6-01-02 Creation of a new code table RelativeHumidity

[fstuerzl]

Please consult the Guidance and use the following structure for new issues.

Branch

[add branch when created]

Summary and Purpose

Stakeholder(s)

[include emails or handles as relevant]

Proposal

[your specific proposal to resolve the issue - update when decision on proposal is finalized]

Reason

[your reasoning why the proposal resolves the issue]

[amilan17]

@fstuerzl @joergklausen -- who is the stakeholder or originator of this proposal?

[fstuerzl]

@markusfiebig was planning on proposing a a draft for this new table.

[thineshsornalingam]

Greetings from Canada.

I was wondering if I could please get an update on this ticket. A few national operators would like to add relative humidity to their OSCAR/Surface record station and have requested and ETA when relative humidity will be available in the code list.

Thank you Thinesh S.

[joergklausen]

Greetings from Canada.

I was wondering if I could please get an update on this ticket. A few national operators would like to add relative humidity to their OSCAR/Surface record station and have requested and ETA when relative humidity will be available in the code list.

Thank you Thinesh S.

@thineshsornalingam There is a misunderstanding here, presumably. This is not about the observed variable 'Relative humidity', it is about an additional code list on RH to specify other observed variables, specifically for aerosol observations, but perhaps others.

[amilan17]

Gao would like to know if this is about instrument or variable, water or ice? Joerg notes that there are open questions

[gaochen-larc]

This may be a good case for tag. Thinking about a instrument RH tag which has at least two values (e.g., Dry and NotDryEnough) to indicate if the sample were dried under 40% or not. Possibly one may add the third value to denote the instrument RH under 20 or 15%. Is this Ok? @markusfiebig.

[joergklausen]

@markusfiebig Please develop this issue into something more concrete (i.e., prvide summary and purpose). In my understanding, we're discussing a "constraint" (in the I-ADOPT lingo) and the question is whether a controlled vocabulary should exist to specify this constraint. If so, a controlled vocabulary should be proposed, .e.g.

• dry (<40% RH)
• ambient (RH not controlled)

alternatively:

• <40% RH (target)
• 40% - <60% RH (target)
• 60% - 100% RH (target
• RH uncontrolled

If no such controlled vocab is needed, then we should close this issue.

[gaochen-larc]

I consulted with a well-known aerosol measurement expert, Luke Ziemba: <40% RH (target) 40% - 100% RH (target) RH uncontrolled

[joergklausen]

I support @gaochen-larc . @markusfiebig @ferrighi Could you please fill in the proposal and create a branch, so that it can be processed further? Thanks