wmo-im / BUFR4

BUFR edition 4
MIT License
27 stars 9 forks source link

BUFR sequence for DAYCLI #51

Closed efucile closed 2 years ago

efucile commented 3 years ago

Summary and purpose

Background, history and reasoning for the reporting of daily climate observations The development of the principal measure of the state of the climate - the global temperature record - has extensively depended on monthly CLIMAT data provided by National Meteorological and Hydrological Services (NMHSs). Over the last 20 years, there has been a growing demand for indices and measures of the climate that also consider extremes (Jones et al., 2012). For many extreme measures, monthly data are insufficient and there is a need for operationally exchanged daily climate data. This need is not just for timeliness, but principally for data that is compatible with long historical daily series developed and made available by NMHSs. Attempts have been made to use SYNOP data for this purpose (e.g. by the European Climate Assessment and Dataset but there are serious issues of incompatibility of SYNOP data with traditional methods of climate measurement within NMHSs (see van den Besselaar et al., 2012). Daily summaries in SYNOP messages are based on measurements that occur between synoptic reporting times and often over a period of less than 24 hours. For instance, in Europe, minimum temperatures are recorded usually over the 18 to 06 UTC 12-hour period and maximum temperatures during the 06 to 18 UTC 12-hour period. Measured in this way, the true daily minimum and maximum temperatures may not be reported because they may have occurred outside those particular 12-hour periods. As a result, SYNOP reports have been shown to significantly underestimate extremes: minimum temperatures measured in this way may be higher than the true daily minimum temperature, and maximum temperatures reported may be lower than the true daily maximum temperature reported as 24-hour climate observation. Similar problems occur for precipitation. In other regions of the world, SYNOP reporting practices can differ but problems remain. The Commission for Basic Systems (CBS) Open Programme Area Group on Integrated Observing Systems (OPAG-IOS), Implementation/Coordination Team on Integrated Observing Systems (ICT-IOS), recommended in 2012 that daily climate observations be included in monthly CLIMAT reports as a means of addressing the gap in the quality of daily climate observations. The U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI), in cooperation with WMO Inter-programme Expert Team on Data Representation Maintenance and Monitoring (IPET-DRMM) and NOAA National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP), developed a BUFR template for transmission of daily climate observations in BUFR format. This template was approved by CBS for implementation in May 2015. It was subsequently tested in the United States, with the cooperation of the UK Met Office. A one-year trial phase for the monthly reporting of daily climate observations was accepted by delegates to the seventeenth session of the Commission for Climatology in April 2018 (see Recommendation 5 (CCl-17)).

Reporting daily climate observations: Technical solution NOAA/NCEI, in cooperation with IPET-DRMM (taken over by the Inter-programme Expert Team on Codes Maintenance (IPET-CM) in 2016) and NOAA/NCEP, developed a BUFR template, 3 07 074 - Supplemental daily temperature and precipitation values, for daily climate observations in BUFR format, for monthly reporting. Please note that this does not replace the existing CLIMAT BUFR templates but offers complementary reporting of daily observations once per month. BUFR template 3 07 074 enables NMHSs to provide 31 daily observations consistent with national climate databases for the following elements: • Time of observation for temperature • Daily maximum temperature • Daily minimum temperature • Daily mean temperature (if it differs from (Tmax+Tmin)/2) • Time of observation for precipitation • Total daily precipitation • Depth of new snowfall • Depth of total snow on the ground Each of these observations should be recorded at the observing time consistent with the climate reporting practices of the NMHS and should reflect conditions over the previous 24-hour period. The climate convention varies from country to country; each country should retain its traditional observing practice in reporting daily climate summaries. For example, while in the U.S. the reporting time is local midnight, in Australia it is 9 a.m. local, and in Canada it is 06 UTC. These observations can be efficiently provided via daily CLIMAT reports or other methods specifically designed for climate purposes.

Consultations and Reviewers

References Jones, P.D., Lister, D.H., Osborn, T.J., Harpham, C., Salmon, M., Morice, C.P., 2012: Hemispheric and large-scale land-surface air temperature variations: An extensive revision and an update to 2010. Journal of Geophysical Research, 117, D05127, doi:10.1029/2011JD017139.

Van den Besselaar, E.J.M., Klein Tank, A.M.G, van der Schrier, G. and Jones, P.D., 2012: Synoptic messages to extend climate data records. Journal of Geophysical Research, 117, D07101, doi:10.1029/2011JD1688.

Detailed proposal

(Final proposal, updated by @jitsukoh December 20.) 1. Add a new entry in the significance qualifier class of table B (0-08-094) and a new code table to describe the method used to calculate the daily average temperature.

F X Y ELEMENT NAME UNIT SCALE REFERENCE VALUE DATA WITH (bits)
0-08-094 Method used to calculate the average daily temperature Code table 0 0 8

CODE TABLE 0-08-094 0-08-094 Method used to calculate the average daily temperature

Code Figure --
0 Average of maximum and minimum values: Tm = ( Tx + Tn) / 2 (see Note 1)
1 Average of the 8 tri-hourly observation
2 Average of 24 hourly observation
3 Weighted average of 3 observations: Tm = (aT1 +bT2 + cT3) (see Note 1)
4 Weighted average of 3 observation and also maximum and minimum values: Tm= (aT1 +bT2 + cT3 +dTx + eTn) (see Note 1)
5 Automatic weather station complete integration from minute data
6 Average of the 4 six-hourly observation
7 - 254 Reserved
255 Missing value

Note (1) : The letters "a", "b", "c", "d" and "e" generically represent the weight associated with the respective temperature T. The sub-index of T: "1", "2", "3", "x" and "n" represent the values measured at different times or maximum (x) or minimum (n) values.

2. Quality flag for each climatological value (Temperatures, Precipitation and Snow). Add a new entry (5) of 8-bit indicator of quality control in the Associated field significance (0 31 021).

Code Figure Code table  
3 - 4 Reserved
5 8-bit indicator of quality control 0 = Data checked and declared good; 1 = Data checked and declared suspect; 2 = Data checked and declared aggregated; 3 = Data checked and declared out of instrument range; 4 = Data checked, declared aggregated, and out of instrument range; 5 = Parameter is not measured at the station; 6 = Daily value not provided; 7 = Data unchecked, 8-254 = Reserved; 255 = Missing (QC info not available)

3. Siting classification and Measurement Quality Classification

Discussion: It is necessary to add the Siting Classification (SC) and also Measurement Quality Classification (MQC). However, the MQC must be accompanied by the siting classification.

Proposal:

Add 2 entries in table B: One for Temperature and another for Precipitation. Both with 8-bit code tables, where, the first character represents the Siting Classification from "1" to "5", as defined by defined ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E) (see the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8) edition 2014 Part I, Chapter I, Annex 1B for details), and the second character represent the Measurement Quality Classification from “A” to “D” defined by the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8) edition 2020.

F X Y ELEMENT NAME UNIT SCALE REFERENCE VALUE DATA WITH (bits)
0-08-095 Siting and measurement quality classification for temperature Code table 0 0 8
0-08-096 Siting and measurement quality classification for precipitation Code table 0 0 8
CODE TABLE for 0-08-095 and 0-08-096 Code Figure  
0 Reserved
1 1A (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E) and Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition)
2 1B (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E) and Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition)
3 1C (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E) and Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition)
4 1D (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E) and Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition)
5 reserved
6 2A (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E) and Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition)
7 2B (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E) and Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition)
8 2C (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E) and Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition)
9 2D (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E) and Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition)
10 reserved
11 3A (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E) and Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition)
12 3B (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E) and Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition)
13 3C (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E) and Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition)
14 3D (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E) and Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition)
15 reserved
16 4A (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E) and Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition)
17 4B (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E) and Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition)
18 4C (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E) and Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition)
19 4D (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E) and Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition)
20 reserved
21 5A (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E) and Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition)
22 5B (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E) and Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition)
23 5C (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E) and Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition)
24 5D (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E) and Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition)
25 reserved
26 1 (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E), Measurement Quality Classification is missing
27 2 (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E), Measurement Quality Classification is missing
28 3 (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E), Measurement Quality Classification is missing
29 4 (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E), Measurement Quality Classification is missing
30 5 (Siting Classification according to ISO/WMO standard 119289:2014(E), Measurement Quality Classification is missing
31 A (Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition), Siting Classification is missing
32 B (Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition), Siting Classification is missing
33 C (Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition), Siting Classification is missing
34 D (Measurement Quality Classification according to the Guide to Instruments and Methods of Observation (WMO-No. 8), 2020 Edition), Siting Classification is missing
35 - 254 Reserved
255 Missing

4. Element names for 0 13 012 (depth of fresh snow) and 0 13 013 (total snow depth) This change will not be implemented. ~~Update the element name for 0 13 012 (depth of fresh snow) and 0 13 013 (total snow depth) to add terminology used in WIGOS Metadata.~~ * CSV file: BUFRCREX_TableB_en_13.csv

F X Y Current Updated (proposal)
0 13 012 Depth of fresh snow Depth of fresh snow (Depth of snowfall)
0 13 013 Total snow depth Total snow depth (Snow depth) (see Note 2)

