All Sonic Anemometers Need to Correct for Transducer and Structural Shadowing in Their Velocity Measurements
Sonic anemometry is fundamental to all eddy-covariance studies of surface energy and ecosystem carbon and water balance. Recent studies have shown that some nonorthogonal anemometers underestimate vertical wind. Here it is hypothesized that this is due to a lack of transducer and structural shadowin...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of atmospheric and oceanic technology 2016-01, Vol.33 (1), p.149-167 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 167 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 149 |
container_title | Journal of atmospheric and oceanic technology |
container_volume | 33 |
creator | Frank, John M Massman, William J Swiatek, Edward Zimmerman, Herb A Ewers, Brent E |
description | Sonic anemometry is fundamental to all eddy-covariance studies of surface energy and ecosystem carbon and water balance. Recent studies have shown that some nonorthogonal anemometers underestimate vertical wind. Here it is hypothesized that this is due to a lack of transducer and structural shadowing correction. This is tested with a replicated intercomparison experiment between orthogonal (K-probe, Applied Technologies, Inc.) and nonorthogonal (A-probe, Applied Technologies, Inc.; and CSAT3 and CSAT3V, Campbell Scientific, Inc.) anemometer designs. For each of the 12 weeks, five randomly selected and located anemometers were mounted both vertically and horizontally. Bayesian analysis was used to test differences between half-hourly anemometer measurements of the standard deviation of wind ( sigma sub(u), sigma sub( upsilon ), and sigma sub(w)) and temperature, turbulent kinetic energy (TKE), the ratio between vertical/horizontal TKE (VHTKE), and sensible heat flux (H). Datasets were analyzed with various applications of transducer shadow correction. Using the manufacturer's current recommendations, orthogonal anemometers partitioned higher VHTKE and measured about 8%-9% higher sigma sub(w) and ~10% higher H. This difference can be mitigated by adding shadow correction to nonorthogonal anemometers. The horizontal manipulation challenged each anemometer to measure the three dimensions consistently, which allowed for testing two hypotheses explaining the underestimate in vertical wind. While measurements were essentially unchanged when the orthogonal anemometers were mounted sideways, the nonorthogonal anemometers changed substantially and confirmed the lack of shadow correction. Considering the ubiquity of nonorthogonal anemometers, these results are consequential across flux networks and could potentially explain half of the ~20% missing energy that is typical at most flux sites. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1175/JTECH-D-15-0171.1 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1816018839</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1790969524</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c410t-f47411434a37d983137947262c7120b1add9080b814bc64b7ac3bbc0d6c8eeb23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkTtvFDEQgC1EJI7AD6CzREOzweO3y9MlvJRHkYPW8nrnyEa7drC9Qvn37BEqCqim-Wb0jT5C3gA7AzDq_Zf9xe5Td96B6hgYOINnZAOKs45Jrp-TDTPCdUwZ_oK8rPWeMQYC9IZM22mitzmNkW4TznnGhqXSa8SBtkx3uRSMjR5yofsSUh2WiIWGNNDbVpbYlhLW_bsw5J9j-k7HRPd3OBb6Daccx_ZIrzDUpeCMqdVX5OQQpoqv_8xT8vXDxX71vrz5-Hm3veyiBNa6gzQSQAoZhBmcFSCMk4ZrHg1w1kMYBscs6y3IPmrZmxBF30c26GgRey5Oybunuw8l_1iwNj-PNeI0hYR5qR4saAbWCvd_1DjmtFNcrujbv9D7vJS0PuK5Xe2ks1z9iwKjlRZWiaMhPFGx5FoLHvxDGedQHj0wfwzqfwf15x6UPwb1IH4BwY2SKA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1765638532</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>All Sonic Anemometers Need to Correct for Transducer and Structural Shadowing in Their Velocity Measurements</title><source>American Meteorological Society</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Frank, John M ; Massman, William J ; Swiatek, Edward ; Zimmerman, Herb A ; Ewers, Brent E</creator><creatorcontrib>Frank, John M ; Massman, William J ; Swiatek, Edward ; Zimmerman, Herb A ; Ewers, Brent E</creatorcontrib><description>Sonic anemometry is fundamental to all eddy-covariance studies of surface energy and ecosystem carbon and water balance. Recent studies have shown that some nonorthogonal anemometers underestimate vertical wind. Here it is hypothesized that this is due to a lack of transducer and structural shadowing correction. This is tested with a replicated intercomparison experiment between orthogonal (K-probe, Applied