New Table D sequence for reporting observations from ocean gliders #16
Comments
|
I spotted a couple of typos - the FXY value for "Direction of sea-surface current" should be 0-22-005 (not 0-02-169), and the FXY value for "Speed of sea-surface current" should be 0-22-032 (not 0-22-031). |
|
Thanks, it's hopefully correct now. |
New Table D sequence for reporting observations from ocean gliders #16 New Table B Entries Class 41: BUFR / CREX Oceanographic / biogeochemical parameters
New Table D sequence for reporting observations from ocean gliders #16 Class 42: BUFR / CREX Oceanographic Elements
New Table D sequence for reporting observations from ocean gliders #16 New Table D Entries Category 15: Oceanographic report sequences
New Table D sequence for reporting observations from ocean gliders #16 0-08-080 Qualifier for GTSPP quality flag
|
@DavidBerryNOC I have created a branch for this issue. Could you please check it? BTW, when it comes to adding table B entries/class 41/42, please provide the information of CREX unit/scale/width. Many thanks. |
Revision of proposal as part of validationTable B entries
Table D entries
Revised proposalNew Table B EntriesClass 41: BUFR / CREX Oceanographic / biogeochemical parameters
Class 42: BUFR / CREX Oceanographic Elements
New Table D EntriesCategory 15: Oceanographic report sequences
Additions to code tables0-08-080
New entries (25 - 31) indicated by *. |
@chenxiaoxia2019 revised versions of tables attached - substantial changes made to Table D due to errors in branch. |
|
@chenxiaoxia2019 I've added CREX width scale below - please let me know it you need further info. Revision of proposal as part of validationFurther modifications to include CREX scale / width plus increase of width for dissolved oxygen using operators. Test files and revised tables attached. Table B entries
Table D entries
Revised proposalNew Table B EntriesClass 41: BUFR / CREX Oceanographic / biogeochemical parameters
Class 42: BUFR / CREX Oceanographic Elements
New Table D EntriesCategory 15: Oceanographic report sequences
Additions to code tables0-08-080
New entries (25 - 31) indicated by *. |
david-i-berry
added
samples provided
help wanted
|
I've just added the help wanted - if anyone is able to decode the samples to help the validation that would be appreciated. Please note that the tables in the branch are incorrect and that tables attached to the the previous comment (#16 (comment)) need to be used. |
@chenxiaoxia2019 Please see comments above in reference to the CREX unit/scale/width, units are the same as for BUFR. I've also updated my versions of the tables from the branch (attached above) - what would be the best way to update these in the branch? Should I do a pull request or will that be handled by the secretariat? |
|
@DavidBerryNOC Hi, David, I will update all the revisions in the branch. I will get you updated when I finish it. |
|
The new updates to the branch remain to be checked, plus there is a further change required. Noting significant number of changes to proposal, propose delaying to FT-2021-01 to allow time for branch to be checked and revised width and scale of new B descriptors to be checked by ocean community. |
|
Please colleague, consider this as a clarification of what COULD be the reduced Table D from the perspective of someone discovering BUFR format but "expert" in gliders. (** mean out of the reduced table D). |
|
I think there is a strategic decision to be made here before any technical solution. I understand and agree with the urge to have this template included in the next round. The question is how valuable is to put effort at this moment to add more variables beyond the CTD plus the vertically averaged current? There is no reason to put time into more variables if it's not believed to be valuable at this moment. @vturpin and @kbailey-noaa might be better suited to decide that. A few comments that might help (please, don't be shy to correct me if there is any information wrong here):
I'm not sure how much I'm actually helping here, so I'll step back and get out of your way. @david-i-berry and @amilan17 , if you have the time, I created some sample datasets and would be very much interested in learning if my binaries have a consistent structure, or if I done any logical mistake. If you have the time for that, it would be probably better done outside this issue to avoid confusion. |
|
The priority is to turn this BUFR format operational by May2023. I think this template, even if only for CTD and current at the moment, give us a nice framework to work with in the future. It will not impact data flow much, but it make an important difference on the long term (I think). It will give us the capacity to evolve independantly from other format. I agree that CHLA and O2 can be mature for some groups and usefull for some applications, eventhough I understood that from last Argo Data Management Team meeting, the risk related to push imature data on GTS is to be taken seriously as it brings discredit on the program itself (I discovered that aspect during the meeting two weeks ago). I was not aware of RT transmission of current at depth. Great ! Let's keep it in the format as it is "pretty strait forward". If we can define a format for T, S, current (average and at depth), CHLA and O2, in time, I'll be more than happy. If not, then we should stick to T, S, Current. Keeping in mind the "Perferct is the enemy of good". Thanks @castelao for providing the data sets for validation. That's great. |
|
Based on the above comments I've simplified the template to the proposal below, keeping only the CTD elements. In the next period I would then recommend developing the additional sequences to add in the ChlA, O2, PAR etc. It should then be possible to use these additional sequences with the Argo data. Revised proposalNew Table B EntriesClass 42: BUFR / CREX Oceanographic Elements
New Table D EntriesCategory 15: Oceanographic report sequences
Additions to code tables0-08-080
New entries (25 - 31) indicated by *. Summary of latest changesSimplification following above discussion to only include CTD measurements in first version of the profile. |
|
If the above is acceptable hopefully we can get the validation completed by Christmas. |
|
I'm just looking at the EGO NetCDF format (https://repository.oceanbestpractices.org/bitstream/handle/11329/1253/71648.pdf). In this there are 7 different glider phases listed, in BUFR we only have 3 possible. Will this be an issue? EGO NetCDF BUFR |
|
What are the phase in BUFR ?
