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

Add ice shelf regions #10

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 1, 2016
Merged

Conversation

xylar
Copy link
Collaborator

@xylar xylar commented Jan 31, 2016

Regions covering 100 ice shelves are added. Where ice shelves intersect multiple IMBIE basins, they have been divided into numbered subregions. All features are tagged with the ice-shelf name, the IMBIE basin name, and the IMBIE region name.

Each region covers not just the present-day location of the shelf but also all parts of a given basin that are closer to that shelf than any other shelf in the basin. The regions extend to the continental-shelf break as defined by the -800 m contour. Thus, the regions should be useful as shelves advance or retreat over time.

Regions covering 100 ice shelves are added.  Where ice shelves
intersect multiple IMBIE basins, they have been divided into
numbered subregions.  All features are tagged with the ice-shelf
name, the IMBIE basin name, and the IMBIE region name.

Each region covers not just the present-day location of the shelf
but also all parts of a given basin that are closer to that shelf
than any other shelf.  The regions extend to the continental-shelf
break as defined by the -800 m contour.  Thus, the regions should
be useful as shelves advance or retreat over time.
@xylar
Copy link
Collaborator Author

xylar commented Feb 1, 2016

The ice-shelf regions that cross the antimeridian have been divided into multiple polygons using the fix_features_crossing_antimeridian.py script from #9.

@stephenprice
Copy link
Contributor

Looks great Xylar. I'll try to check this out and merge later today. Thanks for all your work on this (and the new tool as well).

@stephenprice
Copy link
Contributor

@xylar - I spot checked a few of the more standard ones I'm familiar with here and they all look OK to me.

@douglasjacobsen - I'm not sure what the process is for merging these, since we don't really have any obvious way of 'testing' them out. I'm happy to check out a branch and merge the appropriate way, but let me know if this is also a case where we can (horrors!) just hit the green button.

@douglasjacobsen
Copy link
Member

@stephenprice If you're happy with the way they look (you can just plot them in github, or using the plot script) that's good enough. Alternatively you could plot them using the mask creator, and see how well they work.

@stephenprice
Copy link
Contributor

@douglasjacobsen - I checked them out w/ the github plotting script. That's all I'm technically capable of doing right now in terms of testing. If that is adequate, I will merge. If not, I can wait until I have some other means of looking through them and testing them out.

@douglasjacobsen
Copy link
Member

@stephenprice You're free to merge them once you feel confident that they are good enough. So, if you're confident that the plotting you've done so far is good enough, feel free to merge them.

stephenprice added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 1, 2016
@stephenprice stephenprice merged commit e65e346 into MPAS-Dev:master Feb 1, 2016
@xylar xylar deleted the add_ice_shelves branch February 12, 2016 10:01
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants