scholarly journals Field intercomparison of prevailing sonic anemometers

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 249-263 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthias Mauder ◽  
Matthias J. Zeeman
Keyword(s):  
Wind Speed ◽  
Sonic Anemometer ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Buoyancy Flux ◽  
Horizontal Wind ◽  
Horizontal Wind Speed ◽  
Sonic Anemometers ◽  
Adjacent Structures ◽  
Mean Wind Speed ◽  
Field Intercomparison

Abstract. Three-dimensional sonic anemometers are the core component of eddy covariance systems, which are widely used for micrometeorological and ecological research. In order to characterize the measurement uncertainty of these instruments we present and analyse the results from a field intercomparison experiment of six commonly used sonic anemometer models from four major manufacturers. These models include Campbell CSAT3, Gill HS-50 and R3, METEK uSonic-3 Omni, R. M. Young 81000 and 81000RE. The experiment was conducted over a meadow at the TERENO/ICOS site DE-Fen in southern Germany over a period of 16 days in June of 2016 as part of the ScaleX campaign. The measurement height was 3 m for all sensors, which were separated by 9 m from each other, each on its own tripod, in order to limit contamination of the turbulence measurements by adjacent structures as much as possible. Moreover, the high-frequency data from all instruments were treated with the same post-processing algorithm. In this study, we compare the results for various turbulence statistics, which include mean horizontal wind speed, standard deviations of vertical wind velocity and sonic temperature, friction velocity, and the buoyancy flux. Quantitative measures of uncertainty, such as bias and comparability, are derived from these results. We find that biases are generally very small for all sensors and all computed variables, except for the sonic temperature measurements of the two Gill sonic anemometers (HS and R3), confirming a known transducer-temperature dependence of the sonic temperature measurement. The best overall agreement between the different instruments was found for the mean wind speed and the buoyancy flux.

scholarly journals Field intercomparison of prevailing sonic anemometers

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthias Mauder ◽  
Matthias J. Zeeman
Keyword(s):  
Wind Speed ◽  
Sonic Anemometer ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Buoyancy Flux ◽  
Horizontal Wind ◽  
Horizontal Wind Speed ◽  
Sonic Anemometers ◽  
Adjacent Structures ◽  
Mean Wind Speed ◽  
Field Intercomparison

Abstract. Three-dimensional sonic anemometers are the core component of eddy-covariance systems, which are widely used for micrometeorological and ecological research. In order to characterize the measurement uncertainty of these instruments we present and analyse the results from a field intercomparison experiment of six commonly used sonic anemometer models from four major manufacturers. These models include Campbell CSAT3, Gill HS-50 and R3, METEK uSonic-3 Omni, R.M. Young 81000 and 81000RE. The experiment was conducted over a meadow at the TERENO/ICOS site De-Fen in southern Germany over a period of 16 days in June of 2016 as part of the ScaleX campaign. The measurement height was 3 m for all sensors, which were separated by 9 m from each other, each on its own tripod, in order to limit contamination of the turbulence measurements by adjacent structures as much as possible. Moreover, the high-frequency data from all instruments were treated with the same post-processing algorithm. In this study, we compare the results for various turbulence statistics, which include mean horizontal wind speed, standard deviations of vertical wind velocity and sonic temperature, friction velocity and the buoyancy flux. Quantitative measures of uncertainty, such as bias and comparability, are derived from these results. We find that biases are generally very small for all sensors and all computed variables, except for the sonic temperature measurements of the two Gill sonic anemometers (HS and R3), confirming a known transducer-temperature dependence of the sonic temperature measurement. The best overall agreement between the different instruments was found for the mean wind speed and the buoyancy flux.

scholarly journals Wind Measurements from Arc Scans with Doppler Wind Lidar

2015 ◽  
Vol 32 (11) ◽  
pp. 2024-2040 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Wang ◽  
R. J. Barthelmie ◽  
A. Clifton ◽  
S. C. Pryor
Keyword(s):  
Wind Speed ◽  
Sonic Anemometer ◽  
Elevation Angle ◽  
Horizontal Wind ◽  
Horizontal Wind Speed ◽  
Energy Applications ◽  
Mean Wind Speed ◽  
Wind Measurements ◽  
Wind Lidar ◽  
Doppler Wind Lidar

AbstractDefining optimal scanning geometries for scanning lidars for wind energy applications remains an active field of research. This paper evaluates uncertainties associated with arc scan geometries and presents recommendations regarding optimal configurations in the atmospheric boundary layer. The analysis is based on arc scan data from a Doppler wind lidar with one elevation angle and seven azimuth angles spanning 30° and focuses on an estimation of 10-min mean wind speed and direction. When flow is horizontally uniform, this approach can provide accurate wind measurements required for wind resource assessments in part because of its high resampling rate. Retrieved wind velocities at a single range gate exhibit good correlation to data from a sonic anemometer on a nearby meteorological tower, and vertical profiles of horizontal wind speed, though derived from range gates located on a conical surface, match those measured by mast-mounted cup anemometers. Uncertainties in the retrieved wind velocity are related to high turbulent wind fluctuation and an inhomogeneous horizontal wind field. The radial velocity variance is found to be a robust measure of the uncertainty of the retrieved wind speed because of its relationship to turbulence properties. It is further shown that the standard error of wind speed estimates can be minimized by increasing the azimuthal range beyond 30° and using five to seven azimuth angles.

scholarly journals Intercomparisons of Tropospheric Wind Velocities Measured by Multi-Frequency Wind Profilers and Rawinsonde

Atmosphere ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (10) ◽  
pp. 1284
Author(s):  
Zhao-Yu Chen ◽  
Yen-Hsyang Chu ◽  
Ching-Lun Su
Keyword(s):  
Wind Speed ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Meridional Wind ◽  
Horizontal Wind ◽  
Wind Component ◽  
Horizontal Wind Speed ◽  
Order Of Magnitude ◽  
Wind Velocities ◽  
Mean Square Difference ◽  
Wind Profilers

Concurrent measurements of three-dimensional wind velocities made with three co-located wind profilers operated at frequencies of 52 MHz, 449 MHz, and 1.29 GHz for the period 12–16 September 2017 are compared for the first time in this study. The velocity–azimuth display (VAD) method is employed to estimate the wind velocities. The result shows that, in the absence of precipitation, the root mean square difference (RMSD) in the horizontal wind speed velocities U and wind directions D between different pairs of wind profilers are, respectively, in the range of 0.94–0.99 ms−1 and 7.7–8.3°, and those of zonal wind component u and meridional wind component v are in the respective ranges of 0.91–1.02 ms−1 and 1.1–1.24 ms−1. However, the RMSDs between wind profilers and rawinsonde are in the range of 2.89–3.26 ms−1 for horizontal wind speed velocity and 11.17–14.48° for the wind direction, which are around 2–3 factors greater than those between the wind profilers on average. In addition to the RMSDs, MDs between wind profilers and radiosonde are around one order of magnitude larger than those between wind profilers. These results show that the RMSDs, MDs, and Stdds between radars are highly consistent with each other, and they are much smaller than those between radar and rawinsonde. This therefore suggests that the wind profiler-measured horizontal wind velocities are much more reliable, precise, and accurate than the rawinsonde measurement.

scholarly journals Using sonic anemometer temperature to measure sensible heat flux in strong winds

2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 447-469 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. P. Burns ◽  
T. W. Horst ◽  
P. D. Blanken ◽  
R. K. Monson
Keyword(s):  
Heat Flux ◽  
Sonic Anemometer ◽  
Sensible Heat Flux ◽  
Heat Fluxes ◽  
Horizontal Wind ◽  
Subalpine Forest ◽  
Sensible Heat ◽  
Scientific Model ◽  
Horizontal Wind Speed ◽  
Sonic Anemometers

Abstract. The sensible heat flux (H) is a significant component of the surface energy balance (SEB). Sonic anemometers simultaneously measure the turbulent fluctuations of vertical wind (w') and sonic temperature (Ts'), and are commonly used to measure H. Our study examines 30-min heat fluxes measured with a Campbell Scientific model CSAT3 sonic anemometer above a subalpine forest. We compare H calculated with Ts to H calculated with a co-located thermocouple and find that for horizontal wind speed (U) less than 8 m s−1 the agreement is ≈±30 W m−2. However, for U >≈ 8 m s−1, the CSAT3 H becomes larger than H calculated with the thermocouple, reaching a maximum difference of ≈250 W m−2 at U ≈ 18 m s−1. H calculated with the thermocouple results in a SEB that is relatively independent of U at high wind speeds. In contrast, the SEB calculated with H from the CSAT3 varies considerably with U, particularly at night. Cospectral analysis of w'Ts' suggest that spurious correlation is a problem during high winds which leads to a positive (additive) increase in H calculated with the CSAT3. At night, when H is typically negative, this CSAT3 error results in a measured H that falsely approaches zero or even becomes positive. Within a broader context, the usefulness of side-by-side instrument comparisons are discussed.

scholarly journals Using sonic anemometer temperature to measure sensible heat flux in strong winds

