Try to convert the naming standard of ERA5 to CMIP

[rhaegar325]

Recently we try to use EAR5 data as our observational dataset to do some confrontation with our own model results. But I found that the way ERA5 used to name there variables is different than what ilamb using now(this is the ERA5 intro: https://confluence.ecmwf.int/display/CKB/ERA5%3A+data+documentation). I just what to ask if anyone have the experience to use ERA5 data or know how to convert the naming standard of ERA%5 to what we using now. Thanks

[rbeucher]

I will be interested to know if someone ran confrontations against ERA5.
Is there a need for an ERA5 confrontation class?
@nocollier ?

[nocollier]

I am not sure how this thread escaped my notice, my apologies. I am not great at keeping up with all these locations where issues can be raised.

ILAMB does not really care about naming standards. We try to follow them, but the software does not care. If the files that ERA5 provides are otherwise ILAMB-compliant, then you could just add a alternate_vars to the configure file, see this example.

However, if more reformatting is required, then you might as well rename the variable too. We do compare against the relative humidity output from ERA5, see here. It appears someone else encoded that dataset, but if you look in the data information tab, you can see a link. I am not sure why we have that but not other variables.

I realize you may have now worked passed all this, but if you think we should be comparing to more of the ERA5 output, we can raise the issue on a future development call.