5. The new DAYCLI BUFR message Create a new descriptor 3-07-075 in the next version of BUFR table D.

Table reference Table references Element name Description / comments
3-07-075   Supplemental daily temperature and precipitation values with the time of occurrence for monthly climate report  
  3-01-150 WIGOS identifier  
  3-01-001 WMO block and station number  
  3-01-021 Latitude/longitude (high accuracy)  
  0-07-030 Height of station ground above mean sea level  
  0-08-095 Siting and measurement quality classification for temperature Code table
  0-08-096 Siting and measurement quality classification for precipitation Code table
  0-08-094 Method used to calculate the average daily temperature Code table
  3-01-011 Year, Month, Day  
  (Total accumulated precipitation)
  0-04-023 Time period or displacement in day since reference date, 0 (when beginning time of the period is on the same day) or -1 (previous day)
  3-01-013 Hour, minute, second beginning time of the period
2-04-008 Add associated field 8 bits long
0-31-021 Associated field significance Set as 5 for 8-bit indicator of quality control
0-13-060 Total accumulated precipitation  
  2-04-000 Add associated field cancel
  (Depth of fresh snow)
  0-04-023 Time period or displacement in day since reference date, 0 (when beginning time of the period is on the same day) or -1 (previous day)
  3-01-013 Hour, minute, second beginning time of the period
2-04-008 Add associated field 8 bits long
0-31-021 Associated field significance Set as 5 for 8-bit indicator of quality control
  0-13-012 Depth of fresh snow (Depth of snowfall)
  2-04-000 Add associated field cancel
  (Total snow depth)
  0-04-023 Time period or displacement in day since reference date, 0 (when beginning time of the period is on the same day) or -1 (previous day)
  3-01-013 Hour, minute, second beginning time of the period
2-04-008 Add associated field 8 bits long
0-31-021 Associated field significance Set as 5 for 8-bit indicator of quality control
  0-13-013 Total snow depth (Snow depth)
  2-04-000 Add associated field cancel
  (Max, Min, Mean temperature)
  0-07-032 Height of sensor above local ground for temperature measurement
  1-07-003 Replicate 7 descriptors 3 times  
  0-04-023 Time period or displacement in day since reference date, 0 (when beginning time of the period is on the same day) or -1 (previous day)
  3-01-013 Hour, minute, second beginning time of the period
  0-08-023 First-order statistics 2 – maximum; 3 – minimum; 4 – mean
2-04-008 Add associated field 8 bits long
0-31-021 Associated field significance Set as 5 for 8-bit indicator of quality control
  0-12-101 Temperature/air temperature  
  2-04-000 Add associated field cancel
  0-08-023 First-order statistics (code table) Set as missing value
DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

In July 2018, the World Meteorological Organization, launched a one-year trial phase for the monthly reporting of daily climate data as per BUFR template 3 07 074 (WMO 20180730), named DAYCLI message. This message includes 6 variables: maximum temperature, minimum temperature, mean temperature, precipitation, depth of new snowfall and depth of total snow on the ground (See File WMO 20180730). WMO 20180730.pdf

An assessment report of the trial phase was published in May 2020 (See File WMO 20200918 ). It recommends enhancing the DAILY message, both in term of climatological practices (metadata) and BUFR structure. It suggest also a way forward on monitoring the exchange of DAYCLI messages, and the promotion of WMO Member participation on this project. Assessment_DAYCLI_2020.pdf

EXTENSION OF THE TRIAL PHASE OF THE INTERNATIONAL EXCHANGE OF DAILY CLIMATE DATA WITH THE AIM OF RECOMMENDING ITS OPERATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION IN 2021 EC72_Doc4_2_1_DAYCLI.pdf

The Expert Team on Data Requirements for Climate Services (ET-DRC) from the WMO Services Commission has been proposed to specify all information needed for the complete data understanding, which means the necessary metadata.

At first analysis the BUFR template should precise:

A start on the DAYCLI requirement is available here: 20201005_DAYCLI_Requirements.pdf

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

Stations that send the CLIMAT message (normals values with monthly parameters and daily extremes, average and cumulative values) are forseen to send also the DAYCLI message. The reference guidelines for the CLIMAT message are : wmo-td_1188_en.pdf GCOS-127_EN_Climate_code_practical_help.pdf

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

Those who are sharing their development :

NOAA ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/dailyclimat/No licence but code and documentation available with FTP  
Brazil http://downloads.cptec.inpe.br/publicacoes/distribuicao.jsp LGPL  
Norway https://wiki.met.no/bufr.pm/bufrread.pl  GNU GPL  
Canada http://launchpad.net /libecbufr  Free LGPL licence V3 - Language : Fortran and C http://launchpad.net /libecbufr  Free LGPL licence
Météo-France
tomkralidis commented 3 years ago

Aside: libecbufr is now migrated to GitHub: https://github.com/ECCC-MSC/libecbufr

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

The following Members submitted interest and/or written intents to the Secretariat to participate in the trial :

  1. Argentina
  2. Australia (will join later)
  3. Brazil
  4. Chile
  5. Egypt
  6. Estonia
  7. France
  8. Hong Kong, China
  9. Indonesia
  10. Ireland
  11. Japan
  12. Kazakhstan
  13. Korea
  14. Latvia
  15. Mexico
  16. Norway
  17. Pakistan
  18. Russian Federation
  19. Spain
  20. Switzerland
DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

Let's present the Expert Team on Data Requirements for Climate Services Co-chairs:

  1. Christina LIEF, ret.NOAA/NCEI, USA
  2. Denis STUBER, Météo-France, France

Core members:

  1. Ali EDDENJAL, LNMC, Libya (National Data Maturity Assessment)
  2. Bruce BANNERMAN, ret.BOM, Australia (RA-5)
  3. Ge PENG, NOAA's Cooperative Institute for Satellite Earth, USA (RA-4)
  4. José A. GUIJARRO, AEMET, Spain (RA-6)
  5. Lipeng JIANG, CMA, China (RA-2)
  6. María SKANSI, Servicio Meteorológico Nacional (SMN),
  7. Markus DONAT, University of New South Wales, Australia (RA-5)
  8. Markus ZIESE, DWD/GPCC, Germany (RA-6)
  9. Rachid SEBBARI, DGM, Morocco, (RA-1)
  10. Reinaldo SILVEIRA, Paraná Meteorological System (SIMEPAR), Brazil (RA-3)
  11. Robert ALLAN, Met Office, UK (DARE synergy: ACRE/Copernicus)
  12. Urip HARYOKO, BMKG, Indonesia (DARE applications)
  13. Xiolan WANG, EC, Canada (Data Homogenization)
DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

Aside: libecbufr is now migrated to GitHub: https://github.com/ECCC-MSC/libecbufr

Thanks !

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

New version on issues and requirements : 20201104_DAYCLI_to_Sercom_Infcom_V2.pdf

Draft on actors and tasks : daycli_ET-DRC_2.txt

using this tool:

sergioh-pessoal commented 3 years ago

I present here the summary of the meeting we had yesterday (Sergio and Denis)

I believe that the information from this meeting is sufficient to make an initial outline of a new BUFR sequence that will be developed based on the existing DAYCLI sequence (3 07 074).

I intend to make an initial document to put on GitHub.

These are the points covered:

1 -The time slots to measure daily extreme, cumulative and average of variable as Max temperature, Min temperature, Precipitation and Average temperature differ from one NMHS to another, and also are not the same in one NMHS For example:

- Météo-France

India In general from Day D at 00:01 UTC to Day D+1 at 00:00 UTC (India Standard Time Zone is 5h30 ahead from UTC)

Luxembourg · In general from Day D-1 at 23:46 UTC to Day D at 23:45 UTC

Brazil

In the case of the current template (3-07-074). The hour and time period are the same for maximum, minimum and mean temperature, which is not what is seen in a lot of NMHSs

This is the part of 3-07-074 relative to the temperature 0-04-003-DAY 0-04-004-HOUR 0-04-024-TIME PERIOD OR DISPLACEMENT (H) 1-02-003- Replicate 2 descriptor 3X | 0-08-023 – First-order statistics | 0-12-101 – Temperature/air temperature

One possible solution is put Day Hour and Time period or displacement inside of the loop. Example

1-05-003 - Replicate 5 descriptor 3X |0-04-003 – Day | 0-04-004 – Hour | 0-04-024 – Time period or displacement | 0-08-023 – First-order statistics | 0-12-101 – Temperature/air temperature

But there are other points to also be consider

2 There are many practical differences in calculating the average temperature. Therefore, it will probably be necessary to add a descriptor before the average temperature to identify the type of calculation used. e.g. Tm = (Tn+ Tx)/2 Tm = mean of the 8 tri-hourly observations Tm= mean of 24 hourly observations Tm = (T7 +T14 + 2 T21)/4, Germany before 2001 Tm = (T6 +T12 + 2 T18)/4, Greece Tm = (T6 +T12 + T18) –k(( T6+T12+T18)/3 –Tn), Norway and Switzerland Tm = (aT6 +bT12 + cT18 +dTx +e Tn ), Sueden (Ekolm-Modens formula) Tm = (T6_I +2T18_I + T6_II+ 2Tx +2*Tn)/8, European project NORGRID

3 In the current template, the height out sensor (0-07-030) represent one value for all sensor (temperature and precipitation), but the height could be different in each case and not make sense in case of precipitation. At same time, this definition is already in OSCAR and not necessary in the template. So the most simple solution in this case would be to remove 0-07-030

4 Quality code for each variable-  The idea is to create flag_table (10 bits probably is enough) to represent quality information of the data. In this context, it will be necessary to propose a table B descriptor associated with a flag table. Here is a first example of how this table could be

Bit No.
1 The value has been checked 2 Checked with climatological limits
3-9 reserved All 10 Missing value

5 There are many definition of Depth of fresh snow, Total snow depth. Example: Could be measurement each day at special time, or accumulation from one time to another time. Therefore, we will probably need different times and/or time period or displacement for each one So we need first to have a clear definition for those variables. Is it:

(Surely the second definition but need to be validated by experts)

6 Adding the quality of the measurement at the station point. There are quality classification for temperature and precipitation related to location and environment in CIMO Guide (WMO No.8) Part I, Chapter I, Annex 1B.: Sitting classification (first common ISO/WMO standard. It was published by ISO as ISO standard 19289:2014 (EN). Class 1 to 5. Maintained/Sustained performance. Class A to E. Not yet in the CIMO guide. Need to contact the experts on that domain (mail sent to "Krunoslav PREMEC" kpremec@wmo.int)

(See attached files) CIMO_A1-A2-Doc_4.3 Sustaind performance Surface Classification_as_published.pdf CIMO_Guide_2014_en_I_1-2_Annex_1B-1.pdf Doc-3-2-1.pdf

Those 2 classifications are not yet part of the WIGOS Metedata, but was discussed in previous TT-WMD meetings. It is necessary for those descriptors to indicate this classification in each case Example:

jlawrimo commented 3 years ago

Hi Denis, from my email earlier this week.. Regarding snow. There should be depth of snow (all snow) on the ground at time of observation and also new snow that fell in the previous 24-hours. How that is done could vary by country and even within countries as you know. In my opinion the ideal is for 4 new snow obs to be taken every 6 hours and the total summed to a 24-hour total. But many networks only record the new snow once at observation time.

