[gradsusr] GFS total cloud cover
sam at surfline.com
Wed Nov 2 17:54:36 EDT 2016
Thanks for the response Jeff - it’s strange to me as well!
Running wgrib2 on the data files for forecast hours 001 through 007 gives the following for TCDCclm:
17:7991683:d=2016110212:TCDC:entire atmosphere:0-1 hour ave fcst:
17:8082626:d=2016110212:TCDC:entire atmosphere:0-2 hour ave fcst:
17:8059826:d=2016110212:TCDC:entire atmosphere:0-3 hour ave fcst:
17:8057865:d=2016110212:TCDC:entire atmosphere:0-4 hour ave fcst:
17:8119289:d=2016110212:TCDC:entire atmosphere:0-5 hour ave fcst:
17:8172510:d=2016110212:TCDC:entire atmosphere:0-6 hour ave fcst:
17:8013825:d=2016110212:TCDC:entire atmosphere:6-7 hour ave fcst:
And it continues on..once the files go to 3 hourly (after hour 120), we have:
17:7687687:d=2016110212:TCDC:entire atmosphere:120-123 hour ave fcst:
17:7778871:d=2016110212:TCDC:entire atmosphere:120-126 hour ave fcst:
17:7728042:d=2016110212:TCDC:entire atmosphere:126-129 hour ave fcst:
And finally the 12 hourly files (past hour 240) are all just 12 hour average forecasts:
17:6845416:d=2016110212:TCDC:entire atmosphere:240-252 hour ave fcst:
I did think about the method you suggested (tcdcclm - tcdcclm(t-1)) but stopped there for the reason you mentioned..
Strange indeed - unless I’m missing something..
From: <gradsusr-bounces at gradsusr.org<mailto:gradsusr-bounces at gradsusr.org>> on behalf of Jeff Duda <jeffduda319 at gmail.com<mailto:jeffduda319 at gmail.com>>
Reply-To: GrADS Users Forum <gradsusr at gradsusr.org<mailto:gradsusr at gradsusr.org>>
Date: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 at 2:08 PM
To: GrADS Users Forum <gradsusr at gradsusr.org<mailto:gradsusr at gradsusr.org>>
Subject: Re: [gradsusr] GFS total cloud cover
It seems a little strange to me that the total cloud cover product would be averaged over time. Is that really the case?
Anyway, if you really do have an average over overlapping and increasing windows, with nothing else to go on and without applying the equations of motion in reverse, you'd have to assume a linear averaging, so subtraction of subsequent slices of the field (i.e., tcdcclm - tcdcclm(t-1)) would give you piecewise temporal averages. However, that method would give you negative cloud cover values which is clearly nonsensical, which again is why I question whether or not that array contains a temporal average. That just doesn't make a lot of sense.
On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Sam Wilson <sam at surfline.com<mailto:sam at surfline.com>> wrote:
I’m working with hourly GFS total cloud cover (TCDCclm) and I’m a bit stumped on the following..
Given TCDCclm for hours 0-1, 0-2, 0-3, 0-4, 0-5, and 0-6, what is the proper way to determine TCDCclm for hours 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, 4-5, and 5-6?
I may be making the problem more difficult than it is..but wanted to ping this group to be sure.
Is there an existing grads script that handles this already and if not, does anyone here have any insight?
Thanks so much for your time.
gradsusr mailing list
gradsusr at gradsusr.org<mailto:gradsusr at gradsusr.org>
Post-doctoral research associate
University of Oklahoma School of Meteorology
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the gradsusr