Opened 6 years ago
Closed 6 years ago
#185 closed Defect (duplicate)
MQUASILAG in backward mode
Reported by: | mdmulder | Owned by: | |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | |
Component: | FP other | Version: | FLEXPART 10.0 |
Keywords: | Cc: |
Description
Dear all,
Anyone interested in implementing the MQUASILAG in backward mode?
Preferably in FP v9.02, which I currently use. But if there is a reason to rather do it already in v10 its also fine, I can wait for it.
I read that some people think that the option in forward mode is not properly implemented. So I think this can be dealt with at the same time.
(Im not sure yet if there is some money for this from the project, but at least I can offer co-authorship.)
Thanks!
Change History (4)
comment:1 Changed 6 years ago by pesei
comment:2 Changed 6 years ago by pesei
And let's also keep in mind ticket:122 (maybe close this one as duplicate and have all in #122?)
comment:3 Changed 6 years ago by mdmulder
Hi Petra,
thank you for replying. For the project, we found a way to solve it in the post-processing and we dont necessarily need the labelling now. With my former colleagues in Brno we use it for source-receptor studies.
With "not properly implemented" I probably meant #122, sorry for not citing it. I agree that my ticket duplicates yours, so I will soon remove it.
Thank you,
Mariëlle
comment:4 Changed 6 years ago by admin
- Resolution set to duplicate
- Status changed from new to closed
Hi M., it seems the v10 developers are not so interested ...
Why do you want this in bwd mode - if we use it with domain-filling runs, fwd or bwd will give the same information. Are there non-domain-filling applications?
And what is the knowledge about "not properly implemented"? Many years ago, using A. Stohl's 4-yr global data set, I noticed some minor issues in the resulting data which were probably produced with the first version of this. I could dig that out again ...