Your suggestion for greater detail such as those listed below are good ones, but may have the potential to make taking observations difficult for observers. Given how difficult it can be to make good snowfall measurements given variations within a single observing site and effects of blowing snow, and ability of the observer to follow procedures, I know with some of our volunteer networks we are happy when we get well taken total snow and new snow measurements.

Regarding thoughts to add a quality indicator. I am guessing you are referring to the ability to indicate if the observation is preliminary (no or limited QC applied), final (fully QCd)? I believe something like that could be useful. But like most organizations we run all the data we collect through our own QC processes. Which we will do regardless of any quality indicators provided.

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

About the snow, I was wondering about the definitions. It was not in my intention to add more variables about snow. I suppose that total snow at a time of observation and new snow that fell in the previous 24 hours is sufficient for the Daycli message. Nevertheless we need to precise the time of observation, and the period of time for Fresh snow.

For the quality, yes I was suggesting to add a quality code for each value in order to kown if the value is a raw one, or not. If the value has been checked or not, which kind of controls have been performed on the value and the result of the controls. But this international quality code as to be defined. As you said, we (WMO community) have so many different practices about quality code ! As regard current projects on interoperability and the opencdms project I think we really need the design of a "global" quality code that could allow NMHSs to keep their own QC and be translated into the Global-QC when exchanging data worldwide.

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

Minimum modification for the DAYCLI message sequence (0 07 074)

  1. Tmax, Tmin and Taverage, Add the time frame (Day Hour and Time period be added)
  2. Total accumulated precipitation, Add the time frame (Day Hour and Time period be added)
  3. Depth of fresh snow, Add the time frame (Day Hour and Time period be added)
  4. Total snow depth, Add the time of observation (Day Hour)

Recommended modifications for Climatology purpose

  1. Data quality flag for each value (Temperatures, Precipitation and Snow). But no agreement yet on an international Data quality standard (ET-DRC tasks). • Quality Flag WaterML2 (WMDS) : Estimate, Good, Missing , Poor, Suspect, Unchecked • Quality Flag BUFR Table 0 33 020 : Doubtful, Estimated, Good, Has been changed, Inconsistent, missing value, not checked, wrong

DAYCLI message with the CLIMAT message are non-real time data exchange, more particularly suitable for climatological studies. Those messages in non-real time give time to NMHSs to include their added values : the data quality. The DAYCLI message is a good opportunity to start sharing data with better quality information. On the other hand the Flagging System to use has not received (so far) the approval from the WMO community.

  1. Adding the Siting Classification (SC) (first common ISO/WMO standard. It was published by ISO as ISO standard 19289:2014 (EN)). Class 1 to 5.

  2. Adding the Measurement Quality Classification (MQC) , approved by INFCOM-1. The classification from this scheme will be represented by a letter (A, B, C or D), and it should go hand in hand with the Siting Classification for Surface Observing Stations on Land that is represented by a number (1-5). Both schemes should form part of the metadata of a measurand and assist data users to obtain an estimate of the overall quality of the data ("Krunoslav PREMEC" kpremec@wmo.int).

There is an intention to add indication of MQC in WMDS as well, and we have already tasked SC-MINT/Expert Team on Surface and Sub-surface Measurement (ET-SSM) to draft a proposal on how both classification schemes could be indicated properly not only in WMDS, but also in OSCAR. Of course it will be done in collaboration with SC-ON/ET-WIGOS Tools. (Krunoslav PREMEC)

Luis Filipe NUNES (2 December 2020) Including data on sitting and/or uncertainty elements in BUFR reports for international exchange should be very beneficial for data users, however I'd recommend the implementation of this to be planned carefully in advance, in order to avoid inconsistencies with records in OSCAR/Surface. It is an issue that already exists in near-real time BUFR reports, e.g. some stations reporting their geographical coordinates in BUFR messages, with values different from those registered in OSCAR/Surface.

  1. Computation methods used for the average of temperature.

Remarks

  1. In the current template, the height out sensor (0-07-030) represent one value for all sensor (temperature and precipitation), but the height could be different in each case and not make sense in case of precipitation. At same time, this definition is already in OSCAR and not necessary in the template. So the most simple solution in this case would be to remove 0-07-030.
jitsukoh commented 3 years ago

Comments of Dr. Jörg Klausen on Data Quality Codes:

My immediate reaction is that we have here a topic where a lot of legacy is involved and a certain harmonization would clearly benefit future generations. Specifically, I see a great potential of bridging the gap between the WIGOS Metadata Standard (WMDS/WMDR) and WIS, taking into consideration the requirements of the climate community for documentation of quality of observations.

The WMDS has section 7.8 about Data Quality that addresses uncertainty, flagging and traceability. Regarding flagging, it mentions the following:

In the technical implementation of this, there are the following elements:

as currently 2 specific quality flagging systems.

The principle setup of the WMDS/WMDR in this regard makes sense to me, in that it allows one to use a quality flag and then to explain from which vocabulary it comes. Obviously, more vocabularies could be added to accommodate legacy. And obviously, for the future, it would be extremely helpful to agree on one vocabulary and then to promote it, together with clear mappings to other existing vocabularies.

The TT-WMD at the time wanted to re-use an existing flagging system and explicitly did not want to define ‘yet another standard’. We chose 2 relatively convincing vocabularies, but we were also a bit at a loss with the plethora (and sometimes ambiguity) of the existing 0 33 BUFR tables. I would welcome a dialogue on the possibilities to converge, further evolve (by way of adding better definitions and perhaps more elements) an existing code table that meets the requirements of ET-DRC and ET-Data/TT-CDCF. I would not recommend at this point to define yet another new BUFR table.

sergioh-pessoal commented 3 years ago

I agree with this point. There is a lot of redundancy in tables 0 33 BUFR and it is difficult to decide what to use. Creating a new table is not a good solution. It would further increase the redundancies in the tables. Adding better definitions and perhaps more elements to an existing code table that meets the requirements for ET-DRC and ET-Data / TT-CDCF. would be better

lemkhenter commented 3 years ago

I think all quality information is relevant to the climato community. It is therefore necessary to list all the details relating to this aspect before thinking about a way to optimize their representation in the BUFR message.

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

For information, here below, explanation on the 2 classifications, the siting classification and the measurement quality classification:

sergioh-pessoal commented 3 years ago

Just one detail about adding the day, hour and 'time period or displacement' for each variable. In my opinion it is necessary add only hour (0-04-004) and time period or displacement (0-04-024 ) for each variable. The day is not necessary because it is already understood that the start or end the time frame are modified in relation to the date provided by the value of displacement

For example Suppose the date is 1/1/2020 and: 1) Tm is measured at 12 UTC from the previous day to the present day; 2) Tmax is observed from 00 UTC of the present day to 00UTC of the next day

In these cases we can fixed day = 01 and use: 1) Tm preceded by hour = 12UTC and Displacement = -24h to indicate the time frame from 12/31/2019 12UTC to 01/01/2020 12UTC

Tmax preceded by hour = 00UTC and displacement = +24h to indicate the time frame from 01/01/2020 00UTC to 01/02/2020 00 UTC

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

Flagging systems from : Spain (AEMET) AEMET_CDB_Quality_Flags.pdf

MICROSTEP (Slovakian company) MICROStep.pdf

jitsukoh commented 3 years ago

Dear @DenisStuber and @sergioh-pessoal Would it be possible to present a draft new sequence at this moment as part of the status report at the next meeting on 28th? We can of course add elements as agreed at a later stage.

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

Dear @DenisStuber and @sergioh-pessoal Would it be possible to present a draft new sequence at this moment as part of the status report at the next meeting on 28th? We can of course add elements as agreed at a later stage.

For sure, we will work on it...

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

Proposition from Sergio y Denis will include:

Need to Experts validation from :

sergioh-pessoal commented 3 years ago

Here is a draft proposal for the new DAYCLI message. We welcome comments, suggestions and corrections.

1- Add a new entry in the significance qualifier class of table B ( 0-08-094) and a new code table to describe the method used to calculate the daily average temperature.

F X Y ELEMENT NAME UNIT SCALE REFERENCE VALUE DATA WITH (bits)
0-08-094 Method used to calculate the average daily temperature Code table 0 0 4

Discussion:

There are many formulas in use to estimate the average daily temperature. However, in general, these formulas are weighted average calculations of temperatures measured throughout the day, where the weights for each temperature are adjusted according to the time zone of each location.

In this context, we see two possibilities for the code table for methods in use

1) To reduce the number of entries in the code tables, represent the methods in a generic way, without detailing the exact weights and times used by each country.

2) Build a complete table, with the specific method in each case

Tm = (Tn+ Tx)/2 Tm = mean of the 8 tri-hourly observations Tm= mean of 24 hourly observations Tm = (T7 +T14 + 2 T21)/4, Germany before 2001 Tm = (T6 +T12 + 2 T18)/4, Greece Tm = (T6 +T12 + T18) –k(( T6+T12+T18)/3 –Tn), Norway and Switzerland Tm = (aT6 +bT12 + cT18 +dTx +e Tn ), Sueden (Ekolm-Modens formula) Tm = (T6_I +2T18_I + T6_II+ 2Tx +2*Tn)/8, European project NORGRID Etc.

The code table bellow was based on option 1, but it cam be rewrite based in the option 2. There are 15 position to include methods in this code table. In the case of option 2, it may be better to create a code table with more positions.

CODE TABLE 0-08-094 0-08-094 Method used to calculate the average daily temperature

Code Figure  
0 Average of maximum and minimum values: Tm = ( Tx + Tn) / 2
1 Average of the 8 tri-hourly observation
2 Average of 24 hourly observation
3 Weighted average of 3 observations: Tm = (aT1 +bT2 + cT3),
4 Weighted average of 3 observation and also maximum and minimum values: Tm= (aT1 +bT2 + cT3 +dTx + eTn)
5 AWS complete integration from minute data
6 -14 Reserved
15 Missing value

Note : The letters "a", "b", "c", "d" and "e" generically represent the weight associated with the respective temperature T. The sub-index of T: "1", "2", "3", "x ”And“ n represent the values measured at different times or maximum (x) or minimum (n) values.

2. Quality flag the for each climatological value (Temperatures, Precipitation and Snow). Add a Associated filed with 12 bits and update the Associated Field Significance (0 31 021) : Code figure 8: 12 bit indicator for the Quality Flag for climatological values.

System Flagging in preparation from SERCOM

3 – Siting classification and Measurement Quality Classification

Discussion: It is necessary to add the Siting Classification (SC) and also Measurement Quality Classification (MQC). However, the MQC must be accompanied by the siting classification.

Proposal: Add 2 entries in table B: One for Temperature and another for Precipitation. Both with 2-character (16 bits), where, the first character represents the SC Class from "1" to "5", as defined in the CIMO Guide (WMO No.8) Part I, Chapter I, Annex 1B: and the second character, represent class “A” to “E”. (CIMO Guide)

F X Y ELEMENT NAME UNIT SCALE REFERENCE VALUE DATA WITH (bits)
0-08-095 Siting and Measurement Quality Classification for temperature CCITTIA5 0 0 16
0-08-096 Siting and Measurement Quality Classification for precipitation CCITTIA5 0 0 16

Note: It is necessary to verify if another descriptor will be necessary to snow.

4 – End measurement day

Discussion: The ending day (UTC) of daily measurement is eventual not equal to the nominal day informed. Its depends of region and of each specific parameter.
Examples:

Proposal: Add 3 entries in table B (class 26 – Non-coordinate location (time))

F X Y ELEMENT NAME UNIT SCALE REFERENCE VALUE DATA WITH (bits)
0-26-004 Time in UTC to compute the average daily temperature h 1 0 12
0-26-005 Time in UTC to compute 24 hours precipitation h 1 0 12
0-26-006 Time in UTC to compute snow depth h 1 0 12

Add 1 entry in code table 0-31-021 ( Associated filed significance)

Code figure 20: 1 bit indicator for the end measurement day

set 0: Current day (From previous day to current day); set 1:Next day (From current day to next day. )

This 1 bit indicator would be add in each descriptors bellow

0-26-001 Principal time of daily reading in UTC of maximum temperature 0-26-002 Principal time of daily reading in UTC of minimun temperatures 0-26-004 Time in UTC use to compute daily mean temperature 0-26-005 Time in UTC use to compute 24 hours precipitation

5 – The new DAYCLI BUFR message

Update descriptor 3-07-074 (Update the sequence or create a new descriptor in the next version of BUFR table D)

Table reference Table references Element name Description / comments
3-07-074   Supplemental daily temperature and precipitation values for monthly climate report  
  3-01-150 (WIGOS identifier)  
  3-01-001 WMO block and station number  
  0-04-001 Year  
  0-04-002 Month  
  3-01-021 Latitude/longitude (high accuracy)  
  0-07-030 Height of station ground above mean sea level (see note 3) (m)  
  0-08-095 Siting and measurement quality classification for temperature Character- Examples: 1A,1B, 2A,2B,... etc.
  0-08-096 Siting and measurement quality classification for precipitation Character- Examples: 1A,1B, 2A,2B,... etc.
  0-08-094 Method used to calculate the average daily temperature (code table)
  2-04-001 Add associated field 1 bits long
  0-31-021 Associated Field Significance Set as 20 – indicator for end measurement day
  0-26-001 Principal time of daily reading in UTC of maximum temperature Associated Field: 0 (From D-1 to D) or 1 (From D to D+1)
  0-26-002 Principal time of daily reading in UTC of minimum temperature Associated Field: 0 (From D-1 to D) or 1 (From D to D+1)
  0-26-004 Time in UTC use to compute avarege daily temperature Associated Field: 0 (From D-1 to D) or 1 (From D to D+1)
  0-25-005 Time in UTC use to compute 24 hours precipitation Associated Field: 0(From D-1 to D) or 1 (From D to D+1)
  0-25-006 Time in UTC use to compute snow depth Associated Field: 0 (From D-1 to D) or 1 (From D to D+1)
  2-04-000 Add associated field (cancel)
  0-07-032 Height of sensor above local ground  
  1-16-000 Delayed replication of 16 descriptors  
  0-31-001 Delayed descriptor replication factor It corresponds the number of days of the month
  0-04-003 Day  
  1-05-003 Replicate 5 descriptors 3 times  
  0-08-023 First-order statistics 2–maximum; 3– minimum; 4 – mean
2-04-012 Add associated field 12 bits long
0-31-021 Associated Field Significance Set as 8 indicator for the Quality Flag
  0-12-101 Temperature/air temperature (k)  
  2-04-000 Add associated field cancel
  0-08-023 First-order statistics (code table) Set as missing value
  0-07-032 Height of sensor above local ground Set as missing value (not applicable for precipitation)
  2-04-012 Add associated field 12 bits long
0-31-021 Associated Field Significance Set as 8: indicator for the Quality Flag
  0-13-060 Total accumulated precipitation (kg m-2)  
  0-13-012 Depth of fresh snow (m)  
  0-13-013 Total snow depth  
  2-04-000 Add associated field cancel
DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

Here a graphic to illustrate the different climatological day definitions according parameters e.g. Luxembourg, France and Brazil Climatological Day Definition

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

summary of climatological needs : BUFR Fields

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

Mail from Rodica Nitu (WMO) the 28 of January 2021 11:59 :

"My apologies for missing to reply to your message. With the holidays and competing priorities, we’ve been unable to reconvene the Snow Watch team which worked on the development of the Snow BUFR Table, which has been published already in the manual on codes. It includes Total snow depth, Snow density (LIQUID WATER CONTENT), and Snow water equivalent, but not the depth of fresh snow. While, I’m still trying to understand the contribution we can make, I would like to refer to the expected precise timing of observation:

I’m looking forward to learning more about the expectations and involve the relevant experts, for support.

Kind regards,

jlawrimo commented 3 years ago

Hi Denis, What day does the observation in France get reported as? Is the observation taken at 6AM reported as an observation for Day+1 in your graphic?

Best regards, Jay

On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 5:22 AM DenisStuber notifications@github.com wrote:

Here a graphic to illustrate the different climatological day definitions according parameters e.g. Luxembourg, France and Brazil [image: Climatological Day Definition] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/47636359/106124035-f036b480-615a-11eb-8d1f-8eb6ce5444f7.png

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/wmo-im/BUFR4/issues/51#issuecomment-768952053, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ARYQF7HJCEKFOOZPEYFZSETS4E3EJANCNFSM4R7FMFXA .

-- Jay Lawrimore Chief, Dataset Section Climatic Science and Service Division NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) 151 Patton Ave Asheville, NC 28801 828-271-4750 fax: 828-271-4022 Follow NCEI on Facebook and Twitter (@NOAANCEI)

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

Hi Jay,

As regard the graphic for Météo-France, the Daily MAx Temperature from Day D at 06h (in fact 06:01) to Day D+1 at 06:00 is reported to Day D. This is generally OK as the Max Temperature occurs is often after midday and France is on Greenwich Time zone. SSe you, Denis.

----- Météo-France ----- STUBER DENIS DCSC/POC denis.stuber@meteo.fr Fixe : +33 561078337

De: "jlawrimo" notifications@github.com À: "wmo-im/BUFR4" BUFR4@noreply.github.com Cc: "Denis Stuber" denis.stuber@meteo.fr, "Mention" mention@noreply.github.com Envoyé: Jeudi 28 Janvier 2021 14:10:37 Objet: Re: [wmo-im/BUFR4] BUFR sequence for DAYCLI (#51)

Hi Denis, What day does the observation in France get reported as? Is the observation taken at 6AM reported as an observation for Day+1 in your graphic?

