Average temperature: Difference between revisions

From Cumulus Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
m
→‎Annual NOAA report: add mention of possible missing days - see https://cumulus.hosiene.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=17856#p138447
m (→‎Alternatives: Minor tweaking)
m (→‎Annual NOAA report: add mention of possible missing days - see https://cumulus.hosiene.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=17856#p138447)
The [https://library.wmo.int/doc_num.php?explnum_id=4166 WMO guidlines] say that for a climatic normal over an annual or seasonal period, the mean you quote should be the average of the monthly means you calculated for international exchanged products, but allow "National Meteorological and Hydrological Services [to] weight monthly normals by the number of days in the month when calculating the multimonth normal". In other words, within a nation you can report annual averages calculated using integrated daily means. If you are calculating climate norms for international publication you average the individual months. Put another way, within a nation you can add all the daily average temperature values you have and divide by the number of days (part or full year); for publishing climate norms you add all the monthly average temperatures you have for a past year and divide by 12.
 
For Cumulus users looking at complete ''past years'' the difference between the two approaches just sometimes shows small discrepancies, and those are mainlypartly because of the way Cumulus does its rounding of each daily figure, rather than just rounding final figure. For the ''current year'', (or any past year if you have missing days in that year) especially in Northern Hemisphere Spring, the difference between approaches is seen because February and April have fewer days than January, March, and May, and when you look at a report the current month may have even fewer days. e.g. on 7 March one approach divides by 3, the other by 66 in a non-leap year (31+28+6 completed days, if none missing) leading to discrepancies, but in the same year on 1 April the first approach is still dividing by 3, but the second approach is dividing by 90. The latter shows little discrepancy because 30 (the 90 quoted divided by the 3 quoted) days is a reasonable average length for a month. So for good practical reasons, annual averages calculated from daily averages are good for Cumulus web pages as they are not skewed by missing days nor by incomplete months.
 
From Cumulus ''Version 3.4.4 - Build 3068'' onwards the figures shown at the bottom of the columns in this first table on the annual report shows the '''more accurate annual average calculated from adding all the daily averages and dividing by number of days'''. For Cumulus 1.9.4 (and Cumulus MX up to and including build 3067), the annual averages shown at the bottom of the annual NOAA report do not use these integrated daily means, instead '''the yearly average is calculated by adding all the months and then dividing by the number of months'''.
5,838

edits

Navigation menu