# $Id: congen_input.txt,v 1.3 2004/08/16 17:52:15 flaterco Exp $ # Congen input to generate constituents for harmonics. # Please use Congen version 1.4.7 or later. # # Format of input: # For basic constituents: # name Basic T s h p p1 c xi v vp dvpp Q R f# # For compound constituents (trailing zeroes are optional): # name Compound O1 K1 P1 M2 S2 N2 L2 K2 Q1 NU2 S1 M1-DUTCH LDA2 # For comment lines: # # blah blah blah # For approximated Doodson constituents: # name Doodson T s h p p1 c numsatellites # ... followed by IOS style satellite records ... # # Constituent collisions # ---------------------- # # The Canadian and NOS systems have many subtle differences. Wallner # gives the following recipe for converting Canadian data to the NOS # system. # # NOS NOS Can. Modification of Canadian Constants # Name No. Name __________________________________ # SA 22 SA Subtract 77.1° from the phase. # MF 24 MF Differences significant but not correctable. # M1 18 NO1 Multiply amplitude of NO1 by 0.701. # S1 17 S1 Add 154.3° to the phase, multiply amplitude by 0.699. # OO1 15 OO1 Differences moderate but not correctable. # R2 28 R2 Subtract 5.1° from the phase, multiply amplitude by 1.233. # 2MK3 34 MO3 No modifications. Amplitude 0.9 to 1.14, phase ±4.2°. # # M1 versus NO1 is moot, as is 2MK3 versus MO3. I've added # constituents SA-IOS, MF-IOS, S1-IOS, OO1-IOS, and R2-IOS to # approximate the others. S1, SA, and R2 are adjusted as above in # Canadian data via Wallner but not via LaPointe. It's hard to say # what data sources other than Canada might need the IOS constituents. # # MNS2 and EPS2 are nearly indistinguishable. # KJ2 and ETA2 are nearly indistinguishable. # MP1 and TAU1 are different in eq args and node factors. # KP1 is significantly different from PHI1. # RP1 and PSI1 differ by a 180 degree shift. # TK1 and PI1 are different in eq args and node factors. # KQ1 and UPS1 might ought to be indistinguishable, but lacking a # Darwin style formula for UPS1, it's hard to tell if it's the # Doodson approximation causing UPS1 to bounce around or if they # are meant to have slightly different eq args and node factors. # M1 and NO1 are different because M1 has a curse on it (see below). # BET1 is nearly indistinguishable from an unused constituent in SP 98 # Table 2 (A19). # THE1 and LambdaO1 differ by a 180 degree shift. # # Your mileage may vary. The glossary of SP 98 asserts that KP1 and # PHI1 are the same, that RP1 and PSI1 are the same, that TK1 and # PI1 are the same, and that THE1 and LambdaO1 are the same. # # Aliases and equivalences # ------------------------ # # 3MSN10 is an alias for 3MNS10. # 4MSN12 is an alias for 4MNS12. # LAM2 and LABDA2 are aliases for LDA2. # These have all been replaced by the latter names. # # H1 is an alias for ALP2; H2 is an alias for BET2. We use H1 and H2 # here because that is what appears in the present batch of data. # # The NOS MSF is an alias for SM; see below. We use the name MSF. # # Typographically, NU and V are interchangeable. # # Lots of aliases (not to mention lots of cases where a given # constituent name is ambiguous) can be found in the IHO constituent # list that is currently available at # http://www.iho.shom.fr/COMMITTEES/TC/Constituents.pdf (it will be # replicated in the congen and harmbase2 distributions shortly). If # two constituents have the same XDO (Extended Doodson Number), then # they are identical. If not, then they are different. # # Confusingly, the IHO list associates both MQ3 and NO3 with two # different Doodson codes having all the same speeds: # # MQ3 42.382 765 3 356 554 C XZA ZZY # NO3 42.382 765 3 356 554 C XZA ZZY # MQ3 42.382 765 3 356 555 C XZA ZZZ # NO3 42.382 765 3 356 555 C XZA ZZZ # # Deriving them according to the harmonic method used in the U.S. gives # completely identical results for M2+Q1 or N2+O1. # # M1 / NO1 # -------- # # NOS node factors for M1 contain a historical error that make them about # 50% greater than they should be. M1 amplitudes are correspondingly # smaller to compensate. # # M1 has two formulas in SP 98 Table 2. The first yields the correct # speed for the constituent, while the second yields the correct # equilibrium arguments (SP 98 p. 42). The correct thing to do *here* # is to use the second formula since congen automatically compensates # the speed when the Q variable gets a nonzero multiplier. # M1 Basic 1 -1 1 0 0 -90 1 -1 0 0 1 0 206 # Speed = 14.4966939 # # Wallner writes: # # In SP98, "Manual of Harmonic Analysis and Prediction of Tides" two # approaches are given for M1, which is a combination of two terms # in Darwin's theory, A16 and A23. (Why wasn't A71 included in the # combination? It is labelled (M1) in Table 2, its speed is half # that of M2 and its coefficient is larger than that of A16 or # A23!!) # # V0 for the first is T -s +h +p -90° and u is -nu -Qu. # V0 for the second is T -s +h -90° and u is xi -nu +Q. # # The terms Qu and Q are such that the equilibrium arguments at the # start of the prediction interval are the same but the variable p # is absorbed in Q in the second method and held fixed for the # interval. Not only are there two approaches, alternate formulas # are given for some equations in which some elements are replaced # by their mean values. The tables in SP98 use these approximations. # # Canada uses NO1 = N2 - O1. They don't use a constituent named M1. # # Regarding Japan's M1, Wallner wrote (1997): # The text with the Japanese constituents I got a little over two # year ago gives the argument of M1 as T - s + h - 90 as in the # second NOS definition. The node factor f and phase u are # defined by: # f cos(u) = 2 * cos(p) + 0.4 cos(p-N) # f sin(u) = sin(p) + 0.2 sin(p-N) # This gives essentially the NOS values. # # Upon further review in year 2000, Wallner wrote: # The Japanese u and f are reasonably close to the second SP98 # formulation. The Japanese constituent phases could be "corrected" # to work with first formulation in TIDES by subtracting p, but # since this is a variable that's not much help. Considering it a # new constituent, or a different version of M1, would work # better. The German M1 has the right speed, half that of M2, but # I'm not sure what u and f are for it. The IHO data set has both # M1 and NO1, but again I'm not sure what their M1 is. The French M1 # appears to be NO1 exactly. The Mexican data I have include another # undefined M1. # # Regarding Horn's publications, which have M1 = A71 but also NO1, # Casement wrote: # I can't agree with his notation here. What he calls NO1 is a # lunisolar tide and would be better called M1 - as it is by other # authors. His M1 is in fact a shallow-water tide (= M3 - M2 + # 180°) and would be better called MM1. # # The Dutch define the following constituents: # M1 = SP98 term M1 formula #1 (I have called this M1-DUTCH) # M1A = SP98 term A23 # M1B = SP98 term A16 # M1C = SP98 term A71 # M1D = SP98 term M1 formula #2 # M1A, M1B, and M1D are not used in the data I have received. M1C is. # M1-DUTCH is used indirectly in the building of M7 (complete with # exaggerated node factors). The IOS formulation of M7 is 3.5 * M2! # # In summary, M1 is a minor constituent that doesn't deserve to be # such an inconvenience. Until someone complains, I am just going to # use the NOS M1 for all data containing a constituent named M1 and # hope for the best. Future producers of harmonic constants are # advised to abolish M1 and just use NO1. # # Other Problems # -------------- # # NOTE: Like IOS, Casement's breakdowns of constituents use inverted # phases for the constant angles relative to SP98. # # For OQ2, Horn uses O1 + Q1: # OQ2 Compound 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 # OQ2 Basic 2 -5 2 1 0 180 etc. # but Canada uses a different formulation. # Wallner wrote (in 1997): # First, a correction to the former correction of OQ2. The TIDES # constituent assumed that this was compound tide O1+Q1 which is not # correct. The Canadian definition should be used. The Canadian # node argument and factor are difficult to convert to the TIDES # system and are set to 0 and 1. The error should be no more than # about 20% of the constituent value. # # The Dutch use OQ2 = O1 + Q1. I've called this OQ2-HORN. # # The MSF used by NOS is not derived using the formula in Table 2 but # is instead calculated as a compound constituent (SP 98 p. 48). This # causes u to be nonzero. Casement writes: # The NOS "MSf" is really SM0, a shallow-water tide = S2 - M2. It # almost certainly does have a greater amplitude than the lunisolar # tide of the same frequency. # This suggests that non-U.S. data might