Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Modify naming and attributes of time variables on history files to be consistent with other CESM components #1693

Open
billsacks opened this issue Mar 29, 2022 · 2 comments · May be fixed by #2052
Assignees
Labels
enhancement new capability or improved behavior of existing capability priority: high High priority to fix/merge soon, e.g., because it is a problem in important configurations

Comments

@billsacks
Copy link
Member

See ESCOMP/CESM#194 and especially the google doc referenced from ESCOMP/CESM#194 (comment)

The proposed changes for CTSM are:

Land current output:

	float time(time) ;
		time:long_name = "time" ;
		time:units = "days since YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS" ;
		time:calendar = "noleap" ;
		time:bounds = "time_bounds" ;
	double time_bounds(time, hist_interval) ;
		time_bounds:long_name = "history time interval endpoints" ;

Land proposed output (Changes made: time changed to type double, 2nd dimension name of time_bounds changed to nbnd to match CAM, added units/calendar attributes to time_bounds array, changed time_bounds@long_name to time interval endpoints):

	double time(time) ;
		time:long_name = "time" ;
		time:units = "days since YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS" ;
		time:calendar = "noleap" ;
		time:bounds = "time_bounds" ;
	double time_bounds(time, nbnd) ;
		time_bounds:long_name = "time interval endpoints" ;
		time_bounds:units = "days since YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS" ;
		time_bounds:calendar = "noleap" ;
@billsacks billsacks added the enhancement new capability or improved behavior of existing capability label Mar 29, 2022
@billsacks billsacks added next this should get some attention in the next week or two. Normally each Thursday SE meeting. priority: high High priority to fix/merge soon, e.g., because it is a problem in important configurations labels Mar 29, 2022
@billsacks billsacks moved this from Needs Prioritization to Todo ~ months in CESM: infrastructure / cross-component SE priorities Mar 29, 2022
@billsacks billsacks removed the next this should get some attention in the next week or two. Normally each Thursday SE meeting. label Mar 31, 2022
@slevis-lmwg
Copy link
Contributor

I'm tentatively assigning this issue to @samsrabin based on this morning's conversation. Assignment may change after we meet with @billsacks

@ekluzek
Copy link
Collaborator

ekluzek commented Jun 16, 2023

To be complete the calendar attribute should also be added to: mcdate, mcsec, mdcur, mscur.

@olyson olyson moved this from Todo to In Progress in CTSM tasks for supporting coupled simulations Jul 10, 2023
@samsrabin samsrabin added the next this should get some attention in the next week or two. Normally each Thursday SE meeting. label Jul 13, 2023
@samsrabin samsrabin removed the next this should get some attention in the next week or two. Normally each Thursday SE meeting. label Jul 13, 2023
@billsacks billsacks moved this from Todo ~ months to In Progress in CESM: infrastructure / cross-component SE priorities Dec 7, 2023
@ekluzek ekluzek moved this to In progress in CTSM: High priority Aug 15, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement new capability or improved behavior of existing capability priority: high High priority to fix/merge soon, e.g., because it is a problem in important configurations
Projects
Status: In progress
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants