<div dir="ltr"><div style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><span style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">Ok, so we currently use the 1982-2010 data from: </span><a href="http://cfs.ncep.noaa.gov/pub/raid0/cfsv2/climo_cfsr_time/mean/" target="_blank" style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">http://cfs.ncep.noaa.gov/pub/raid0/cfsv2/climo_cfsr_time/mean/</a><br></div><div style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><br>I'd like to use the data from UCAR since they have CFSR 1981-2010 in the 093.0 dataset but the one HUGE difference is that the mean data from the in that NOAA CFSR link is formatted from 1982-2010 all (pre-averaged?) into one year, 1984 whereas the UCAR data I'm getting is all based on 1/1/1981/00z-12/31/2010/18z with each date it's own tdef.</div><div style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><br></div><div style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">So the current .ctl file is tdef 1464 (to account for leapyears) and the UCAR data .ctl is tdef 43829 (also accounting for leapyears) and while leapyears are currently an issue I'm first and foremost curious if we can take the UCAR data and make it into a single year file like the CFSR data we currently use?</div><div style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><br></div><div style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">I have no problem having 43829 tdefs but my concern is then how would you average them to see an anomaly for the current model run vs an average for that same date and time?</div><div style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><br></div><div style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">What we're doing is, say, 2m temp anomaly. So I figure the climo averaging would look like:</div><div style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><br></div><div style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">'d ave(tmp2m,time=0z31jul1981,time=0z31jul2010,1464)-273.15' - I can't even begin to comprehend how we could go about not using time= and using t= instead since the whole 1460 (non-ly) vs 1464 (ly) aspect to the data.</div><div style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><br></div><div style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">The only reason I'm doing the time-stepping of 1464 is because there is leapyear data. Really I'd just absolutely love for it to have (beginning time) time1=0z31jul1981 and have (ending time) time2=0z31jul2010 and have it include every 0z31julYYYY in between regardless of whether it has leapyear data or not. I'm surprised there's no a way to literally have it ave the zddmmmyyyy to zdddmmmyyyy range without needing to know incrementing values. :(</div><div style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><br></div><div style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">It makes trying to work with leapyear data a pain, let alone I don't even know if my above function would really be doing exactly (it does validate somewhat identical to other 2m temp anomaly models out there) what I need since there's really only 7 leapyears worth of data.</div>
</div>