are each processed separately.
> >
> > Is it true that you really want to use a polyline to define an
area
> > and then use a SID list to capture additional points outside of
that
> polyline?
> >
> > If so, your options are:
> >
> > - Define one single SID list which include all the points
currently
> > inside the polyline as well as the extra ones outside.
> > - Continue verifying using one polyline and one SID list and
write
> > partial sums and contingency table counts. Then aggregate the
results
> > together by running a STAT-Analysis job.
> >
> > Hope that helps.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > John
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 12:36 PM, robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil via RT <
> > met_help at ucar.edu> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Tue May 02 12:36:14 2017: Request 80332 was acted upon.
> > > Transaction: Ticket created by robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil
> > > Queue: met_help
> > > Subject: Masking Regions
> > > Owner: Nobody
> > > Requestors: robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil
> > > Status: new
> > > Ticket <URL:
> > > https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=80332
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > John, I looked through the documentation and this didn't jump
out at
> > > me on how to do. I have a list of stations to use for
verification.
> > > I also have a poly region defined. If I specify both of these
> > > should the result be a union of them?
> > >
> > > The station list is a list of all valid dust reporting stations
> > > around the world and the poly region is the area I want to
verify
> > > over. When I run with both the poly region defined and the SID
file
> > > included, the SID file seems to take precedence over the poly
region
> > > and I am getting verification points out side of the poly
region.
> > > If I
> > remove the SID file,
> > > the observations stay within the SID region. This is on MET
6.0.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Bob
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [rt.rap.ucar.edu #80332] Masking Regions
From: robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil
Time: Tue May 02 15:32:20 2017
John,
Now that we are running on 6.0, let me try to duplicate the problems
in those work tickets before addressing.
Thanks
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: John Halley Gotway via RT [mailto:met_help at ucar.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2017 4:27 PM
To: CRAIG, ROBERT J GS-12 USAF ACC 16 WS/WXN
<robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil>
Subject: Re: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [rt.rap.ucar.edu #80332] Masking
Regions
Bob,
OK, works for me. Whatever is simplest to implement.
So I still have 5 total met-help tickets from you open. And I'm not
sure which issues we still have to resolve.
Can you please let me know if you waiting for any additional
information on them? Or should I resolve them?
Thanks,
John
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 3:07 PM, robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil via RT <
met_help at ucar.edu> wrote:
>
> <URL: https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=80332 >
>
> John,
>
> I think the simplest way is to use the SID list in stat_analysis
based
> on what you have said.
>
> Thanks
> Bob
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Halley Gotway via RT [mailto:met_help at ucar.edu]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2017 4:02 PM
> To: CRAIG, ROBERT J GS-12 USAF ACC 16 WS/WXN
> <robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil>
> Subject: Re: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [rt.rap.ucar.edu #80332] Masking
> Regions
>
> Bob,
>
> If you define a lat/lon polyline region, only those lat/lon
locations
> falling inside that region will be used for that verification task.
>
> If you define a SID list, only those stations whose station ID's
> appear in that list will be used for that verification task.
>
> This logic is totally independent. Here's one possible way to
tackle this:
>
> (1) Run point_stat using only your polyline masking region and dump
> the MPR line type.
> (2) Extract the observation SID (i.e. OBS_SID column) from the
output
> MPR lines.
> (3) Use some scripting language to take the intersection of the
> OBS_SID column and your list of dust stations.
> (4) Pass that list of intersecting station id's to point_stat in the
> "mask.sid" option to define the stations you'd like to keep.
>
> Thanks,
> John
>
> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 2:09 PM, robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil via RT <
> met_help at ucar.edu> wrote:
>
> >
> > <URL: https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=80332 >
> >
> > So, if I have a poly region and a SID region, and the poly region
> > will fall inside the SID region, then I would expect I would have
> > only those SID points verified which fall in the Poly region. Is
> > that correct? I do that because I have a list of obs that should
be
> > used for dust verification and I only want this verification to
> > occur in a poly area, the opposite of how you worded it below. If
I
> > can't use the the masking areas in this fashion then I will apply
> > the SID list at
> the stat_analysis point.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Bob
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Halley Gotway via RT [mailto:met_help at ucar.edu]
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2017 2:46 PM
> > To: CRAIG, ROBERT J GS-12 USAF ACC 16 WS/WXN
> > <robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil>
> > Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [rt.rap.ucar.edu #80332] Masking
> > Regions
> >
> > Bob,
> >
> > These settings are defined in the "mask" section of the Point-Stat
> > configuration file. You can define masking regions in one of 3
> > ways, as a "grid", a "poly" line file, or a "sid" list of station
ID's.
> >
> > If you specify one entry for "poly" and one entry for "sid", you
> > should see output for those two different masks. Note that each
of
> > these settings is an array of values, as indicated by the square
> > brackets "[]" in the default config file. If you specify 5 grids,
3
> > poly's, and 2 SID lists, you'd get output for those 10 separate
> > masking regions. Point-Stat does not compute unions or
> > intersections of masking regions. Instead, they are each
processed separately.
> >
> > Is it true that you really want to use a polyline to define an
area
> > and then use a SID list to capture additional points outside of
that
> polyline?
> >
> > If so, your options are:
> >
> > - Define one single SID list which include all the points
currently
> > inside the polyline as well as the extra ones outside.
> > - Continue verifying using one polyline and one SID list and
write
> > partial sums and contingency table counts. Then aggregate the
> > results together by running a STAT-Analysis job.
> >
> > Hope that helps.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > John
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 12:36 PM, robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil via RT <
> > met_help at ucar.edu> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Tue May 02 12:36:14 2017: Request 80332 was acted upon.
> > > Transaction: Ticket created by robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil
> > > Queue: met_help
> > > Subject: Masking Regions
> > > Owner: Nobody
> > > Requestors: robert.craig.2 at us.af.mil
> > > Status: new
> > > Ticket <URL:
> > > https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=80332
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > John, I looked through the documentation and this didn't jump
out
> > > at me on how to do. I have a list of stations to use for
verification.
> > > I also have a poly region defined. If I specify both of these
> > > should the result be a union of them?
> > >
> > > The station list is a list of all valid dust reporting stations
> > > around the world and the poly region is the area I want to
verify
> > > over. When I run with both the poly region defined and the SID
> > > file included, the SID file seems to take precedence over the
poly
> > > region and I am getting verification points out side of the poly
region.
> > > If I
> > remove the SID file,
> > > the observations stay within the SID region. This is on MET
6.0.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Bob
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------
More information about the Met_help
mailing list