Technologies, Inc.) and nonorthogonal (A-probe, Applied Technologies, Inc.; and CSAT3 and CSAT3V, Campbell Scientific, Inc.) anemometer designs. For each of the 12 weeks, five randomly selected and located anemometers were mounted both vertically and horizontally. Bayesian analysis was used to test differences between half-hourly anemometer measurements of the standard deviation of wind ( sigma sub(u), sigma sub( upsilon ), and sigma sub(w)) and temperature, turbulent kinetic energy (TKE), the ratio between vertical/horizontal TKE (VHTKE), and sensible heat flux (H). Datasets were analyzed with various applications of transducer shadow correction. Using the manufacturer's current recommendations, orthogonal anemometers partitioned higher VHTKE and measured about 8%-9% higher sigma sub(w) and ~10% higher H. This difference can be mitigated by adding shadow correction to nonorthogonal anemometers. The horizontal manipulation challenged each anemometer to measure the three dimensions consistently, which allowed for testing two hypotheses explaining the underestimate in vertical wind. While measurements were essentially unchanged when the orthogonal anemometers were mounted sideways, the nonorthogonal anemometers changed substantially and confirmed the lack of shadow correction. Considering the ubiquity of nonorthogonal anemometers, these results are consequential across flux networks and could potentially explain half of the ~20% missing energy that is typical at most flux sites.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0739-0572</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1520-0426</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1175/JTECH-D-15-0171.1</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Boston: American Meteorological Society</publisher><subject>Anemometers ; Bayesian analysis ; Bayesian theory ; Carbon ; Eddy covariance ; Enthalpy ; Experiments ; Fluctuations ; Flux ; Heat flux ; Heat transfer ; Horizontal ; Hypotheses ; Intercomparison ; Kinetic energy ; Marine ; Probability theory ; Sensible heat ; Sensible heat flux ; Sensible heat transfer ; Shadows ; Sonic anemometers ; Studies ; Surface energy ; Surface properties ; Three dimensional ; Transducers ; Turbulent kinetic energy ; Velocity ; Velocity measurement ; Water balance ; Wind ; Wind measurement</subject><ispartof>Journal of atmospheric and oceanic technology, 2016-01, Vol.33 (1), p.149-167</ispartof><rights>Copyright American Meteorological Society Jan 2016</rights><rights>Copyright American Meteorological Society 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c410t-f47411434a37d983137947262c7120b1add9080b814bc64b7ac3bbc0d6c8eeb23</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c410t-f47411434a37d983137947262c7120b1add9080b814bc64b7ac3bbc0d6c8eeb23</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3672,27915,27916</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Frank, John M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Massman, William J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Swiatek, Edward</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zimmerman, Herb A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ewers, Brent E</creatorcontrib><title>All Sonic Anemometers Need to Correct for Transducer and Structural Shadowing in Their Velocity Measurements</title><title>Journal of atmospheric and oceanic technology</title><description>Sonic anemometry is fundamental to all eddy-covariance studies of surface energy and ecosystem carbon and water balance. Recent studies have shown that some nonorthogonal anemometers underestimate vertical wind. Here it is hypothesized that this is due to a lack of transducer and structural shadowing correction. This is tested with a replicated intercomparison experiment between orthogonal (K-probe, Applied Technologies, Inc.) and nonorthogonal (A-probe, Applied Technologies, Inc.; and CSAT3 and CSAT3V, Campbell Scientific, Inc.) anemometer designs. For each of the 12 weeks, five randomly selected and located anemometers were mounted both vertically and horizontally. Bayesian analysis was used to test differences between half-hourly anemometer measurements of the standard deviation of wind ( sigma sub(u), sigma sub( upsilon ), and sigma sub(w)) and temperature, turbulent kinetic energy (TKE), the ratio between vertical/horizontal TKE (VHTKE), and sensible heat flux (H). Datasets were analyzed with various applications of transducer shadow correction. Using the manufacturer's current recommendations, orthogonal anemometers