Re: Reconciling wrf_updraft_helicity and the updraft helicity calculated with UPP/WRF Post Processor

Hi Bill,

I'm not sure you used the correct address for wrfhelp, so I've included them here. Hopefully they can clear up the confusion about PH versus PH+PHB, and I'll be happy to update the documentation then.

--Mary

On Jul 6, 2012, at 12:17 PM, Capehart, William J wrote:

> Hi All
>
> I am working with our weather service office trying to better coordinate
> and synchronize our real-time modeling efforts.
>
> We're running into a slight impasse on updraft helicity with UPP and NCL
> producing notably different outputs.
>
> In reviewing the documentation for wrf_updraft_helicity, I am seeing that
> it is asking in the argument list for perturbation geopotential (in the
> WRF output list, PH) but in the example the respective argument is using
> the perturbation + base state geopotential.
>
> Should I be using only PH or (PH + PHB)?
>
> In either case can the NCL documentation be updated to be less confusing?
>
> Thanks Much
> ================================================================
> Bill Capehart <William.Capehart@sdsmt.edu> Associate Professor
> Department of Atmospheric Sciences
> 213 Mineral Industries Building Skype/EVO: wcapehart
> South Dakota School of Mines and Technology Ph: +1-605-394-1994
> 501 East Saint Joseph Street Fax: +1-605-394-6061
> Rapid City, SD 57701-3995 Mobile: +1-605-484-5692
> =================== http://capehart.sdsmt.edu ==================
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ncl-talk mailing list
> List instructions, subscriber options, unsubscribe:
> http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/ncl-talk

_______________________________________________
ncl-talk mailing list
List instructions, subscriber options, unsubscribe:
http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/ncl-talk
Received on Mon Jul 9 09:47:55 2012