Update of standard names of structure "mass_concentration_of_*_dry_aerosol_particles" and of similar standard names

[neumannd]

We have an unresolved issue from the mailing list with respect to standard names of the form mass_concentration_of_X_dry_aerosol_particles_in_air and similar standard names related to particulate matter in air.

Based on the current interpretation of standard name mass_concentration_of_X_dry_aerosol_particles_in_air, it describes "mass concentation of all aerosol particles that contain X" (see mailing list post from 22nd June 2017, link further below). But, probably, a name for "mass concentration of particulate bound X in air" is intended. It wasn't decided on a proper standard name structure for the latter.

There were some new standard names, which have the first structure but the second meaning, accepted for CMIP6. This was done because these names were urgently needed. I didn't find the post in the archive of the mailing list.

I would be happy if we could settle this because there are some standard names pending (e.g. Issue #16 and my proposal from 2017). Jonathan (@JonathanGregory) and I disccused some of the standard names in 2018. Thanks to Jonathan for that discussion.

Past timeline of this issue

• The issue startet here (look for mass_concentration_of_chloride_dry_aerosol_particles_in_air): [CF-metadata] New standard names for atmospheric sea salt and for nitrogen deposition, Thu Jun 22 05:42:10 MDT 2017
• Was followed up here: [CF-metadata] Clarifying standard names for 'mass_concentration_of_*_dry_aerosol_particles', Tue Jun 27 06:43:58 MDT 2017
• And is currently pending since March 2018 ([CF-metadata] Clarifying standard names for 'mass_concentration_of_*_dry_aerosol_particles', Fri Mar 23 10:31:16 MDT 2018 )

Generic renaming proposal

This proposal is based on my post from Wed Jan 17 02:02:10 MST 2018. The names are constructed with the example of particulate ammonium. There are several special cases, which do not fully fit into this structure. Please see the attached csv file further below for a detailled overview and names to discuss.

mass_concentration_of_

mass_concentration_of_ammonium_dry_aerosol_particles_in_air to mass_concentration_of_particulate_ammonium_in_air

mass_concentration_of_pm10_ammonium_dry_aerosol_particles_in_air to mass_concentration_of_pm10_ammonium_in_air

mass_fraction_of_

mass_fraction_of_ammonium_dry_aerosol_particles_in_air to mass_fraction_of_particulate_ammonium_in_air

mass_fraction_of_pm10_ammonium_dry_aerosol_particles_in_air to mass_fraction_of_pm10_ammonium_in_air

atmosphere_mass_content_of_

atmosphere_mass_content_of_ammonium_dry_aerosol_particles to atmosphere_mass_content_of_particulate_ammonium

tendency_of_mass_concentration_of_

tendency_of_mass_concentration_of_ammonium_dry_aerosol_particles_in_air_due_to_emission to tendency_of_mass_concentration_of_particulate_ammonium_in_air_due_to_emission

tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_

tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_ammonium_dry_aerosol_particles_due_to_deposition to tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_particulate_ammonium_due_to_deposition

atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_

There are some names that could be modified to be consistent with the new structure of the other standard names. But the old names do not seem to be ambiguous as the other names.

atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_ammonium_ambient_aerosol_particles to atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_ambient_particulate_ammonium_in_air

Affected standard names

approximate numbers from 2018 are given

• atmospherere_mass_content_of_X_dry_aerosol (15 names in 2018; see Thu Nov 9 07:52:41 MST 2017 and Wed Jan 3 09:07:45 MST 2018)
• mass_concentration_of_X_dry_aerosol_in_air (15 names in 2018; see Thu Nov 9 07:52:41 MST 2017 and Wed Jan 3 09:07:45 MST 2018)
• tendency_of_atmosphere_mass_content_of_*_dry_aerosol_particles_due_to_... (approx 78 names in 2018; see Thu Nov 9 08:02:31 MST 2017 and Wed Jan 3 09:07:45 MST 2018)
• tendency_of_mass_concentration_of_*_dry_aerosol_particles_in_air (1 name in 2018; see Wed Jan 3 09:07:45 MST 2018)
• mass_fraction_of_*_dry_aerosol_particles_in_air (number not mentioned in 2018; see Clarifying standard names for 'mass_concentration_of_*_dry_aerosol_particles', Thu Nov 9 08:02:31 MST 2017)
• atmosphere_optical_thickness_due_to_* (13 names in 2018; see Fri Mar 23 03:05:23 MDT 2018)

Full renaming proposal

The full renaming proposal is attached as XLSX file: renaming_aerosol_species_20200715.xlsx

Some additional explanations:

• Each sheet represents another group of standard names.
• The column "status" (column 4) indicates whether I see need for discussion (?) or no need for discussion (!). The column "comment" indicates why I see need for discussion.
• A text in the "comment" column but a ! in the "status" column indicates that the name deviates from the default structure -- but no need to worry.

[jen-thomas]

Dear All,

I am just revisiting this topic because we are looking to make a new publication of some of the parameters mentioned in #16 and I was wondering if you had any recommendations of which format names we should adopt please? Would the suggestions made there be suitable, or should we follow those above?

Thank you very much for your help.

[efisher008]

Dear @jen-thomas,

I am revisiting this issue after it has been transferred to the new cf-conventions/vocabularies repo following migration of currently open standard names issues to this new location, as it has been open for a long time with no obvious conclusion.

In the intervening time, proposals by Markus Fiebig (#109, #164) have introduced new names to the standard name table which are based on the structure ...dry_aerosol_particles. Therefore it does not now seem wise to change the existing mass_concentration_of_*_dry_aerosol_particles you have suggested above as it would be inconsistent with these new names (and there are quite a few of them!).

There are certainly names which contain the construction moles_of_particulate... /mole_concentration_of_particulate... (see #145 #128), but as these refer to molar and not mass quantities, this might constitute a separate application.

Do you still see a benefit in making this change in the name construction (given the timeframe of CMIP6 is now past)?

Best regards,
Ellie