Download
in situ currents breakout group report out n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
In-Situ Currents: Breakout Group Report Out PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
In-Situ Currents: Breakout Group Report Out

In-Situ Currents: Breakout Group Report Out

175 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

In-Situ Currents: Breakout Group Report Out

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. In-Situ Currents:Breakout Group Report Out QARTOD IIFebruary 28 – March 2, 2005

  2. Technology Selection • 25 participants • Three technology groups • Current meters • ADCPs – technology selected by group • Drifters • In general, did not want to be vendor specific

  3. Recommended Real-Time Quality Control Tests

  4. Real-Time Quality Control Checks for Red – Level 1 * • Pitch/Roll • UVW – Vertical velocity/horizontal velocity • Echo amplitude/intensity • Percent solutions • Percent good pings (PGP) • Error velocity • Correlation magnitude • Surface (or bottom) reflection/ detection * If information is available with instrument

  5. Real-Time Quality Control Checks for Yellow - Level 2 * • Heading • Bit status (Built In Test) • Battery voltage (V1 & V2) two batteries • Water temperature • Pressure • Timestamp • Std deviation of speeds • Transmit current • Correlation coefficient • Speed of sound * If information is available with instrument

  6. Real-Time Quality Descriptor Flags • Each data record goes out with quality descriptor flags Group Discussion • Two principle customer groups • Customer interested in observation only (e.g., maritime community) • Ensemble flag linked to release of data • Customer interested in full record (e.g., academia, oil and gas industry) • Flags for each hard parameter • Ensemble flag linked to release of data • Flags for soft flags, if affordable • Two data sets • Real-time observations (only Level 2 and 3 data) • Archived observations (all data)

  7. Real-Time Quality Descriptor Flags • Categories … agree with QARTOD I recommendations: • -9 = missing value • 0 = quality not evaluated • 1= bad • 2=questionable/suspect • 3=good

  8. Real-Time Metadata Descriptors Group Discussion • Developed a list of recommended fields to send with the real-time observation • Instrument-level description • Metadata should be in the header of the record

  9. Metadata to be Delivered in Real-Time • Latitude (with a designator: fixed or moving) • Longitude (with a designator: fixed or moving) • Horizontal datum / reference • Depth of water • Depth of instrument • Vertical datum / reference • Time (with a designator for time zone, e.g., UTC) • Data collected at beginning, middle, or end of sample • Compass reference • Serial number • Units for data reporting • Orientation

  10. Metadata to be Delivered if Affordable • Sensor type • Deployment date • Calibration procedures • Date of calibration • System frequency • Bin size • Number of bins • Sampling interval • Bad beam indicator • Average interval • Pings per ensemble • Compass update rate • Quality checks descriptions and thresholds • Blanking distance • Coordinate system for velocity measurements • Joyce parameters • Platform description, including fixed or moving

  11. Real-Time Calibration Flags Descriptors • Place reference to date of calibration in metadata

  12. Common Data Formats Group Discussion • Many data formats represented in group • ASCII is universally understood • Future holds sensor sending data in XML • Moving towards automation and interoperability Recommendations • Community should strive to be DMAC compliant • Recommended format: NetCDF, along with data dictionary and convention

  13. Next Steps and Roadblocks Key Next Steps • Define thresholds for quality control tests • Develop open source environment for collaboration (e.g., TWiki) • Define specifications for metadata descriptors Roadblocks • Disparity in requirements for different user groups – could lead to two or more datasets