2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (9) ◽  
pp. 2095-2111 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. P. Burns ◽  
T. W. Horst ◽  
L. Jacobsen ◽  
P. D. Blanken ◽  
R. K. Monson
Keyword(s):  
Heat Flux ◽  
Sonic Anemometer ◽  
Sensible Heat Flux ◽  
Heat Fluxes ◽  
Horizontal Wind ◽  
Subalpine Forest ◽  
Sensible Heat ◽  
Horizontal Wind Speed ◽  
Sonic Anemometers ◽  
Significant Underestimation

Abstract. Sonic anemometers simultaneously measure the turbulent fluctuations of vertical wind (w') and sonic temperature (Ts'), and are commonly used to measure sensible heat flux (H). Our study examines 30-min heat fluxes measured with a Campbell Scientific CSAT3 sonic anemometer above a subalpine forest. We compared H calculated with Ts to H calculated with a co-located thermocouple and found that, for horizontal wind speed (U) less than 8 m s−1, the agreement was around ±30 W m−2. However, for U ≈ 8 m s−1, the CSAT H had a generally positive deviation from H calculated with the thermocouple, reaching a maximum difference of ≈250 W m−2 at U ≈ 18 m s−1. With version 4 of the CSAT firmware, we found significant underestimation of the speed of sound and thus Ts in high winds (due to a delayed detection of the sonic pulse), which resulted in the large CSAT heat flux errors. Although this Ts error is qualitatively similar to the well-known fundamental correction for the crosswind component, it is quantitatively different and directly related to the firmware estimation of the pulse arrival time. For a CSAT running version 3 of the firmware, there does not appear to be a significant underestimation of Ts; however, a Ts error similar to that of version 4 may occur if the CSAT is sufficiently out of calibration. An empirical correction to the CSAT heat flux that is consistent with our conceptual understanding of the Ts error is presented. Within a broader context, the surface energy balance is used to evaluate the heat flux measurements, and the usefulness of side-by-side instrument comparisons is discussed.

The Influence of Wind Direction on Campbell Scientific CSAT3 and Gill R3-50 Sonic Anemometer Measurements

2016 ◽  
Vol 33 (11) ◽  
pp. 2477-2497 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurent Grare ◽  
Luc Lenain ◽  
W. Kendall Melville
Keyword(s):  
Wind Speed ◽  
Wind Direction ◽  
Friction Velocity ◽  
Sonic Anemometer ◽  
Strongly Correlated ◽  
Sonic Anemometers ◽  
Mean Wind Speed ◽  
The Mean

AbstractMeasurements from the Campbell CSAT3 and Gill R3-50 anemometers were conducted in four different experiments, in laboratory and field environments. Consistent differences between these two sonic anemometers were observed. The data have revealed that the differences were strongly correlated with the wind direction. According to the datasets used, the CSAT3 was the anemometer whose measurements were more sensitive to the instrument’s orientation relative to the wind direction. While the mean wind speed and direction remained within the manufacturers’ specifications (a few percent for the wind speed and a few degrees for the wind direction), the estimates of the friction velocity from the CSAT3 differed from the R3-50 by up to 20%.

Wind structure in the atmospheric boundary layer

1971 ◽  
Vol 269 (1199) ◽  
pp. 439-456 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Wind Speed ◽  
Thermal Stratification ◽  
Wind Profile ◽  
Horizontal Wind ◽  
Horizontal Wind Speed ◽  
Wind Structure ◽  
Mean Wind Speed ◽  
Urban Complex ◽  
Profile Characteristics ◽  
Averaging Time

The semi-empirical laws for the variation of mean wind speed with height and for the statistical properties of the turbulent fluctuations are briefly outlined. Similarity considerations provide some useful ordering of the mean wind profile characteristics in relation to surface roughness and thermal stratification. Appreciable uncertainties prevail, however, especially as a consequence of the effect of thermal stratification and of variable terrain roughness. Some generalization on similarity grounds can also be made regarding the fluctuations of horizontal wind speed as a function of roughness and stability, but there are wide variations of spectral density and scale which are not immediately explicable and which at present preclude anything more than a relatively coarse specification of the spectrum. Features which are of special relevance to architectural aerodynamics and which are discussed briefly are: ( a ) the difficulty of generalizing about the wind profile and turbulence above an urban complex; ( b ) the requirement for estimating the magnitudes of extreme gusts as a function of mean wind speed, averaging time and height; ( c ) the problem of generalizing about flow properties below roof level; ( d ) the effect of urban airflow on the travel and dispersion of pollutants

scholarly journals Wind Estimation in the Lower Atmosphere Using Multirotor Aircraft

