Bugfix/gnssro refmetoffice geom2geop #75
Open
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
Add geopotential height conversion to GNSSRO RefMetOffice forward operator
The RefMetOffice GNSSRO forward operator was previous reading geometric height from the MetaData/height variable, but treating it as a geopotential height when comparing to model data. This resulted in a significant bias, especially in the upper atmosphere, when compared to the RefNCEP FO.
This code adds an explicit conversion from geometric to geopotential height, using the same function used by RefNCEP.
Issue(s) addressed
No issue number has been created, but I have conferred personally with Neill Bowler, original author of this forward operator.
Dependencies
None
Impact
None
Checklist
A note on my unit tests.
I ran the ufo unit tests successfully in the skylab-v8 environment, where I tested the scientific validity of these changes. I also ran all the ufo unit tests in the latest develop environment before and after making my changes. The unit tests had some errors. From the error messages, I believe this is primarily because I don't have the most up-to-date unit test data files. However, the errors in unit tests were identical before and after my code changes. The ufo_coding_norms test passed in both cases.