Best regards, Jay

On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 5:22 AM DenisStuber notifications@github.com wrote:

Here a graphic to illustrate the different climatological day definitions according parameters e.g. Luxembourg, France and Brazil [image: Climatological Day Definition] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/47636359/106124035-f036b480-615a-11eb-8d1f-8eb6ce5444f7.png

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/wmo-im/BUFR4/issues/51#issuecomment-768952053, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ARYQF7HJCEKFOOZPEYFZSETS4E3EJANCNFSM4R7FMFXA .

-- Jay Lawrimore Chief, Dataset Section Climatic Science and Service Division NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) 151 Patton Ave Asheville, NC 28801 828-271-4750 fax: 828-271-4022 Follow NCEI on Facebook and Twitter (@NOAANCEI)

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, [ https://github.com/wmo-im/BUFR4/issues/51#issuecomment-769042021 | view it on GitHub ] , or [ https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALLN7B3NQE5QYELVYOMW6LDS4FO43ANCNFSM4R7FMFXA | unsubscribe ] .

jlawrimo commented 3 years ago

thanks Denis. I now see I earlier missed the detailed description of the various observing times for each element.

Best regards, Jay

On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 10:27 AM DenisStuber notifications@github.com wrote:

Hi Jay,

As regard the graphic for Météo-France, the Daily MAx Temperature from Day D at 06h (in fact 06:01) to Day D+1 at 06:00 is reported to Day D. This is generally OK as the Max Temperature occurs is often after midday and France is on Greenwich Time zone. SSe you, Denis.

----- Météo-France ----- STUBER DENIS DCSC/POC denis.stuber@meteo.fr Fixe : +33 561078337

De: "jlawrimo" notifications@github.com À: "wmo-im/BUFR4" BUFR4@noreply.github.com Cc: "Denis Stuber" denis.stuber@meteo.fr, "Mention" < mention@noreply.github.com> Envoyé: Jeudi 28 Janvier 2021 14:10:37 Objet: Re: [wmo-im/BUFR4] BUFR sequence for DAYCLI (#51)

Hi Denis, What day does the observation in France get reported as? Is the observation taken at 6AM reported as an observation for Day+1 in your graphic?

Best regards, Jay

On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 5:22 AM DenisStuber notifications@github.com wrote:

Here a graphic to illustrate the different climatological day definitions according parameters e.g. Luxembourg, France and Brazil [image: Climatological Day Definition] < https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/47636359/106124035-f036b480-615a-11eb-8d1f-8eb6ce5444f7.png>

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/wmo-im/BUFR4/issues/51#issuecomment-768952053, or unsubscribe < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ARYQF7HJCEKFOOZPEYFZSETS4E3EJANCNFSM4R7FMFXA>

.

-- Jay Lawrimore Chief, Dataset Section Climatic Science and Service Division NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) 151 Patton Ave Asheville, NC 28801 828-271-4750 fax: 828-271-4022 Follow NCEI on Facebook and Twitter (@NOAANCEI)

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, [ https://github.com/wmo-im/BUFR4/issues/51#issuecomment-769042021 | view it on GitHub ] , or [ https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALLN7B3NQE5QYELVYOMW6LDS4FO43ANCNFSM4R7FMFXA | unsubscribe ] .

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/wmo-im/BUFR4/issues/51#issuecomment-769162892, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ARYQF7GMIDVKPKVRJTZJJCLS4F66DANCNFSM4R7FMFXA .

-- Jay Lawrimore Chief, Dataset Section Climatic Science and Service Division NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) 151 Patton Ave Asheville, NC 28801 828-271-4750 fax: 828-271-4022 Follow NCEI on Facebook and Twitter (@NOAANCEI)

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

Could we agree on the definitions of the Total Snow Depth and on the Depth of Fresh Snow? Herewith the definitions I have found :

1. Total Snow Depth https://unterm.un.org/unterm Definition Vertical distance between the top surface of a snow layer and the ground beneath; the layer is assumed to be evenly spread over the ground which it covers.

https://www.weather.gov/gsp/snow Determine the total depth of snow, ice pellets, or ice on the ground. This observation is taken once-a-day at the scheduled time of observation with a measuring stick. It is taken by measuring the total depth of snow on exposed ground at a permanently-mounted snow stake or by taking the average of several depth readings at or near the normal point of observation with a measuring stick. When using a measuring stick, make sure the stick is pushed vertically into the snow until the bottom of the stick rests on the ground. Do not mistake an ice layer or crusted snow as "ground". The measurement should reflect the average depth of snow, ice pellets, and glaze ice on the ground at your usual measurement site (not disturbed by human activities). Measurements from rooftops, paved areas, and the like should not be made.

2. Depth of Fresh Snow

Météo-France Definition Fresh snowfall in 24 hours (from 06:00 a.m. TZ the Day D to 06:00 a.m. TZ the Day D+1) which remains on the ground at 06h TZ. The value read at D+1 is assigned to day D (in cm). TZ : Time Zone

Proposed Definition for WMO Fresh snowfall depth in 24 hours, from a certain 24 hours period, specified by a beginning time and a ending time in UTC, and reported at a certain day of the month, which remains on the ground at the ending time of the 24 hours period.

Do you have other propositions ?

sergioh-pessoal commented 3 years ago

The above proposal for the new DAYCLI is, in fact, quite complex. But only in the part relating to the specification of the time slot for each parameter inside of loop of 30 days. This part need more discussion to find the best or more appropriated solution.

On the other hand the quality classification part, is quite simple in technical terms . It could be added to the original DAYCLI message with small changes.

A sample of the current DAYCLI (3-07-074) is attached

Sergio

ISCE60-SBBR-011600.dat.bufr.gz

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

According the meeting on the 28 January 2021, here below the list of fields to take into account (There are no sitting and measurement classifications for snow, only for Temperature and Precipitation) : BUFR Fields_2

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

Here below a STATION example with all necessary fields to include into a DAYCLI message. The fields are quite simple. I guess that the difficulty is more to translate the information into a BUFR format where real time data is generally used instead of a "historical view". CHAMONIX station ID WMO 07469

POSTE;DATE;RR;QRR;TN;QTN;TX;QTX;TM;QTM;HNEIGEF;QHNEIGEF;NEIGETOT06;QNEIGETOT06 74056001;20201201;5,6;v;-7,6;v;0,4;v;-2,3;v;12;v;2;t 74056001;20201202;0;v;-6,2;v;1,9;v;-2,6;v;0;t;14;t 74056001;20201203;0;v;-5,1;v;3,4;v;-2,4;v;0;t;10;t 74056001;20201204;2,8;v;-2,9;v;4;v;1,3;v;6;v;10;t 74056001;20201205;4,2;v;-4,9;v;0,8;v;-1,2;v;11;v;14;t 74056001;20201206;1;v;-1,2;v;1,7;v;-0,6;v;4;v;21;e 74056001;20201207;1;v;-4,2;v;1,5;v;-1,7;v;0;t;21;t 74056001;20201208;1,4;v;-4,1;v;3,3;v;-0,8;v;4;v;20;t 74056001;20201209;0;v;-2,1;v;0,4;v;-1,3;v;1;t;20;e 74056001;20201210;0;v;-8,5;v;2,4;v;-5,9;v;0;t;19;t 74056001;20201211;7;v;-9,9;v;0,3;v;-3,9;v;16;v;18;t 74056001;20201212;17,2;v;-2,2;v;1,3;v;-0,2;v;15;e;28;e 74056001;20201213;0;v;-0,9;v;3,3;v;-0,1;v;0;t;42;e 74056001;20201214;0;v;-5,4;v;1,3;v;-1,9;v;0;t;37;t 74056001;20201215;0,8;v;-1,4;v;3,8;v;0,8;v;0;t;35;t 74056001;20201216;0;v;-2,3;v;4,6;v;-0,7;v;0;t;32;t 74056001;20201217;0;v;-5,6;v;3,9;v;-1,5;v;0;t;31;t 74056001;20201218;0;v;-3,7;v;6,3;v;-1,6;v;0;t;30;t 74056001;20201219;0;v;-4,3;v;8,5;v;2,1;v;0;t;30;t 74056001;20201220;0;v;-1,6;v;5,8;v;0,8;v;0;t;29;t 74056001;20201221;6,4;v;-3,2;v;4,1;v;0,3;v;0;t;28;t 74056001;20201222;0;v;-0,9;v;7,8;v;0,8;v;0;t;25;t 74056001;20201223;8;v;-1,6;v;5,3;v;1,2;v;0;t;22;t 74056001;20201224;7,2;v;0,2;v;5;v;2,1;v;6;t;22;t 74056001;20201225;0;v;-2,9;v;0,6;v;-1,6;v;0;v;25;e 74056001;20201226;0;v;-7,6;v;-0,6;v;-6,1;v;0;t;26;e 74056001;20201227;0,2;v;-10,7;v;0,3;v;-4,5;v;3;v;23;t 74056001;20201228;3,4;v;-2,8;v;1,3;v;-1,7;v;6;t;26;t 74056001;20201229;4,2;v;-2,8;v;2,1;v;-0,8;v;7;t;31;e 74056001;20201230;0;v;-3,6;v;1,3;v;-1,6;v;1;t;37;t 74056001;20201231;0,8;v;-7,9;v;0,5;v;-3;v;2;v;34;t

QRR : Quality Code for RR (Precipitation), ... Qxx Quality Code for xx Sitting Classification for Temperature : 5 Sitting Classification for Precipitation : 3 Measurement Classification for Temperature : B Measurement Classification for Precipitation : B Methode used to calculate the average daily temperature : with 24 values Average Temperature : From Day D at 00:01 UTC to Day D+1 at 00:00 UTC, the value reported at Day D+1 is reported at Day D Minimum Temperature : From Day D-1 at 18:01 UTC to Day D at 18:00 UTC, the value reported at Day D is reported at Day D Maximum Temperature : From Day D at 06:01 UTC to Day D +1 at 06:00 UTC, the value reported at Day D+1 is reported at Day D Precipitation : From Day D at 06:01 UTC to Day D +1 at 06:00 UTC, the value reported at Day D+1 is reported at Day D Total Depth of snow : Total depth of snow measured at 06:00 UTC at the Day D Depth of Fresh snow : From Day D at 06:01 UTC to Day D +1 at 06:00 UTC, the value reported at Day D+1 is reported at Day D Chamonix.pdf Meta_Chamonix.pdf

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

Here a note on parameters on a daily basis reported on FM 12 SYNOP : Max and Min temperature, Precipitation over 24 hours, Snow depth. Information from Manual on Codes International Codes Volume I.1 Annex II to the WMO Technical Regulations Part A – Alphanumeric Codes WMO-No.306, 2019 Edition. I suppose we could find the equivalente BUFR template in the Volume I.2 . Temperature_Precipitation_Snow_WMO_306.pdf

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

Information given by Rodica Nitu and dialogue over the web:

10/02/2021 Following consultations with the snow community of GCW, it is recommended to develop the definitions for the two terms on snow for the DAYCLI message based on the approved definitions included in Chapter 2, Vol II, of the Guide WMO No. 8, and which have been added in the WIGOS Metadata Representation https://codes.wmo.int/wmdr/ObservedVariableTerrestrial (# 629, and #627), and taking into consideration the established practice for the reporting units for Total Snow depth:

Total Snow depth (HS) - the vertical distance from the snow surface to a stated reference level and must be reported in metres (m). In most cases the reference level corresponds to the base surface; on ice sheets it may refer to a depth recorded at some fixed time. Total snow depth (0 13 013) shall be reported in meters (with precision in hundredths of a meter). The synoptic hour at which this datum is reported shall be determined by regional decision.

Depth of snowfall (HN) [to be used instead of Depth of Fresh Snow, as below] - the vertical depth in centimetres of freshly fallen snow that has accumulated on the base surface or on a snow board during a specific period, usually of 24 hours. When reporting HN for observation periods other than for 24 hours, the period must be added in parentheses to the symbol (for example, an 8-hour measurement will be expressed as HN(8h)). The depth of snowfall is reported in centimetres and rounded to the nearest centimetre. As with HS, the perpendicular measurement of snowfall, DN, is related to HN via the slope angle .

Please note that: GCW has compiled a database of known sources of cryospheric terms, available at GCW acknowledges that BUFR Table 0 13 013 includes the parameter “total snow depth”, while the entry in the WIGOS Metadata Representation is Snow Depth.

11/02/2021 I appreciate the feedback. I’d like to add the following:

HN – a complicated discussion. Below are some details, which should be taken into account:

I can’t say how may NMHSs report it at intervals lower than 24h, right now. In 2008, WMO/CIMO published . At the time the reporting interval varied from 1 h to days (55 countries responded). I understand that this group focuses on data for climate; in practice, most often, the same observing systems provide data for more than one application. There is great interest (and value) in shorter intervals (e.g. for snow removal contracts are based on accumulation during storms, where the reference is the data from a met service, e.g. Canada); Once the observations are not manual, anything is possible; is it a reliable measurement? a difficult answer. The method of observation & derivation of data for the data transmitted must be clarified (e.g. 24 x 1 h-observations or 1 observation/24 h; especially if rain occurs during the interval. In the SPICE project of WMO () we tried to answer these questions; I’d say that we ended up with more questions than we started with.

Denis STUBER the 12/02/2021 Here below a way forward to discuss :

One solution could be to come back to the objective of the DAYCLI message and figure out what we want to achieve with it. In my understanding, the DAYCLI messsage is not here to replace the work done at national level and the measurements and functionnalities of National Meteorological Services. Otherwise we will need to develop an application with a complex worldwide database and with very different data management processes to include all practices and functionnalities. Do we have the means to embark on this adventure?

The aim of DAYCLI message could be the worldwide sharing of daily values for temperature, precipitation and snow. Those daily values having such measurements : once a day, and, extreme and accumulation over 24 hours. Even with this "simple" objective the task is not easy because climatological day definitions, data quality and methods of calculation come into play. Of course all the other measurements in operation in National Met Services including multiple intervals should continue. This DAYCLI message would concentrate in drawing a daily picture of the world with simple and qualified data. As I said earlier, the fact to send at the end of the month the daily values would allow the National Meteorological Services to apply the necessary quality control on the data (versus the real time SYNOP message where we find also daily temperature, precipitation and snow).

Dr Charles Fierz, physicist, Research scientist, WSL Institute for Snow and Avalanche Research SLF, Research Unit Snow and Permafrost, Team Winter Sports and Climate, the 12/02/2021

Thanks very much to Rodica for providing up to the point precisions and facts. I fully support and encourage to use the terminology defined in WDMS, that is, snow depth and depth of snowfall. Most important is a clear and generic definition. As for the units, I would strongly advocate to use m only for data exchange. However, both cm and m are SI, the latter being a base unit and 'c' just a SI prefix. In my view it is simply a matter of convenience whether you take measurements in m, cm or even mm (Antarctica). Regarding intervals for reporting depth of snowfall, have a look at the "European Snow Booklet" (https://doi.org/10.16904/envidat.59). Most European countries reporting depth of snowfall do it daily (24h period), only Greece reports every 6 hours (see also https://www.envidat.ch/dataset/european-snow-booklet/resource/d05304f6-6862-4f6c-b4b9-3601201cc824).

Pour la petite histoire/"For history": In North America, avalanche practitioner use to report for different periods as needed for the operation, and the NWS observers too, if I am correct. However, summing up four 6-hour periods of snowfall will not be equivalent to the corresponding 24-hour reading! The disagreement gets worse the shorter the periods you sum up. See also the noteworthy paper by Doesken and Robinson (Doesken, N. J. and Robinson, D. A.: The Challenge of Snow Measurements, in Historical Climate Variability and Impacts in North America, edited by L.-A. Dupigny-Giroux and C. J. Mock, pp. 251–273, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2828-0_15, , 2009.)

In 1954, Snow Depth was termed "Total depth of snow cover" in the first International Classification for Seasonal Snow on the Ground, and Depth of Snowfall "Depth of daily new snowfall". The snow booklet states on p. 48, "Snow depth: The combined total depth at the time of observation of both old and new snow on the ground …" , (Doesken, N. J. and Judson, A.: The snow booklet, Second edition, 1997). Thus I guess this all came about because it was not always clear what depth people were referring to: depth of snow cover or depth of snowfall. In France you use "hauteur total de neige (htn), and in German the Term Totalschneehöhe appears. But is there something like a 'partial' or 'fractional' snow depth?

Denis STUBER the 13/02/2021

Thanks to Charles Fierz for these clarifications, and also to hilight the fact that the sum of small intervalls is not equivalent for the all period (e.g. "summing up four 6-hour periods of snowfall will not be equivalent to the corresponding 24-hour reading").

Just for information, for those who are not "snow specialist", here below the list of hourly parameters and daily parameters in the French Climatological Database (that does not include the snow parameters for snow stations which contain much more parameters about snow) :

image

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

Here the practice at BMKG (Indonesian Met Service) given by Urip HARYOKO the 17/02/2021: 1. Time slot for the daily Maximum Temperature

2. Time slot for the daily Minimum Temperature

3. Time slot for the average of Temperature

4. Time Slot for the daily Precipitation

5. Computation methods for Mean Temperature

Local time for : Western Indonesian Time = UTC + 7 hour Central Indonesian Time = UTC + 8 hour Eastern Indonesian Time = UTC + 9 hour

Station which operates for 24 hours use formula 1
Station which operates for less than 24 hours use formula 2

6. Is your country has already for each station

The Sitting Classification : BMKG has not finished making the sitting classification (exposure measurement) of the meteorlogical station. So far, it has only followed the standards in the WMO Note No.8 document. Currently, the station classification is being carried out. This year is the starting point for BMKG to implement a Quality Management System / ISO certificate, and station classification is one of its activities. Measurement Quality Classification Based on the Measurement Quality Classification, the selected sensor is installed which meets Class A

sebbari commented 3 years ago

Dear Denis and Sergioh,

I would like to thank you for this inspiring discussion. My comments on : image

is that we should not Forget that site classification including for station for instrument and so on
shall be found in OSCAR and we have in each coutry a focal point for this matter.

Including some of these informations in the DAYCLI will not work really in my opinion and there is a risk that if filled the first time it will not be updated after and we may end by having wrong information and conflicted information with what will be in OSCAR.

My proposal is really to have a DAYCLI like the one sent by Denis 19 days ago for CHAMONIX station ID WMO 07469 and include a column for each parameter on the mesurment unit if needed.

For climatological day or let us say time slot for daily parameter mesurment. I really do not see its importance here, because in all cases we will not have a perfect common daily observation around the world due to the diurnal cycle.

To understand what I mean is that for example for forecasting needs we need to have a state of the atmosphere at the same time to run the models and this is reached by making synoptique observations with a reference time which is GMT. So all the stations make the measurments at the same time.

