Open pwolfram opened 5 years ago
cc @bradyrx @maltrud
Resolved by #15.
Closed by #15
@pwolfram,
I'm seeing a bug when testing my particle output for this. latParticle seems to be working but not lonParticle.
See below. I select an arbitrary particle number, then manually convert its x/y/z location to lat/lon and check it against the output latParticle/lonParticle.
@bradyrx, great catch. There is a shift in longitude that is needed to correspond to a direct mapping with the mesh, e.g., see https://github.com/pwolfram/MPAS-Model/pull/15/commits/be19e757eedcc9bd5325370ec5a11091a0ac6449 I needed to add this for consistency with respect to our mesh conversion / coordinate system for the mesh.
If you check for cell centers closest to the particles (which is the metric I used), do you reasonable results? This was how I validated the longitude of the particles.
@bradyrx, please close (or leave open) until we have this 100% resolved. Thanks!
@pwolfram,
Thanks for the feedback and suggestion. Just wanted to vet the simple fixes (i.e. lat/lon/global ID) on my own through python and not just paraview.
See below implementation for verification:
@bradyrx, please close (or leave open) until we have this 100% resolved. Thanks!
I think you need to do this since I'm not an assignee. No comment & close option for me.
Thanks!
Consider including in input in particle initialization.
Particle output should be reported in latitude and longitude coordinates to facilitate global analysis.