be using the "real" MSF. # # All Doodson constituents are approximate (we throw out the latitude- # dependent bits). # # Mexican data contain A7 and LDA1. Wallner writes: # The data set in the Anales del Instituto d Geofisica, v14 pp45-69 # (1969) give 47 constituents for 23 stations. There is no LDA1 but # both A4 and A7 are included. These are presumably are those terms # in Table 2 of SP98, which is one of the references in the # article. My marginalia say A4 = MsM and A7 = Mtm. # My guess would be that LDA1 = LambdaO1, but most data sets having LDA1 # also have THE1, which would cancel it out (they are nearly identical # except for a 180 degree shift). So at this point I'm just stripping # LDA1 from the data. # # Problems with old harmonics.canadian and harmonics.japan # -------------------------------------------------------- # # harmonics.canadian was built by Jean-Pierre LaPointe at a time when # all this was still voodoo to me. harmonics.japan was mostly copied # from harmonics.canadian by Toru Suzuki. By the time I discovered # some weird things that I needed to ask about, Jean-Pierre had # dropped off the face of the Earth. # # The following features are not preserved in harmonics.world. # # Jean-Pierre used the NOS definitions for S1, SA, and R2 without making # the adjustments mentioned above. I've redirected SA, MF, S1, OO1, and # R2 to the IOS versions for harmonics.canadian and assumed that the NOS # versions were correct for harmonics.japan. # # NO1 in harmonics.canadian was N2 - O1, but with node factors from NOS M1. # NO1 Basic 1 -1 1 1 0 -90 0 -1 0 0 0 0 206 # I've replaced this by the normal NO1 formulation. # # harmonics.canadian used MP1 for TAU1. I've replaced it with the # Doodson TAU1 formulation and hope it's better that way. # # M1 in harmonics.japan was same as NO1 in harmonics.canadian except # speed was changed to 14.4920521. I've replaced this by the NOS M1. # # Both files used an OP2 whose argument was shifted by 180 degrees from # O1 + P1. I've used a normal OP2. # # Both files used an OQ2 that was O1 + Q1 with a 180 degree shift. # I've replaced this with the Canadian (and IOS) form OQ2. # # Both files used an MKS2 that matched M2 + K2 - S2 in speed only. The # derivation of it remains a mystery. # # ---------------------------------------------------------------------- # # The historical 37 NOS constituents. # J1 Basic 1 1 1 -1 0 -90 0 -1 0 0 0 0 76 K1 Compound 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 K2 Compound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 L2 Compound 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 M1 Basic 1 -1 1 0 0 -90 1 -1 0 0 1 0 206 M2 Compound 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 M3 Basic 3 -3 3 0 0 0 3 -3 0 0 0 0 149 M4 Compound 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 M6 Compound 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 M8 Compound 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 N2 Compound 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2N2 Basic 2 -4 2 2 0 0 2 -2 0 0 0 0 78 O1 Compound 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OO1 Basic 1 2 1 0 0 -90 -2 -1 0 0 0 0 77 P1 Compound 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Q1 Compound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2Q1 Basic 1 -4 1 2 0 90 2 -1 0 0 0 0 75 R2 Basic 2 0 1 0 -1 180 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 S1 Basic 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 S2 Compound 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 S4 Compound 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 S6 Compound 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 T2 Basic 2 0 -1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 LDA2 Basic 2 -1 0 1 0 180 2 -2 0 0 0 0 78 MU2 Basic 2 -4 4 0 0 0 2 -2 0 0 0 0 78 NU2 Basic 2 -3 4 -1 0 0 2 -2 0 0 0 0 78 RHO1 Basic 1 -3 3 -1 0 90 2 -1 0 0 0 0 75 MK3 Compound 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 2MK3 Compound 0 -1 0 2 0 0 0 0 MN4 Compound 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 MS4 Compound 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2SM2 Compound 0 0 0 -1 2 0 0 0 MF Basic 0 2 0 0 0 0 -2 0 0 0 0 0 74 MSF Compound 0 0 0 -1 1 0 0 0 MM Basic 0 1 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 73 SA