For daily data we CAN NOT have this for three reasons: 1- the diurnal cycle 2- climates are diffrent from place to another 3- we can not Oblige Countries to adopt a reference time for daily data.

For me what is important is to have these informations in Oscar and that's it.

To be pragmatic, if possible, it may be important to include a coulumn with the time of observation of temp min, temp max, snow depth and so on of course, this column when it applies.

I also suggest adding daily wind maximim speed and direction in the DAYCLI.

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

Hi Rachid,

Hope to talk on this subject in few hours in our meeting. Herewith for information for WMO-IM the presentation, introduction for our today talk, on the DAYCLI message. All the best, Denis.

----- Météo-France ----- STUBER DENIS DCSC/POC denis.stuber@meteo.fr Fixe : +33 561078337

De: "Rachid SEBBARI" notifications@github.com À: "wmo-im" BUFR4@noreply.github.com Cc: "Denis Stuber" denis.stuber@meteo.fr, "Mention" mention@noreply.github.com Envoyé: Jeudi 18 Février 2021 11:35:15 Objet: Re: [wmo-im/BUFR4] BUFR sequence for DAYCLI (#51)

Dear Denis and Sergioh,

I would like to thank you for this inspiring discussion. My comments on : [ https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/12167054/108338353-741e1280-71d6-11eb-994f-f3bf8759888d.png ]

is that we should not Forget that site classification including for station for instrument and so on shall be found in OSCAR and we have in each coutry a focal point for this matter.

Including some of these informations in the DAYCLI will not work really in my opinion and there is a risk that if filled the first time it will not be updated after and we may end by having wrong information and conflicted information with what will be in OSCAR.

My proposal is really to have a DAYCLI like the one sent by Denis 19 days ago for CHAMONIX station ID WMO 07469 and include a column for each parameter on the mesurment unit if needed.

For climatological day or let us say time slot for daily parameter mesurment. I really do not see its importance here, because in all cases we will not have a perfect common daily observation around the world due to the diurnal cycle.

To understand what I mean is that for example for forecasting needs we need to have a state of the atmosphere at the same time to run the models and this is reached by making synoptique observations with a reference time which is GMT. So all the stations make the measurments at the same time.

For daily data we CAN NOT have this for three reasons: 1- the diurnal cycle 2- climates are diffrent from place to another 3- we can not Oblige Countries to adopt a reference time for daily data.

For me what is important is to have these informations in Oscar and that's it.

To be pragmatic, if possible, it may be important to include a coulumn with the time of observation of temp min, temp max, snow depth and so on of course, this column when it applies.

I also suggest adding daily wind maximim speed and direction in the DAYCLI.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, [ https://github.com/wmo-im/BUFR4/issues/51#issuecomment-781247903 | view it on GitHub ] , or [ https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALLN7BZOBARF2GN7QKZNSI3S7TUOHANCNFSM4R7FMFXA | unsubscribe ] .

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

Here the practice at LNMC (Libyan National Meteorological Centre) given by Ali Eddenjal the 18/02/2021:

  1. Daily Maximum Temperature: From day D-1 @ 1801 UTC to day D @ 1800 UTC assigned to day D.
  2. Daily Minimum Temperature: From day D-1 @ 1800 UTC to day D @ 1800 UTC, assigned to day D. Note: Both daily extremes are measured using Maximum and Minimum temperature thermometers (in °C).
  3. Daily accumulated precipitation amount (daily rainfall totals) is calculated from 0601 UTC in day D-1 to 0600 UTC in day D. The measured quantity is assigned to day D-1 (in mm).
  4. Daily Mean Temperature: Average of 8 tri-hourly (0000-2100 UTC) observations
jaggh commented 3 years ago

Hi, to know the time interval of daily extremes or accumulations is very relevant to explain inconsistencies when applying quality and homogeneity analysis by comparing different stations in an area.

In Spain, we use a 0-24 time slot for principal and automatic stations, but calculate also the 07-07 to be able to compare the data with secondary stations that only report precipitations and temperatures extreme.

As for the suggestion to report the time of occurrence of, e.g., extreme temperatures, it cannot be established for secondary stations that only have a Six-Bellany thermometer.

jlawrimo commented 3 years ago

Denis, In general I like those definitions, but with some caveats. Regarding the use of Total snow depth - although 'total' may be superfluous it is very helpful to emphasize (particularly for observers including volunteer observers) that it is the total amount of snow on the ground, not just the snow depth of the snow over the past day. The last sentence of Total Snow Depth could be modified to read as follows - The hour at which this datum is reported shall be made in keeping with local climatological observing practices. The reason I removed 'synoptic' and added the phrase regarding climatological practices can be better understood with my comments below regarding the 12/02/2021 discussion points.

In reference to the 12/02/2021 discussion regarding the purpose of DAYCLI. I want to emphasize that the reason we started DAYCLI was not to give people time to quality control their data that was reported in synop. It was to solve the problem that data in Synop messages are not true climate observations. They are typically not made using practices consistent with climate observing practices. I am listing here a number of points that clarify this.

Widespread adoption and consistent reporting of DAYCLI messages each month will help ensure the integrity of the global climate record and will help ensure a full and accurate understanding of climate extremes and the trends and variability in the global climate.

I hope this is helpful for clarifying the purpose of DAYCLI.

Best regards, Jay

On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 7:57 AM DenisStuber notifications@github.com wrote:

Information given by Rodica Nitu and dialogue over the web:

10/02/2021 Following consultations with the snow community of GCW, it is recommended to develop the definitions for the two terms on snow for the DAYCLI message based on the approved definitions included in Chapter 2, Vol II, of the Guide WMO No. 8, and which have been added in the WIGOS Metadata Representation https://codes.wmo.int/wmdr/ObservedVariableTerrestrial (# 629, and #627), and taking into consideration the established practice for the reporting units for Total Snow depth:

Total Snow depth (HS) - the vertical distance from the snow surface to a stated reference level and must be reported in metres (m). In most cases the reference level corresponds to the base surface; on ice sheets it may refer to a depth recorded at some fixed time. Total snow depth (0 13 013) shall be reported in meters (with precision in hundredths of a meter). The synoptic hour at which this datum is reported shall be determined by regional decision.

Depth of snowfall (HN) [to be used instead of Depth of Fresh Snow, as below] - the vertical depth in centimetres of freshly fallen snow that has accumulated on the base surface or on a snow board during a specific period, usually of 24 hours. When reporting HN for observation periods other than for 24 hours, the period must be added in parentheses to the symbol (for example, an 8-hour measurement will be expressed as HN(8h)). The depth of snowfall is reported in centimetres and rounded to the nearest centimetre. As with HS, the perpendicular measurement of snowfall, DN, is related to HN via the slope angle .

Please note that: GCW has compiled a database of known sources of cryospheric terms, available at https://globalcryospherewatch.org/reference/glossary.php GCW acknowledges that BUFR Table 0 13 013 includes the parameter “total snow depth”, while the entry in the WIGOS Metadata Representation is Snow Depth.

11/02/2021 I appreciate the feedback. I’d like to add the following:

  • Technically/scientifically speaking using “total” for snow depth is superfluous, as the measurement is a total distance to the reference surface, by definition. We recognize that historically, the data representation has used “Total snow depth” term. The recent contribution to the WIGOS Metadata representation has strived to be technically correct, hence the term “snow depth” is in OSCAR/Surface (via the WIGOS Metadata task Team led by Jörg)
  • Units: “meters” vs “centimeters” is also steeped in history. We recognized that the practice for reporting in WMO is “meters”. More broadly, the measurement is taken in cm. I think that in the context of BUFR, keeping “meters” is the only option. Will it have to be the same in other data formats? A discussion worth having.
  • depth of snowfall (HN) – at multiple intervals: if included now for the first time, I strongly recommend including different intervals, as per definition.

HN – a complicated discussion. Below are some details, which should be taken into account:

I can’t say how may NMHSs report it at intervals lower than 24h, right now. In 2008, WMO/CIMO published https://library.wmo.int/doc_num.php?explnum_id=9443 . At the time the reporting interval varied from 1 h to days (55 countries responded). I understand that this group focuses on data for climate; in practice, most often, the same observing systems provide data for more than one application. There is great interest (and value) in shorter intervals (e.g. for snow removal contracts are based on accumulation during storms, where the reference is the data from a met service, e.g. Canada); Once the observations are not manual, anything is possible; is it a reliable measurement? a difficult answer. The method of observation & derivation of data for the data transmitted must be clarified (e.g. 24 x 1 h-observations or 1 observation/24 h; especially if rain occurs during the interval. In the SPICE project of WMO ( https://library.wmo.int/doc_num.php?explnum_id=5686) we tried to answer these questions; I’d say that we ended up with more questions than we started with.

Denis STUBER the 12/02/2021 Here below a way forward to discuss :

One solution could be to come back to the objective of the DAYCLI message and figure out what we want to achieve with it. In my understanding, the DAYCLI messsage is not here to replace the work done at national level and the measurements and functionnalities of National Meteorological Services. Otherwise we will need to develop an application with a complex worldwide database and with very different data management processes to include all practices and functionnalities. Do we have the means to embark on this adventure?

The aim of DAYCLI message could be the worldwide sharing of daily values for temperature, precipitation and snow. Those daily values having such measurements : once a day, and, extreme and accumulation over 24 hours. Even with this "simple" objective the task is not easy because climatological day definitions, data quality and methods of calculation come into play. Of course all the other measurements in operation in National Met Services including multiple intervals should continue. This DAYCLI message would concentrate in drawing a daily picture of the world with simple and qualified data. As I said earlier, the fact to send at the end of the month the daily values would allow the National Meteorological Services to apply the necessary quality control on the data (versus the real time SYNOP message where we find also daily temperature, precipitation and snow).