partitioned higher VHTKE and measured about 8%-9% higher sigma sub(w) and ~10% higher H. This difference can be mitigated by adding shadow correction to nonorthogonal anemometers. The horizontal manipulation challenged each anemometer to measure the three dimensions consistently, which allowed for testing two hypotheses explaining the underestimate in vertical wind. While measurements were essentially unchanged when the orthogonal anemometers were mounted sideways, the nonorthogonal anemometers changed substantially and confirmed the lack of shadow correction. Considering the ubiquity of nonorthogonal anemometers, these results are consequential across flux networks and could potentially explain half of the ~20% missing energy that is typical at most flux sites.</description><subject>Anemometers</subject><subject>Bayesian analysis</subject><subject>Bayesian theory</subject><subject>Carbon</subject><subject>Eddy covariance</subject><subject>Enthalpy</subject><subject>Experiments</subject><subject>Fluctuations</subject><subject>Flux</subject><subject>Heat flux</subject><subject>Heat transfer</subject><subject>Horizontal</subject><subject>Hypotheses</subject><subject>Intercomparison</subject><subject>Kinetic energy</subject><subject>Marine</subject><subject>Probability theory</subject><subject>Sensible heat</subject><subject>Sensible heat flux</subject><subject>Sensible heat transfer</subject><subject>Shadows</subject><subject>Sonic anemometers</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Surface energy</subject><subject>Surface properties</subject><subject>Three dimensional</subject><subject>Transducers</subject><subject>Turbulent kinetic energy</subject><subject>Velocity</subject><subject>Velocity measurement</subject><subject>Water balance</subject><subject>Wind</subject><subject>Wind measurement</subject><issn>0739-0572</issn><issn>1520-0426</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkTtvFDEQgC1EJI7AD6CzREOzweO3y9MlvJRHkYPW8nrnyEa7drC9Qvn37BEqCqim-Wb0jT5C3gA7AzDq_Zf9xe5Td96B6hgYOINnZAOKs45Jrp-TDTPCdUwZ_oK8rPWeMQYC9IZM22mitzmNkW4TznnGhqXSa8SBtkx3uRSMjR5yofsSUh2WiIWGNNDbVpbYlhLW_bsw5J9j-k7HRPd3OBb6Daccx_ZIrzDUpeCMqdVX5OQQpoqv_8xT8vXDxX71vrz5-Hm3veyiBNa6gzQSQAoZhBmcFSCMk4ZrHg1w1kMYBscs6y3IPmrZmxBF30c26GgRey5Oybunuw8l_1iwNj-PNeI0hYR5qR4saAbWCvd_1DjmtFNcrujbv9D7vJS0PuK5Xe2ks1z9iwKjlRZWiaMhPFGx5FoLHvxDGedQHj0wfwzqfwf15x6UPwb1IH4BwY2SKA</recordid><startdate>20160101</startdate><enddate>20160101</enddate><creator>Frank, John M</creator><creator>Massman, William J</creator><creator>Swiatek, Edward</creator><creator>Zimmerman, Herb A</creator><creator>Ewers, Brent E</creator><general>American Meteorological Society</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88F</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>M1Q</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160101</creationdate><title>All Sonic Anemometers Need to Correct for Transducer and Structural Shadowing in Their Velocity Measurements</title><author>Frank, John M ; Massman, William J ; Swiatek, Edward ; Zimmerman, Herb A ; Ewers, Brent E</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c410t-f47411434a37d983137947262c7120b1add9080b814bc64b7ac3bbc0d6c8eeb23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Anemometers</topic><topic>Bayesian analysis</topic><topic>Bayesian theory</topic><topic>Carbon</topic><topic>Eddy covariance</topic><topic>Enthalpy</topic><topic>Experiments</topic><topic>Fluctuations</topic><topic>Flux</topic><topic>Heat flux</topic><topic>Heat transfer</topic><topic>Horizontal</topic><topic>Hypotheses</topic><topic>Intercomparison</topic><topic>Kinetic energy</topic><topic>Marine</topic><topic>Probability theory</topic><topic>Sensible heat</topic><topic>Sensible heat flux</topic><topic>Sensible heat transfer</topic><topic>Shadows</topic><topic>Sonic anemometers</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Surface energy</topic><topic>Surface properties</topic><topic>Three dimensional</topic><topic>Transducers</topic><topic>Turbulent kinetic energy</topic><topic>Velocity</topic><topic>Velocity measurement</topic><topic>Water balance</topic><topic>Wind</topic><topic>Wind measurement</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Frank, John M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Massman, William J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Swiatek, Edward</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zimmerman, Herb A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ewers, Brent