However, I don't think it is an issue. Only the corresponding phase can be used and the rest ignored. |
|
Hopefully final version: Revised proposalNew Table B EntriesClass 42: BUFR / CREX Oceanographic Elements
New Table D EntriesCategory 15: Oceanographic report sequences
Additions to code tables0-08-080
New entries (25 - 31) indicated by *. Summary of latest changes
Test data (json) and encoded (BUFR) attached, code to follow. The test data have been extracted from https://www.bodc.ac.uk/data/bodc_database/gliders/ and the AlterEco2 deployment 496 of Melonhead. A straight conversion for salinity from 0/00 to psu was made as salinity in BUFR is in 0/00 whilst that in the test file in psu. This needs to be checked. |
|
Happy new year, would any of you (@vturpin @castelao @sebvi @marianmajan-ibl @marijanacrepulja @SibylleK ) be able to help with the validation of the data in the last post above? I've used the eccodes python library for encoding. |
|
Final modification: Common code table C-13 Add Data category : 31 Oceanographic data |
|
https://github.com/wmo-im/CCT/wiki/Teleconference-10.01.2023 notes: @david-i-berry updated the team on the hopefully final proposal; @david-i-berry will add issue to CCT repo on new C-13 value, update issue summary with test data file and update branches. @marijanacrepulja and @SibylleK will validate the sample data; |
|
Here the output of the DWD BUFR software using the BUFR tables of the branch 16-new-table-d-sequence-for-reporting-observations-from-ocean-gliders: Apart from the representation of the scaled values, the values are the same as in the melonhead.json file. By the way, the accuracy of the water pressure is 10 hPa (i.e. 0,1 decibar) and decimeter of the depth below sea/water surface. Is this sufficient? |
|
Sorry, there may be spurious precision in the json file due to dumping from the netcdf to json. Otherwise the pressures and depths agree with each other and are in the expected range. Numerical precision of 10 hPa or 0.1m should be sufficient. |
|
@amilan17 I did cross-check values from the DWD output provided by @SibylleK. The decoded values are the same. I believe we can finalise validation. |
|
@marijanacrepulja @SibylleK thanks! |
amilan17
moved this from Validated
to Ready for FT Approval Procedure
in BUFR4 Amendments
…ting-observations-from-ocean-gliders #16 Update with new glider sequence, addition of new oceanographic element and new code table entries for GTSPP quality flag.
|
Sorry to ask this here (maybe again), but I wonder when is the next "FT approuval procedure". I've been asked by NOAA partners about the release of the updated WMO Manual on Codes. |
|
@vturpin This proposal and others are currently available for review by National Focal Points until April 28. So far, we've received no comments, so I expect that it will be accepted. The intended implementation date for exchange of data using these new sequences is 31 May 2023. The WMO approval and publication of the machine-readable codes may be available before then. I hope this helps. |
|
@amilan17 I just check the Vol 1.2 of manual of code and I still don't see the mention of the sequence dedicated to glider 3.15.012. Any idea when this will be published ? Also, you mention the "WMO approval and publication of the machine redable code" is this available ? And where ? Finally I struggle finding the place, apart from this issue, where I can see a the version of the sequence that has been accepted. I would like to guide some users to a more "official" documentation as they start to implement the BUFR template but I feel lost at the moment. Thanks for your help Anna |
|
@vturpin They will be included in the next publication of the Manual on Codes, which is being prepared for publication right now but I don't know when it will be finalized and available from the WMO library. Until then you can refer to this provisional copy: https://wmoomm.sharepoint.com/:b:/s/wmocpdb/EW-YM8uJZlRJpe0WPrlyVGEB6Ll_OAwZuVlW_CUJiWpJ7Q?e=Aa1Dnj |
Authors
Summary and purpose
The Ocean Gliders Data Management Task Team (OGDMTT) proposes a new BUFR sequence to report the full suite of glider observations along a trajectory profile.
Action proposed
The team is kindly asked to review and approve the contents for inclusion within the next update to the WMO Manual on Codes.
Discussions
Ocean glider data is currently submitted to the GTS using the Argo BUFR sequence (3-15-003) but this is not ideal. For example, the Argo sequence does not allow the along track positions to be reported as part of the trajectory profile and a number of parameters are missing. This new sequence seeks to address those deficiencies.
Detailed proposal (updated 10/01/2023)
New Table B Entries
Class 42: BUFR / CREX Oceanographic Elements
New Table D Entries
Category 15: Oceanographic report sequences
new sequence for Ocean glider trajectory profile
Additions to code tables
0-08-080
Qualifier for GTSPP quality flag
New entries (25 - 31) indicated by *.
See also wmo-im/CCT#122.
Test data
test-data.zip
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: