Eddy-covariance data with low signal-to-noise ratio: time-lag determination, uncertainties and limit of detection
Author:
Langford B., Acton W., Ammann C.ORCID, Valach A.ORCID, Nemitz E.ORCID
Abstract
Abstract. All eddy-covariance flux measurements are associated with random uncertainties which are a combination of sampling error due to natural variability in turbulence and sensor noise. The former is the principal error for systems where the signal-to-noise ratio of the analyser is high, as is usually the case when measuring fluxes of heat, CO2 or H2O. Where signal is limited, which is often the case for measurements of other trace gases and aerosols, instrument uncertainties dominate. We are here applying a consistent approach based on auto- and cross-covariance functions to quantifying the total random flux error and the random error due to instrument noise separately. As with previous approaches, the random error quantification assumes that the time-lag between wind and concentration measurement is known. However, if combined with commonly used automated methods that identify the individual time-lag by looking for the maximum in the cross-covariance function of the two entities, analyser noise additionally leads to a systematic bias in the fluxes. Combining datasets from several analysers and using simulations we show that the method of time-lag determination becomes increasingly important as the magnitude of the instrument error approaches that of the sampling error. The flux bias can be particularly significant for disjunct data, whereas using a prescribed time-lag eliminates these effects (provided the time-lag does not fluctuate unduly over time). We also demonstrate that when sampling at higher elevations, where low frequency turbulence dominates and covariance peaks are broader, both the probability and magnitude of bias are magnified. We show that the statistical significance of noisy flux data can be increased (limit of detection can be decreased) by appropriate averaging of individual fluxes, but only if systematic biases are avoided by using a prescribed time-lag. Finally, we make recommendations for the analysis and reporting of data with low signal-to-noise and their associated errors.
Funder
Natural Environment Research Council Seventh Framework Programme
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Reference47 articles.
1. Acton, W. J. F., Schallhart, S., Langford, B., Fares, S., Valach, A., Rantala, P., Hewitt, C. N., and Nemitz, E.: Comparison of three methods to derive canopy-scale flux measurements above a mixed oak and hornbeam forest in Northern Italy, in preparation for Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., 2015. 2. Ahlm, L., Nilsson, E. D., Krejci, R., Mårtensson, E. M., Vogt, M., and Artaxo, P.: Aerosol number fluxes over the Amazon rain forest during the wet season, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 9, 9381–9400, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-9381-2009, 2009. 3. Billesbach, D. P.: Estimating uncertainties in individual eddy covariance flux measurements: a comparison of methods and a proposed new method, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 151, 394–405, 2011. 4. Billesbach, D. P., Kim, J., Clement, R. J., Verma, S. B., and Ullman, F. G.: An intercomparison of two tunable diode laser spectrometers used for eddy correlation measurements of methane flux in a prairie wetland, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 15, 197–206, 1998. 5. Businger, J. A.: Evaluation of the accuracy with which dry deposition can be measured with current micrometeorological techniques, J. Clim. Appl. Meteorol., 25, 1100–1124, 1986.
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|