E</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Military Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy & Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Military Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>Journal of atmospheric and oceanic technology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Frank, John M</au><au>Massman, William J</au><au>Swiatek, Edward</au><au>Zimmerman, Herb A</au><au>Ewers, Brent E</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>All Sonic Anemometers Need to Correct for Transducer and Structural Shadowing in Their Velocity Measurements</atitle><jtitle>Journal of atmospheric and oceanic technology</jtitle><date>2016-01-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>33</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>149</spage><epage>167</epage><pages>149-167</pages><issn>0739-0572</issn><eissn>1520-0426</eissn><abstract>Sonic anemometry is fundamental to all eddy-covariance studies of surface energy and ecosystem carbon and water balance. Recent studies have shown that some nonorthogonal anemometers underestimate vertical wind. Here it is hypothesized that this is due to a lack of transducer and structural shadowing correction. This is tested with a replicated intercomparison experiment between orthogonal (K-probe, Applied Technologies, Inc.) and nonorthogonal (A-probe, Applied Technologies, Inc.; and CSAT3 and CSAT3V, Campbell Scientific, Inc.) anemometer designs. For each of the 12 weeks, five randomly selected and located anemometers were mounted both vertically and horizontally. Bayesian analysis was used to test differences between half-hourly anemometer measurements of the standard deviation of wind ( sigma sub(u), sigma sub( upsilon ), and sigma sub(w)) and temperature, turbulent kinetic energy (TKE), the ratio between vertical/horizontal TKE (VHTKE), and sensible heat flux (H). Datasets were analyzed with various applications of transducer shadow correction. Using the manufacturer's current recommendations, orthogonal anemometers partitioned higher VHTKE and measured about 8%-9% higher sigma sub(w) and ~10% higher H. This difference can be mitigated by adding shadow correction to nonorthogonal anemometers. The horizontal manipulation challenged each anemometer to measure the three dimensions consistently, which allowed for testing two hypotheses explaining the underestimate in vertical wind. While measurements were essentially unchanged when the orthogonal anemometers were mounted sideways, the nonorthogonal anemometers changed substantially and confirmed the lack of shadow correction. Considering the ubiquity of nonorthogonal anemometers, these results are consequential across flux networks and could potentially explain half of the ~20% missing energy that is typical at most flux sites.</abstract><cop>Boston</cop><pub>American Meteorological Society</pub><doi>10.1175/JTECH-D-15-0171.1</doi><tpages>19</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0739-0572 |
ispartof | Journal of atmospheric and oceanic technology, 2016-01, Vol.33 (1), p.149-167 |
issn | 0739-0572 1520-0426 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1816018839 |
source | American Meteorological Society; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Anemometers Bayesian analysis Bayesian theory Carbon Eddy covariance Enthalpy Experiments Fluctuations Flux Heat flux Heat transfer Horizontal Hypotheses Intercomparison Kinetic energy Marine Probability theory Sensible heat Sensible heat flux Sensible heat transfer Shadows Sonic anemometers Studies Surface energy Surface properties Three dimensional Transducers Turbulent kinetic energy Velocity Velocity measurement Water balance Wind Wind measurement |
title | All Sonic Anemometers Need to Correct for Transducer and Structural Shadowing in Their Velocity Measurements |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T07%3A12%3A08IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=All%20Sonic%20Anemometers%20Need%20to%20Correct%20for%20Transducer%20and%20Structural%20Shadowing%20in%20Their%20Velocity%20Measurements&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20atmospheric%20and%20oceanic%20technology&rft.au=Frank,%20John%20M&rft.date=2016-01-01&rft.volume=33&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=149&rft.epage=167&rft.pages=149-167&rft.issn=0739-0572&rft.eissn=1520-0426&rft_id=info:doi/10.1175/JTECH-D-15-0171.1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1790969524%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1765638532&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |