Dear Russ and Ansley, thanks a lot for your answers.
I think I wasn't as thorough as I should have when
explaining my issue. Attached is a netcdf with the the lon
and lat variables.
This is the code I used to create the first figure in the
previous email:
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
let lon_hyc2 = (lon_hyc+lon_hyc[i=@shf:1])/2
let lat_hyc2 = (lat_hyc+lat_hyc[j=@shf:1])/2
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
set win/asp=1 1
shade/title="Hycom Grid"/nokey/x=-75.8:-73.8/y=38.0:40.0
surf_hyc
go land_detail
rep/i=1:126 (plot/ov/vs/line/dash/col=1/nolab
lon_hyc2,lat_hyc2)
rep/j=1:87 (plot/ov/vs/line/dash/col=1/nolab
lon_hyc2,lat_hyc2)
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The /dash in here is just because this is not my main grid.
What I'm trying to accomplish here is to just show the
differences between these two grids (one from the HYCOM
available at
hycom.org, and
the other one is my grid) at my boundaries and in my area of
interest.
So, the HYCOM grid works fine. However when I try to do the
same to my grid (using the code below), I get the second
figure
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
let lon_rho2 = (lon_rho+lon_rho[i=@shf:-1])/2
let lat_rho2 = (lat_rho+lat_rho[j=@shf:1])/2
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
set win/asp=1 2
shade/lev=(-38.5,-37.4,0.02)/hlim=-75.2:-74.4/vlim=36.4:37.1/nolab
lon_rho+lat_rho,lon_rho,lat_rho
rep/i=2:150 (plot/ov/vs/line/col=7/nolab lon_rho2,lat_rho2)
rep/j=1:299 (plot/ov/vs/line/col=7/nolab lon_rho2,lat_rho2)
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This second figure is actually a little different from the
original; I figured a mistake a had done in my code.
However, the offset is still there. I've plotted using /dash
just to make it easier to notice the offset.
Also, it seems that I'm not showing the first row and
last column. And they seem to have just half of the size of
the other cells.
Russ, I think the link you suggested me kind of cover this
last issue, but I didn't understand how to use that. Should
I write:
shade/lev=(-38.5,-37.4,0.02)/hlim=-75.2:-74.4/vlim=36.4:37.1/nolab
lon_rho+lat_rho,lon_rho[i=1:151,j=0:300],lat_rho[i=1:151,j=0:300]
I doesn't seem to make any difference.
Any suggestions?
Thanks a lot!
Andre