-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 24
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Feature #2278 qm_docs #2364
Feature #2278 qm_docs #2364
Conversation
…. Also, update pb2nc logic to track the maximum quality mark for CAPE and PBL rather than just the most recent one! I wonder if that'll change the regression test output?
…ues of bad data. See unit test output file ndas.20120409.t12z.prepbufr.tm00.summary.nc. Update the print_pointnc2ascii.py to avoid runtime error about convert masked array elements to int.
…triction of computing CAPE and PBL quality marks from only the first vertical level. Instead, compute the maximum quality mark over all vertical levels.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The cape_qm and pbl_qm are initialized once at line 1003 and line 1006. They do not need to reset when the quality mark is from the lowest level. Now it's changed to look at all vertical levels. They (cape_qm and pbl_qm) should be initialized for the next computed PBL and CAPE.
…each bufr message is read.
src/tools/other/pb2nc/pb2nc.cc
Outdated
if (do_pbl) { | ||
pbl_level = 0; | ||
pbl_qm = bad_data_float; | ||
} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The code was not cleaned up. Handling pbl_level is moved to compute_pbl from process_pbfile. pbm_qm should be initialized after saving the computed PBL. The PBL is computed from two messages: one message with TPQ and other message with UV.
- Please delete
- https://github.com/dtcenter/MET/blob/feature_2278_qm_docs/src/tools/other/pb2nc/pb2nc.cc#L1006
- https://github.com/dtcenter/MET/blob/feature_2278_qm_docs/src/tools/other/pb2nc/pb2nc.cc#L1355-L1358
- https://github.com/dtcenter/MET/blob/feature_2278_qm_docs/src/tools/other/pb2nc/pb2nc.cc#L1897
- Add
pqtzuv_list.clear();
pqtzuv_map_tq.clear();
pqtzuv_map_uv.clear();
}
to
pqtzuv_list.clear();
pqtzuv_map_tq.clear();
pqtzuv_map_uv.clear();
pbl_qm = bad_data_float;
}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The quality mark for PBL is initialized at the right place which are combined from two messages.
Co-authored-by: Seth Linden <linden@seneca.rap.ucar.edu> Co-authored-by: Howard Soh <hsoh@seneca.rap.ucar.edu> Co-authored-by: Dave Albo <dave@seneca.rap.ucar.edu> Co-authored-by: John Halley Gotway <johnhg@ucar.edu> Co-authored-by: johnhg <johnhg@ucar.edu> Co-authored-by: Lisa Goodrich <lisag@seneca.rap.ucar.edu> Co-authored-by: jprestop <jpresto@ucar.edu> Co-authored-by: MET Tools Test Account <met_test@seneca.rap.ucar.edu> Co-authored-by: j-opatz <59586397+j-opatz@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: George McCabe <23407799+georgemccabe@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Julie Prestopnik <jpresto@seneca.rap.ucar.edu> Co-authored-by: Jonathan Vigh <jvigh@ucar.edu> Co-authored-by: Seth Linden <linden@ucar.edu> Co-authored-by: hsoh-u <hsoh@ucar.edu> Co-authored-by: bikegeek <3753118+bikegeek@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: davidalbo <dave@ucar.edu> Co-authored-by: lisagoodrich <33230218+lisagoodrich@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Daniel Adriaansen <dadriaan@ucar.edu>
Expected Differences
Do these changes introduce new tools, command line arguments, or configuration file options? [No]
If yes, please describe:
Do these changes modify the structure of existing or add new output data types (e.g. statistic line types or NetCDF variables)? [No]
If yes, please describe:
Pull Request Testing
Describe testing already performed for these changes:
Ran a full regression test in this GHA run and note that one difference is flagged.
Recommend testing for the reviewer(s) to perform, including the location of input datasets, and any additional instructions:
Do these changes include sufficient documentation updates, ensuring that no errors or warnings exist in the build of the documentation? [Yes]
Do these changes include sufficient testing updates? [Yes]
No changes needed.
Will this PR result in changes to the test suite? [Yes]
If yes, describe the new output and/or changes to the existing output:
This changes one output file:
I dumped these to ascii and confirmed that the only changes are in the
qty
column.All that that previously had a value of '2' are now '8' or '9'.
Pull Request Checklist
See the METplus Workflow for details.
Select: Reviewer(s)
Select: Organization level software support Project or Repository level development cycle Project
Select: Milestone as the version that will include these changes