2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2012.09.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A strategy for quality and uncertainty assessment of long-term eddy-covariance measurements

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

11
399
2
2

Year Published

2014
2014
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 455 publications
(447 citation statements)
references
References 68 publications
11
399
2
2
Order By: Relevance
“…As shown in Figure 1, a dirt road and several scientific instruments were located within the UAS imaging area. The turbulent energy fluxes and corresponding flux footprints were computed in 30 min intervals (Mauder et al 2013; Mauder and Foken 2015) and were combined with ancillary meteorological data listed in Table 1. The observed energy fluxes were adjusted in order to reach EB closure using a method that preserves the observed BR (Twine et al 2000).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As shown in Figure 1, a dirt road and several scientific instruments were located within the UAS imaging area. The turbulent energy fluxes and corresponding flux footprints were computed in 30 min intervals (Mauder et al 2013; Mauder and Foken 2015) and were combined with ancillary meteorological data listed in Table 1. The observed energy fluxes were adjusted in order to reach EB closure using a method that preserves the observed BR (Twine et al 2000).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Unlike in the original equation given in Mauder et al (2013), the contribution of instrumental noise in w was neglected since the focus was on comparing the gas analysers. This method is sensitive only to random noise, i.e.…”
Section: Random Errors In the Fluxmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Contribution of this noise to uncertainty in the covariance is estimated using error propagation (Eq. 7 in Mauder et al, 2013):…”
Section: Random Errors In the Fluxmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Here L is the Obukhov length, k is the von Karman constant, g is the acceleration due to gravity, w θ s is the vertical kinematic potential temperature flux at the surface, θ V is the mean virtual potential temperature and u * is the friction velocity. L was determined from data obtained from the energy balance stations using TK3 software (Mauder et al 2013). The mounting of the instruments was 4 m above the ground, therefore z = 4 m was used.…”
Section: Data Handlingmentioning
confidence: 99%