Basic 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 SSA Basic 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 # # IOS clashes with NOS # SA-IOS Doodson 0 0 1 0 -1 0 0 MF-IOS Doodson 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 S1-IOS Doodson 1 0 0 0 1 -90 2 0 0 -2 .0 0.3534 0 1 0 .50 0.0264 OO1-IOS Doodson 1 2 1 0 0 -90 8 -2 -1 0 .50 0.0037 -2 0 0 .0 0.1496 -2 1 0 .0 0.0296 -1 0 0 .25 0.0240R1 -1 1 0 .25 0.0099R1 0 1 0 .0 0.6398 0 2 0 .0 0.1342 0 3 0 .0 0.0086 R2-IOS Doodson 2 0 1 0 -1 180 2 0 0 2 .50 0.2535 0 1 2 .0 0.0141 # # Unusual constituents used in Mexican data # A7 Basic 0 3 0 -1 0 0 -2 0 0 0 0 0 74 # I guessed LambdaO1 (LDA2 - O1), which makes no sense in context # LDA1 Compound -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 # # All other constituents added during the original Harmonic Convergence. # 2MK5 Compound 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 2MK6 Compound 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 2MN2 Compound 0 0 0 2 0 -1 0 0 2MN6 Compound 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2MS6 Compound 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 2NM6 Compound 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 2SK5 Compound 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 2SM6 Compound 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 3MK7 Compound 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 3MN8 Compound 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 3MS2 Compound 0 0 0 3 -2 0 0 0 3MS4 Compound 0 0 0 3 -1 0 0 0 3MS8 Compound 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 ALP1 Doodson 1 -5 3 1 0 90 2 -1 0 0 .75 0.0360R1 0 -1 0 .00 0.1906 BET1 Doodson 1 -1 -1 1 0 -90 1 0 -1 0 .00 0.2266 CHI1 Basic 1 -1 3 -1 0 -90 0 -1 0 0 0 0 76 H1 Doodson 2 -2 1 0 1 180 2 0 -1 0 .50 0.0224 1 0 -1 .50 0.0447 H2 Doodson 2 -2 3 0 -1 0 1 0 -1 0 .50 0.0217 KJ2 Basic 2 1 2 -1 0 0 0 -2 0 0 0 0 79 ETA2 Doodson 2 1 2 -1 0 0 7 0 -1 0 .50 0.0187 0 1 0 .0 0.4355 0 2 0 .0 0.0467 1 0 0 .75 0.0747R2 1 1 0 .75 0.0482R2 1 2 0 .75 0.0093R2 2 0 0 .50 0.0078 KQ1 Basic 1 3 1 -1 0 -90 -2 -1 0 0 0 0 77 UPS1 Doodson 1 3 1 -1 0 -90 5 -2 0 0 .00 0.0611 0 1 0 .00 0.6399 0 2 0 .00 0.1318 1 0 0 .25 0.0289R1 1 1 0 .25 0.0257R1 M10 Compound 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 M12 Compound 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 MK4 Compound 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 MKS2 Compound 0 0 0 1 -1 0 0 1 MNS2 Compound 0 0 0 1 -1 1 0 0 EPS2 Doodson 2 -5 4 1 0 0 3 -1 -1 0 .25 0.0075R2 -1 0 0 .25 0.0402R2 0 -1 0 .50 0.0373 MO3 Compound 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 MP1 Basic 1 -2 3 0 0 -90 0 -1 0 0 0 0 76 TAU1 Doodson 1 -2 3 0 0 -90 5 -2 0 0 .0 0.0446 -1 0 0 .25 0.0426R1 0 -1 0 .50 0.0284 0 1 0 .50 0.2170 0 2 0 .50 0.0142 MPS2 Compound 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 MSK6 Compound 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 MSM Basic 0 1 -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 73 MSN2 Compound 0 0 0 1 1 -1 0 0 MSN6 Compound 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 NLK2 Compound 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 -1 NO1 Compound -1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 OP2 Compound 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 OQ2 Doodson 2 -5 2 3 0 0 2 -1 0 0 .25 0.1042R2 0 -1 0 .50 0.0386 PHI1 Basic 1 0 3 0 0 -90 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 KP1 Compound 0 0 -1 0 0 0 0 1 PI1 Basic 1 0 -2 0 1 90 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 TK1 Basic 1 0 -2 0 1 90 0 0 1 0 0 0 227 PSI1 Basic 1 0 2 0 -1 -90 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 RP1 Basic 1 0 2 0 -1 90 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 S3 Basic 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 SIG1 Basic 1 -4 3 0 0 90 2 -1 0 0 0 0 75 SK3 Compound 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 SK4 Compound 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 SN4 Compound 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 SNK6 Compound 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 SO1 Basic 1 2 -1 0 0 -90 0 -1 0 0 0 0 76 SO3 Compound 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 THE1 Basic 1 1 -1 1 0 -90 0 -1 0 0 0 0 76 # # Remaining