I know a related question has already been asked about deriving lat/lon values for the cube, but I’m encountering an issue with trying to aggregate other datasets to to the ESDL grid.
I’ve got access to a dataset containing the location of landforms globally at a 1/12 of a degree and so this should match the ESDL grid as both contain 4320 longitudinal values (i.e. 12*360 values). As far as I can tell however, the ESDL extent isn’t exactly -180 to 180, but rather is very close (e.g. -179.99 - 179.99). This problematic as rather than grid cells aligning perfectly, they’re misaligned (as the landform dataset I’m using is exactly -180 to 180), and because both datasets contain 4320 longitudinal values they’re not offset uniformly, but rather this varies (as the ESDL pixel size is therefore slightly smaller than exactly 1/12 of a degree). This is confirmed when exporting the ESDL cube as a .nc file and then viewing the co-ordinate transform parameters, which are listed as:
(0.08333299888121527, 0.0, -179.9999947465109, 0.0, -0.08333299998168098, 90.00000237645568)
I’ve included an image below to show this - the black pixel outline is an ESDL grid cell and the other colours are pixel values for the landform dataset. If anyone can shed any light on this it would be much appreciated! Particularly as to whether the ESDL grid was created from -180 to 180o and the coordinates have now been misaligned, or if aggregation to the grid was always using this slightly smaller pixel size/value extent as this has implications for including other variables in the cube.
Thanks in advance!