Dr Charles Fierz, physicist, Research scientist, WSL Institute for Snow and Avalanche Research SLF, Research Unit Snow and Permafrost, Team Winter Sports and Climate, the 12/02/2021

Thanks very much to Rodica for providing up to the point precisions and facts. I fully support and encourage to use the terminology defined in WDMS, that is, snow depth and depth of snowfall. Most important is a clear and generic definition. As for the units, I would strongly advocate to use m only for data exchange. However, both cm and m are SI, the latter being a base unit and 'c' just a SI prefix. In my view it is simply a matter of convenience whether you take measurements in m, cm or even mm (Antarctica). Regarding intervals for reporting depth of snowfall, have a look at the "European Snow Booklet" (https://doi.org/10.16904/envidat.59). Most European countries reporting depth of snowfall do it daily (24h period), only Greece reports every 6 hours (see also https://www.envidat.ch/dataset/european-snow-booklet/resource/d05304f6-6862-4f6c-b4b9-3601201cc824 ).

Pour la petite histoire/"For history": In North America, avalanche practitioner use to report for different periods as needed for the operation, and the NWS observers too, if I am correct. However, summing up four 6-hour periods of snowfall will not be equivalent to the corresponding 24-hour reading! The disagreement gets worse the shorter the periods you sum up. See also the noteworthy paper by Doesken and Robinson (Doesken, N. J. and Robinson, D. A.: The Challenge of Snow Measurements, in Historical Climate Variability and Impacts in North America, edited by L.-A. Dupigny-Giroux and C. J. Mock, pp. 251–273, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2828-0_15, , 2009.)

In 1954, Snow Depth was termed "Total depth of snow cover" in the first International Classification for Seasonal Snow on the Ground, and Depth of Snowfall "Depth of daily new snowfall". The snow booklet states on p. 48, "Snow depth: The combined total depth at the time of observation of both old and new snow on the ground …" , (Doesken, N. J. and Judson, A.: The snow booklet, Second edition, 1997). Thus I guess this all came about because it was not always clear what depth people were referring to: depth of snow cover or depth of snowfall. In France you use "hauteur total de neige (htn), and in German the Term Totalschneehöhe appears. But is there something like a 'partial' or 'fractional' snow depth?

Denis STUBER the 13/02/2021

Thanks to Charles Fierz for these clarifications, and also to hilight the fact that the sum of small intervalls is not equivalent for the all period (e.g. "summing up four 6-hour periods of snowfall will not be equivalent to the corresponding 24-hour reading").

Just for information, for those who are not "snow specialist", here below the list of hourly parameters and daily parameters in the French Climatological Database (that does not include the snow parameters for snow stations which contain much more parameters about snow) :

[image: image] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/47636359/107850525-5847f480-6e03-11eb-87c1-1d52301f5521.png

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/wmo-im/BUFR4/issues/51#issuecomment-778615509, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ARYQF7F2BBXY4RRWCUYLHVDS6ZZLXANCNFSM4R7FMFXA .

-- Jay Lawrimore Chief, Dataset Section Climatic Science and Service Division NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) 151 Patton Ave Asheville, NC 28801 828-271-4750 fax: 828-271-4022 Follow NCEI on Facebook and Twitter (@NOAANCEI)

marijanacrepulja commented 3 years ago

I was wondering of using subsets for each day, instead of looping with delayed replication over days in the month. When comes to use of associated filed significance for time slot, I was thinking of using day, followed by time period in days. I have created and attached a sample BUFR message containing above approach. @sergioh-pessoal @DenisStuber please let me know your thoughts. Alternatively we can arrange a meeting to discuss it further if necessary. Many thanks,

dayclim.bufr.gz

Marijana

sergioh-pessoal commented 3 years ago

@DenisStuber, @marijanacrepulja

Marijana, This template we are working on is something new in many ways and that is why we need to take an approach to represent this type of data. I think there are 2 possible general approaches. 1) Loop using delayed replication over days 2) Different subsets for each day. In this case, the Station ID, Year, Month will be the same for each subset and day, from 1 to 31

I think it's great that you're working on this idea.

Please check your file (dayclim.bufr.gz). There must have been a problem placing it on the GIT Hub. I cant opening it properly

We can arrange a meeting for this. Monday at 12UTC would be the best time for me.

Sergio

sergioh-pessoal commented 3 years ago

@marijanacrepulja

I’ve prepared a very simple version of DAYCLI BUFR for testing using subsets for each day and the data from Chadonix station. In this example, the quality flag for each climatological value, Siting classification and the measurement quality Classification have not been included yet to keep this example simple and help to think in issue of time slot

The idea in this one was to use the hour and time period or displacement to indicate the time slot for each variable.

The BUFR file and the decoded BUFR file are attached bellow Chamonix_202012_v2.bufr.gz Chamonix_202012_v2.bufr.txt.gz

Sergio

marijanacrepulja commented 3 years ago

@sergioh-pessoal

Thanks for DAYCLI BUFR files for testing. Meeting at 12UTC today works for me.

Marijana

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

Hi,

If you need me I can be there at 12 UTC. Means 13:00h Toulouse Time (UTC +1). Denis.

----- Météo-France ----- STUBER DENIS DCSC/POC @.*** Fixe : +33 561078337

De: "Marijana Crepulja" @.> À: "wmo-im" @.> Cc: "Denis Stuber" @.>, "Mention" @.> Envoyé: Lundi 15 Mars 2021 10:05:04 Objet: Re: [wmo-im/BUFR4] BUFR sequence for DAYCLI (#51)

[ https://github.com/sergioh-pessoal | @sergioh-pessoal ]

Thanks for DAYCLI BUFR files for testing. Meeting at 12UTC today works for me.

Marijana

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, [ https://github.com/wmo-im/BUFR4/issues/51#issuecomment-799246026 | view it on GitHub ] , or [ https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALLN7BYIFUF4SIJWVGFBVCDTDXEUBANCNFSM4R7FMFXA | unsubscribe ] .

sergioh-pessoal commented 3 years ago

Hi @marijanacrepulja and @DenisStuber I am trying to open a conference call for us at 12 UTC but I am having some problems. Could you open it for me?

jitsukoh commented 3 years ago

@sergioh-pessoal Anna has just sent an invitation to you three. Please use it.

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

Dear Anna,

Thanks for the link on " [ https://github.com/wmo-im/wmo-im.github.io/wiki/Repository-Workflow-Guidance | Repository Workflow Guidance ] ".

Here is the link for the GitHub of the Expert Team on Data Requirements for Climate Service (ET-DRC) : [ https://github.com/ET-DRC | https://github.com/ET-DRC ]

You will find also at this address an attempt to put in place such workflow : [ https://github.com/ET-DRC/WMO-No.1131/projects/1 | https://github.com/ET-DRC/WMO-No.1131/projects/1 ]

We really need assistance on how to put in operational this workflow. We could have a video conference with some people from ET-DRC and yourself after you could analyse our GitHub structure.

ET-DRC raised also the question of having a real WMO GitHub location. So far ET-DRC is using a private GitHub which is limited as per several functions. Do you think we could join a WMO repository ?

See you tomorrow, Denis.

----- Météo-France ----- STUBER DENIS DCSC/POC @.*** Fixe : +33 561078337

De: "Anna Milan" @.> À: "wmo-im" @.> Cc: "Denis Stuber" @.>, "Mention" @.> Envoyé: Lundi 15 Mars 2021 14:17:20 Objet: Re: [wmo-im/BUFR4] BUFR sequence for DAYCLI (#51)

Reopened [ https://github.com/wmo-im/BUFR4/issues/51 | #51 ] .

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, [ https://github.com/wmo-im/BUFR4/issues/51#event-4458644154 | view it on GitHub ] , or [ https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALLN7B2LN6PSUWSGQ4OPIM3TDYCGBANCNFSM4R7FMFXA | unsubscribe ] .

DenisStuber commented 3 years ago

20210316_ET-DRC_TT-TDCF_DAYCLI.pptx Dear all,

Please find a summary on DAYCLI current discussions. Better look the slides from 9 to 13. This document could be seen as a mutual document between TT-TDCF and ET-DRC and be reviewed by the 2 teams. It could also become a material to help us when we need to present the DAYCLI message to others...

See you in a couple of hour, Denis.

----- Météo-France ----- STUBER DENIS DCSC/POC @.*** Fixe : +33 561078337

De: "Jitsuko Hasegawa" @.> À: "wmo-im" @.> Cc: "Denis Stuber" @.>, "Mention" @.> Envoyé: Lundi 15 Mars 2021 12:49:43 Objet: Re: [wmo-im/BUFR4] BUFR sequence for DAYCLI (#51)

[ https://github.com/sergioh-pessoal | @sergioh-pessoal ] Anna has just sent an invitation to you three. Please use it.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, [ https://github.com/wmo-im/BUFR4/issues/51#issuecomment-799356752 | view it on GitHub ] , or [ https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALLN7B576RGGDBISEE6BGEDTDXX5PANCNFSM4R7FMFXA | unsubscribe ] .

marijanacrepulja commented 3 years ago

dayclim.bufr.gz BUFR template structure as discussed at the meeting yesterday. The message is encoded using subsets for each day, instead of looping with delayed replication over days in the month. As for time slots, hour followed by time period in hours is used.