constituents merged from harmonics.anchorage 2001-01 # 2PO1 Compound -1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2NS2 Compound 0 0 0 0 -1 2 0 0 MLN2S2 Compound 0 0 0 1 -2 1 1 0 2ML2S2 Compound 0 0 0 2 -2 0 1 0 SKM2 Compound 0 0 0 -1 1 0 0 1 2MS2K2 Compound 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 -2 MKL2S2 Compound 0 0 0 1 -2 0 1 1 M2(KS)2 Compound 0 0 0 1 -2 0 0 2 2SN(MK)2 Compound 0 0 0 -1 2 1 0 -1 2KM(SN)2 Compound 0 0 0 1 -1 -1 0 2 NO3 Compound 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2MLS4 Compound 0 0 0 2 -1 0 1 0 ML4 Compound 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 N4 Compound 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 SL4 Compound 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 MNO5 Compound 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 2MO5 Compound 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 MSK5 Compound 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 3KM5 Compound 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 2MP5 Compound 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 3MP5 Compound 0 0 -1 3 0 0 0 0 MNK5 Compound 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 2NMLS6 Compound 0 0 0 1 -1 2 1 0 MSL6 Compound 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2ML6 Compound 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 2MNLS6 Compound 0 0 0 2 -1 1 1 0 3MLS6 Compound 0 0 0 3 -1 0 1 0 2MNO7 Compound 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2NMK7 Compound 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 2MSO7 Compound 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 MSKO7 Compound 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 2MSN8 Compound 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 2(MS)8 Compound 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 2(MN)8 Compound 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 2MSL8 Compound 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 0 4MLS8 Compound 0 0 0 4 -1 0 1 0 3ML8 Compound 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 3MK8 Compound 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 2MSK8 Compound 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 1 2M2NK9 Compound 0 1 0 2 0 2 0 0 3MNK9 Compound 0 1 0 3 0 1 0 0 4MK9 Compound 0 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 3MSK9 Compound 0 1 0 3 1 0 0 0 4MN10 Compound 0 0 0 4 0 1 0 0 3MNS10 Compound 0 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 4MS10 Compound 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 3MSL10 Compound 0 0 0 3 1 0 1 0 3M2S10 Compound 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 4MSK11 Compound 0 1 0 4 1 0 0 0 4MNS12 Compound 0 0 0 4 1 1 0 0 5MS12 Compound 0 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 4MSL12 Compound 0 0 0 4 1 0 1 0 4M2S12 Compound 0 0 0 4 2 0 0 0 # # Other constituents needed by Dutch data 2001-01 # # M1C is A71 in Table 2 of SP98 M1C Basic 1 -1 1 0 0 0 1 -1 0 0 0 0 144 3MKS2 Compound 0 0 0 3 -1 0 0 -1 OQ2-HORN Compound 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 MSK2 Compound 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 -1 MSP2 Compound 0 0 -1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2MP3 Compound 0 0 -1 2 0 0 0 0 4MS4 Compound 0 0 0 4 -2 0 0 0 2MNS4 Compound 0 0 0 2 -1 1 0 0 2MSK4 Compound 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 -1 3MN4 Compound 0 0 0 3 0 -1 0 0 2MSN4 Compound 0 0 0 2 1 -1 0 0 3MK5 Compound 0 -1 0 3 0 0 0 0 3MO5 Compound -1 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 3MNS6 Compound 0 0 0 3 -1 1 0 0 4MS6 Compound 0 0 0 4 -1 0 0 0 2MNU6 Compound 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 3MSK6 Compound 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 -1 MKNU6 Compound 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 3MSN6 Compound 0 0 0 3 1 -1 0 0 M7 Compound 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2MNK8 Compound 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 1 2(MS)N10 Compound 0 0 0 2 2 1 0 0 # # Other constituents needed by German data 2004-08-11 # # This is indistinguishable from NO3 # MQ3 Compound 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 MNUS2 Compound 0 0 0 1 -1 0 0 0 0 1 2MK2 Compound 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 -1