Return to Question

Edit 2: It appears that computing the cloud cover has to be done from the GFS layer data however it appears how it is done is unclear based on an old message from 2007: http://www.weather-watch.com/smf/index.php/topic,20158.msg216087.html#msg216087

I'm using a little older version of grib_api on my server: 1.10.0

I get a little different response with grib_api 1.14.4:

3054 Precipitable water 34.4
260102 Cloud water 0
157 Relative humidity 39
260130 Total ozone 283.1
228164 Total Cloud Cover 4
228164 Total Cloud Cover 0
228164 Total Cloud Cover 5
228164 Total Cloud Cover 9
54 Pressure 9999
54 Pressure 90670.4
54 Pressure 9999
54 Pressure 13200.4
54 Pressure 9999
54 Pressure 88060
54 Pressure 9999
54 Pressure 11470.4
130 Temperature 288.9
130 Temperature 9999
130 Temperature 198.2
228164 Total Cloud Cover 0
228164 Total Cloud Cover 2

But it still seems a bit odd for the results. Lots of 9999's and whole percentages like 0 or 2.

EDIT: I've been testing the full files from http://nomads.ncep.noaa.gov/pub/data/nccf/com/gfs/prod/

the gfs.t12z.pgrb2.0p25.anl file didn't contain cloud data, so I tried one of the .fxxx files (gfs.t12z.pgrb2.1p00.f384). There appeared to be fields set, but they were at initial values according to grib_ls tool. Here's a snippet:

[3036] => 260130      Total ozone  9999

[3037] => 228164      Total Cloud Cover  9999
[3038] => 228164      Total Cloud Cover  9999
[3039] => 228164      Total Cloud Cover  9999
[3040] => 228164      Total Cloud Cover  9999
[3041] => 54          Pressure    9999
[3042] => 54          Pressure    1
[3043] => 54          Pressure    9999
[3044] => 54          Pressure    1
[3045] => 54          Pressure    9999
[3046] => 54          Pressure    1
[3047] => 54          Pressure    9999
[3048] => 54          Pressure    1
[3049] => 130         Temperature  1
[3050] => 130         Temperature  9999
[3051] => 130         Temperature  1
[3052] => 228164      Total Cloud Cover  1
[3053] => 228164      Total Cloud Cover  1