-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 50
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
conventions for azimuth angle for RHI scans #104
Comments
The azimuth is mostly a convention thing and it is probably best to |
That sounds good, thanks Brenda! `
` It seems like adding this logic to RadxConvert would be the best solution for this. Let me know if you want to work on it, or if I should take a look. |
Added @jacquiewitte python code (converted to C++ syntax) to RadxVol. Also, added a parameter and command-line arg to RadxConvert (-combine_rhi) to maintain a constant azimuth and keep the elevation angle increasing. With these changes, RadxConvert generates CfRadial files that HawkEye can use to display the full range of RHI rays. |
@isabels @leavesntwigs |
Using RadxConvert to create cfradial files from Leosphere WLS200s netcdfs, then using HawkEye to plot RHI scans. On all scans, even those that cover a full 180º, HawkEye plots only display the first half of the scan:
This scan covers a full 180º, with the given elevations and azimuths:
In Leosphere files the azimuth switches by 180º when the elevation passes 90º, which I'm guessing is why HawkEye stops plotting the scan just before 90º elevation. So my question is: is there a convention for how azimuth should be represented on a RHI scan that goes past 90º? Is it incorrect for the azimuth to change when the elevation crosses 90º?
I can do more looking into the code myself, but first I need to know if this is a convention thing that should be fixed in the leosphere input to RadxConvert, or if it's a bug in HawkEye.
Parameter file used:
Hawkeye.rhi.params.txt
Link to netcdf plotted: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wvjiTl3CQAkxRc_FXxSOfOxm6lgFw_rq/view?usp=sharing
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: