Journal cover Journal topic
Atmospheric Measurement Techniques An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 3.248 IF 3.248
  • IF 5-year value: 3.650 IF 5-year 3.650
  • CiteScore value: 3.37 CiteScore 3.37
  • SNIP value: 1.253 SNIP 1.253
  • SJR value: 1.869 SJR 1.869
  • IPP value: 3.29 IPP 3.29
  • h5-index value: 47 h5-index 47
  • Scimago H index value: 60 Scimago H index 60
Volume 10, issue 3 | Copyright
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 10, 869-880, 2017
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-869-2017
© Author(s) 2017. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Research article 09 Mar 2017

Research article | 09 Mar 2017

Flux calculation of short turbulent events – comparison of three methods

Carsten Schaller1,2,a, Mathias Göckede2, and Thomas Foken1,3 Carsten Schaller et al.
  • 1University of Bayreuth, former Department of Micrometeorology, 95440 Bayreuth, Germany
  • 2Max-Planck-Institute for Biogeochemistry, Dept. Biogeochemical Systems, 07745 Jena, Germany
  • 3University of Bayreuth, Bayreuth Center of Ecology and Environmental Research (BayCEER), 95440 Bayreuth, Germany
  • anow at: University of Münster, Institute of Landscape Ecology, Climatology Group, Heisenbergstr. 2, 48149 Münster, Germany

Abstract. The eddy covariance method is commonly used to calculate vertical turbulent exchange fluxes between ecosystems and the atmosphere. Besides other assumptions, it requires steady-state flow conditions. If this requirement is not fulfilled over the averaging interval of, for example, 30min, the fluxes might be miscalculated. Here two further calculation methods, conditional sampling and wavelet analysis, which do not need the steady-state assumption, were implemented and compared to eddy covariance. All fluxes were calculated for 30min averaging periods, while the wavelet method – using both the Mexican hat and the Morlet wavelet – additionally allowed us to obtain a 1min averaged flux.

The results of all three methods were compared against each other for times with best steady-state conditions and well-developed turbulence. An excellent agreement of the wavelet results to the eddy covariance reference was found, where the deviations to eddy covariance were of the order of  < 2% for Morlet as well as  < 7% for Mexican hat and thus within the typical error range of eddy covariance measurements. The conditional sampling flux also showed a very good agreement to the eddy covariance reference, but the occurrence of outliers and the necessary condition of a zero mean vertical wind velocity reduced its general reliability. Using the Mexican hat wavelet flux in a case study, it was possible to locate a nightly short time turbulent event exactly in time, while the Morlet wavelet gave a trustworthy flux over a longer period, e.g. 30min, under consideration of this short-time event.

At a glance, the Mexican hat wavelet flux offers the possibility of a detailed analysis of non-stationary times, where the classical eddy covariance method fails. Additionally, the Morlet wavelet should be used to provide a trustworthy flux in those 30min periods where the eddy covariance method provides low-quality data due to instationarities.

Publications Copernicus
Download
Short summary
The eddy covariance (EC) method allows for measuring and calculating vertical turbulent exchange fluxes between ecosystems and the atmosphere. It fails in non-steady-state flow conditions, e.g. in Arctic regions. Two alternative calculation methods, conditional sampling and wavelet analysis, were implemented and compared to EC. Wavelet analysis for allows calculating a trustworthy flux even in non-stationary times and offers new possibilities for exact flux calculation in difficult environments.
The eddy covariance (EC) method allows for measuring and calculating vertical turbulent exchange...
Citation
Share