2017 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 1183-1191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ross T. Palomaki ◽  
Nathan T. Rose ◽  
Michael van den Bossche ◽  
Thomas J. Sherman ◽  
Stephan F. J. De Wekker
Keyword(s):  
Wind Speed ◽  
Sonic Anemometer ◽  
Unmanned Aircraft ◽  
Lower Atmosphere ◽  
Promising Alternative ◽  
Atmospheric Structure ◽  
Structure And Dynamics ◽  
Sonic Anemometers ◽  
Vertical Profiling ◽  
Good Agreement

AbstractUnmanned aerial vehicles are increasingly used to study atmospheric structure and dynamics. While much emphasis has been on the development of fixed-wing unmanned aircraft for atmospheric investigations, the use of multirotor aircraft is relatively unexplored, especially for capturing atmospheric winds. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate the efficacy of estimating wind speed and direction with 1) a direct approach using a sonic anemometer mounted on top of a hexacopter and 2) an indirect approach using attitude data from a quadcopter. The data are collected by the multirotor aircraft hovering 10 m above ground adjacent to one or more sonic anemometers. Wind speed and direction show good agreement with sonic anemometer measurements in the initial experiments. Typical errors in wind speed and direction are smaller than 0.5 and 30°, respectively. Multirotor aircraft provide a promising alternative to traditional platforms for vertical profiling in the atmospheric boundary layer, especially in conditions where a tethered balloon system is typically deployed.

scholarly journals Doppler wind lidar activities at Cabauw

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Knoop ◽  
Fred Bosveld ◽  
Marijn de Haij ◽  
Arnoud Apituley
Keyword(s):  
Wind Speed ◽  
Wind Profile ◽  
Continuous Wave ◽  
Wind Farms ◽  
Data Availability ◽  
Horizontal Wind ◽  
Horizontal Wind Speed ◽  
Low Clouds ◽  
Wind Measurements ◽  
Wind Lidar

<p>Atmospheric motion and turbulence are essential parameters for weather and topics related to air quality. Therefore, wind profile measurements play an important role in atmospheric research and meteorology. One source of wind profile data are Doppler wind lidars, which are laser-based remote sensing instruments that measure wind speed and wind direction up to a few hundred meters or even a few kilometers. Commercial wind lidars use the laser wavelength of 1.5 µm and therefore backscatter is mainly from aerosols while clear air backscatter is minimal, limiting the range to the boundary layer typically.</p><p>We have carried out a two-year intercomparison of the ZephIR 300M (ZX Lidars) short-range wind lidar and tall mast wind measurements at Cabauw [1]. We have focused on the (height-dependent) data availability of the wind lidar under various meteorological conditions and the data quality through a comparison with in situ wind measurements at several levels in the 213m tall meteorological mast. We have found an overall availability of quality-controlled wind lidar data of 97% to 98 %, where the missing part is mainly due to precipitation events exceeding 1 mm/h or fog or low clouds below 100 m. The mean bias in the horizontal wind speed is within 0.1 m/s with a high correlation between the mast and wind lidar measurements, although under some specific conditions (very high wind speed, fog or low clouds) larger deviations are observed. This instrument is being deployed within North Sea wind farms.</p><p>Recently, a scanning long-range wind lidar Windcube 200S (Leosphere/Vaisala) has been installed at Cabauw, as part of the Ruisdael Observatory program [2]. The scanning Doppler wind lidars will provide detailed measurements of the wind field, aerosols and clouds around the Cabauw site, in coordination with other instruments, such as the cloud radar.</p><p>[1] Knoop, S., Bosveld, F. C., de Haij, M. J., and Apituley, A.: A 2-year intercomparison of continuous-wave focusing wind lidar and tall mast wind measurements at Cabauw, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 2219–2235, 2021</p><p>[2] https://ruisdael-observatory.nl/</p>

scholarly journals Comparison of Large Eddy Simulations of a convective boundary layer with wind LIDAR measurements

2012 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. G. Pedersen ◽  
M. Kelly ◽  
S.-E. Gryning ◽  
R. Floors ◽  
E. Batchvarova ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Boundary Layer ◽  
Wind Speed ◽  
Geostrophic Wind ◽  
Large Eddy Simulations ◽  
Horizontal Wind ◽  
Convective Boundary ◽  
Horizontal Wind Speed ◽  
Large Eddy ◽  
Lidar Measurements ◽  
Wind Lidar

Abstract. Vertical profiles of the horizontal wind speed and of the standard deviation of vertical wind speed from Large Eddy Simulations of a convective atmospheric boundary layer are compared to wind LIDAR measurements up to 1400 m. Fair agreement regarding both types of profiles is observed only when the simulated flow is driven by a both time- and height-dependent geostrophic wind and a time-dependent surface heat flux. This underlines the importance of mesoscale effects when the flow above the atmospheric surface layer is simulated with a computational fluid dynamics model.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document