Issues with TEM fields

edited November 2015 in General

(1) epfluxdiv, utenddivf are these the same quantity (tendency of
eastward wind due to eliassen palm flux divergence)? The unit of
epfluxdiv are unclear to me

Also note that utenddivf is the new name of acceldif, to conform to a
common standard (possibly the old name will be removed?)

(2) eliassen palm flux:
epmflux, fy are both “northward eliassen palm flux in air”
epvflux, fz are both “upward eliassen palm flux in air”

(4) residual (or TEM) velocities:
vstar , vstarbar are both “northward TEM air velocity”
wstar , wstarbar are both “upward TEM air velocity”

(5) gravity wave GW tendencies:
Here it would be good to converge, because DynVar requests separate
tendencies due to orographic and due to nonorographic GW drags; while
HighResMIP requests the total and the nonorographic GW drags.
In summary, we have redundancy although each requests is by itself fine.

For consistency, best would to define a name using utend… vtend… (as we
do in DynVar); while either approach is fine to me.

accelgw, accelnogw, accelogw: these are the old names, to please be

(6) Another issue (possibly propagated by dynvar, sorry for this):
The unit of utendvstarad and utendwstarad should be ms-2


  • Some comments from DCPP:

    * phycs, chls - in the attached MIPVariablesNames list the variables phyc and chl (ie. without the "s") appear to be defined at the surface already. If you agree then we suggest we just use these.
    * co2s - mole_fraction_of_carbon_dioxide_in_air at same height as near-surface temperature (would co2as be more appropriate to match the near surface temperature name tas?).

    My response:

    For the depth averaged potential temperature you can use the thetaot and specify that it is integrated through the whole depth in the cel_methods attribute. I'll check with other requesting thetaot and find out what they want ... it may be worth clarifying the variable definition.

    chl, phyc: an interesting case. In CMIP5 these names where used for surface fields in Omon and 3-dimensional fields in Oyr. In CMIP6, the OMIP proposal is asking for chl and phyc as 3-dimensional fields. This means that you should use chls and phycs to avoid confusion with the OMIP CMIP6 usage.

    co2s/co2as: I don't think there is a clear rule here. The ocean equivalent is stored as spco2, where the "p" stands for partial pressure. For clarity, it may be better to use co2as.
Sign In or Register to comment.